Random thoughts on the Supreme Court decision yesterday…

/in , , , , , /by

See my post yesterday immediately following the surprising announcement by the Supreme Court on the Trump ‘travel ban’ from six terror-producing countries and the ceiling/moratorium on refugee resettlement across all countries and ethnic groups.

This morning I thought I might find an article or two that sounded reasonably informed about what is going to happen in the coming days and weeks.  I didn’t find anything (yet) that looks very useful. Everyone seems confused.

There is an LA Times story with a juicy nugget where they say 50,500 refugees (yikes!) are waiting in the wings from the six targeted ‘travel ban’ countries. And, a Buffalo News story is representative of the myriad stories from across the country where refugee contractors are scratching their heads about what it all means for them.  Those that get mostly refugees with “family ties” believe they will be getting their full quotas of paying clients.

Random thoughts!

So, as much as I would like to give readers guidance on what is going to happen, I can’t.  But, here are some thoughts I have in random order. Some are comments, others are questions.

  • The issue of bona fide relationships is going to be a huge mess.  Already the contractors and subcontractors are thinking that if they have some refugees on the way from any country, they, the contractor, will be a bona fide “entity” and therefore their refugees will get in.
  • Apparently a 120-day MORATORIUM on refugee resettlement (90 days for those 6 countries is a separate part of the EO) will go into effect, except for those who can claim a relationship of some sort. If it begins on Thursday (as most are predicting), 120 days ends on or about October 26th which is 26 days in to  FY18.  It then makes me wonder what Donald Trump will do with his ‘determination’ for that fiscal year which by law he will present to Congress in September.
  • After wandering in the weeds about numbers, will the Trump Administration have any will to reform the whole US Refugee Admissions Program?  It is now or never!
  • Even if the Supreme Court hears the case in October, it could be months later for a decision (well in to election year 2018).
  • BTW, as several news articles yesterday pointed out, there was and probably still is, a huge amount of fraud in the Refugee Admissions Program as it relates to who is, and who isn’t, a family member.  Long time readers may remember the discovery in 2008 that literally as many as 20,000 Somalis entered the US fraudulently as part of the P-3 Family Reunification program. The Dept. of State shut down the P-3 for parts of Africa for years.  The Supreme Court has now further increased the incentive for fraudulent claims of family connections.
  • The Supreme Court ruling is troubling to me, actually on many levels, but they suggest that refugees with family ties get priority, while perhaps more persecuted people are left behind.  Heck, every Somali probably has a family tie to someone in the US (since way over 100,000 are here already), while a truly persecuted Syrian Christian may have no ties because so few Syrian Christians have been admitted  to the US. How did the Supremes let themselves get into this quagmire?
  • The Dept. of State, with the likes of Brian Hook working with Sec. of State Tillerson, will be making critical decisions about how choices will be made about who gets in here between now and October 26th. They will be forced to depend on career bureaucrats (because Trump has moved too slowly to get people loyal to him placed in agencies across Washington) who have long-time personal relationships with the contractors.
  • Although, as I said yesterday, I’m glad the Supreme Court put to rest the issue of whether Trump had the authority to reduce the refugee CEILING that he inherited from Obama (from 110,000 to 50,000), I am extremely troubled by the Supreme Court writing refugee law. The Refugee Act of 1980 is very specific about what steps must be taken for a President to go above the CEILING. The steps involve the President consulting with Congress in the case of an emergency. The court here is saying they have now stepped in to allow an increase over 50,000 (for relatives!).  What is Congress going to do—continue to hide on the subject of refugees—and give up their Constitutional power to the courts?
  • Congress actually appropriated enough money for 75,000 refugees to be admitted by September 30th, so what happens to that money as the number surely won’t come in anywhere near the 75,000 level (how on earth did Tillerson/Hook get out on that limb back in May telling contractors 1,500 would be admitted every week?).
  • Representatives of the nine federal contractors*** are in a tizzy (as I read many news stories this morning), some trying to put a positive spin on what the Court has done. I wondered if they wouldn’t have been better off just letting Trump’s EO go in to effect months ago and get the review over with. It would have been done by now and some normalcy returned.  Instead we are all looking to many more months of chaos, confusion and lawsuits.  So maybe we can say, that the contractors are responsible for those “vulnerable” refugees left in limbo now.
  • On that point about being in a tizzy, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) is organizing a briefing call on Thursday so you can find out what they think of the decision and what they will do going forward.

From an e-mail:

To learn more about the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision for refugees and non-citizens, join HIAS for a briefing call on Thursday, June 27 at 4:30 pm EST. Click here to RSVP and receive a call-in number.

[Update!  A reader has pointed out that Thursday is the 29th! So, I expect there will be an e-mail correction coming from HIAS—ed]

I’m sure I’ve forgotten some things, and if I find some great legal mind who can predict what is going to happen beginning on Thursday, I’ll send it your way.  In the meantime, send story links that you think add to the discussion to the comments here at RRW.

More later…..

***Federal contractors in a tizzy.  Since the vast majority of their annual income is from the US Treasury based on the number of refugees admitted each year, their budgets have again gone to hell. Not that  I am sympathetic about their financial mess, but this is why Congress has to get the middlemen contractors out of the refugee business!

VIDEO: President John Fitzgerald Kennedy — A Democrat or a Republican?

/in , , , , /by

As a young man I was a JFK Democrat. He was my “American idol.” It was the time of Camelot and at the peak of American economic, political and military power. JFK embodied a vision of the future that has been fundamentally changed by Barack Obama.

Larry Elder did a video asking the fundamental question: JFK – Democrat or Republican?

Allow me to point out a few examples of how Democrats have fundamentally changed from the party of JFK to the party of BHO:

  • JFK was a Catholic. He held those beliefs and spoke about his beliefs. JFK stated, “For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew— or a Quaker or a Unitarian or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you — until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.” Today we see under BHO, the persecution of Catholics, and Christians in general, for their beliefs on marriage, abortion, religious freedom and the ability to freely practice their faith, without fear of being audited by the IRS.
  • JFK was a decorated Navy Combat Veteran. JFK Commanded PT109. He served proudly and loved the military. He created the U.S. Army Special Forces, which led to the creation of special operations forces such as the Navy SEAL program. JFK said, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” JFK supported compulsary military service and noted, “A young man who does not have what it takes to perform military service is not likely to have what it takes to make a living. Today’s military rejects include tomorrow’s hard-core unemployed.” BHO never served and has not served well those who do.
  • NASA and reaching for the stars. It was JFK who believed in American ingenuity and wanted to put a man on the moon. He and his policies did just that. Today under BHO we see NASA no-longer its former self. Programs have been dramatically cut, the space shuttle program ended. BHO tasked the head of NASA to focus his and the agencies efforts on “having better relations with Islam.” America is no longer dominant in space as it was under JFK. NASA is but a shadow of itself.
  • The National Rifle Association. JFK was a life member of the NRA. On March 20, 1961 JFK became a life member and in a letter to the NRA President Franklin L. Orth stated, “Through competitive matches and sports in coordination with the National Board for Promotion of Rifle Practice, the Association fills an important role in our national defense effort, and fosters in an active and meaningful fashion the spirit of the Minutemen.” BHO hates the NRA and all it stands for. BHO, his administration and Democrats have taken an adversarial position on the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. JFK supported Second Amendment rights for Americans, saying in an April 1960 statement, “By calling attention to a well-regulated militia, the security of the nation and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, our founding forefathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of government tyranny, which gave rise to the Second Amendment, will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains a major declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the Second Amendment will always be important.”
  • JFK added the M16 (AR15) rifle into the U.S. military inventory. It was JFK who introduced the Armalite M16 (AR-15) rifle into the inventory of the U.S. Military. Under JFK, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14 , the AR-15 and the AK-47 . The Army’s test report stated only the M14 was suitable for Army use, but Vance wondered about the impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to investigate the testing methods used, who reported that the testers showed undue favor to the M14. McNamara ordered a halt to M14 production in January 1964. In November, the Army ordered 85,000 XM16E1s for experimental use, and the Air Force ordered another 19,000. Meanwhile the Army carried out another project, the Small Arms Weapons Systems (SAWS) , on general infantry firearm needs in the immediate future. They highly recommended the immediate adoption of the weapon, so much so that they started referring to it as the M16. Today BHO Democrats hate the M16 rifle and have banned it in states like New York. Senator Diane Feinstein has made it her mission to ban all “assault rifles” the prime example being the M16/AR15 civilian variants. A rifle JFK favored is now in disfavor with BHO Democrats.
  • Immigration policy was much different under JFK. JFK in his book “A Nation of Immigrants” wrote, “The interaction of disparate cultures, the vehemence of the ideals that led the immigrants here, the opportunity offered by a new life, all gave America a flavor and a character that make it as unmistakable and as remarkable to people today as it was to Alexis de Tocqueville in the early part of the nineteenth century.” In his book JFK Kennedy outlines three main reasons why immigration to the U.S. took place: freedom from religious persecution, political oppression and economic hardship. While JFK believed in a generous, fair and flexible immigration policy he did not believe in open borders and no immigration policy.
  • On Federal taxation and balancing the budget. As JFK wrote on September 18, 1963, “A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget….As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.” BHO has raised taxes, spent like no other president and increased the federal deficit to historic levels.
  • Communism and the Free World. As JFK stated in his 1961 inaugural address, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This much we pledge —- and more. To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder….We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.” Weakness in the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine is at the center of BHO’s European policy. Ignoring the threat from Russia, China, North Korea are the hallmarks of the BHO Doctrine.
  • JFK and McCarthyism. Joseph Kennedy had befriended McCarthy because he found him to be a likable fellow Irish-Catholic who had all the right ideas on the domestic communist menace. These warm feelings were quickly transferred to the entire Kennedy family. JFK liked the fact that McCarthy went after the “elites” in the State Department whom JFK regarded with contempt. Even before McCarthy made accusations against the State Department of subversion, JFK had already aligned himself with the militant anti-communists who blamed the Truman State Department for the “loss” of China. So JFK declared on the House floor in January 1949, “The responsibility for the failure of our foreign policy in the Far East rests squarely with the White House and the Department of State.” BHO embraces those who hate America and has put them in key leadership and advisory positions in his administration.
  • And finally Cuba. JFK invaded Cuba, unsuccessfully. Blockaded Cuba. Made Cuba a pariah in the Free World. That has now changed under BHO.

I could go on and discuss how JFK worked with Congress. How JFK embraced the Constitution. At his 1962 State of Union, JFK stated, “The Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress.” BHO believes it is his way or the highway.

Where are the Blue Dog Democrats? Purged from the BHO Party?

As Ronald Reagan once said he did not leave the Democratic Party, rather the Democratic Party left him. So it is with many Democrats. The BHO Party has left them in the lurch.

‘Trump wins’ on travel ban/refugee restrictions, or does he?

/in , , , , , , /by

On the surface it might appear that the Trump Administration has won an important victory in the Supreme Court which ruled just a few hours ago on the so-called “travel ban” Executive Order, but in my view the Court has created an enormous bureaucratic mess, not to mention having re-written Refugee law! What were they thinking???

I know, I know, they will decide the case on the merits after hearing it next fall (and this decision does show where they are leaning), but from now until then there will be nothing but chaos and controversy relating to travel from the 6 countries and regarding the refugee admissions CEILING.  Remember readers, I am not a legal beagle, but the minute I heard some of the convoluted balancing of equities argument I thought my head would explode!

The gist of the decision is that Trump (the President) can halt immigration from the six (although incomplete list) of terror-producing countries unless the wannabe entrant (for any purpose) “can credibly claim a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”

So, I guess  that means the court has decided in advance who the potential terrorists are and that they can’t possibly be someone who has a relative here already or is coming to college at the University of Hawaii (or any college) or connected to any “entity” (a VOLAG perhaps!).

Of greater interest to me is that, although Trump can have his refugee admissions ceiling of 50,000 (remember CEILING is not a target), but the ceiling can be surpassed (says the majority opinion) in the remaining months of this fiscal year  (up to September 30th) if the wannabe refugees have relatives here (what if 10,000, 20,000 and so forth have relatives here!).

Can you see the potential for fraud as all over the world, migrants wishing to get to America are scrambling to have relatives or a bona fide entity with which to associate themselves.

So, in effect the Supreme Court (led by Chief Justice Roberts) has just rewritten the Refugee Act of 1980!

The Act allows the President to exceed his designated ceiling (and here they agree it is 50,000!) only by making a case for an emergency and consulting with Congress.  Well, forget that! Looks like the Supreme Court is now determining the number of refugees to be admitted to America.

(I concede real lawyers might have a different interpretation, but reading the Court’s decision today one wonders if they read the Refugee Act!).

Here in the dissent written by Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch you can clearly see the bureaucratic and legal mess the Court has thrown to a State Department not firmly in the White House’s control, not to mention the parade of court cases the three dissenting Justices envision.

Here is the opinion.  I invite you all to make up your own minds, send comments with your analysis.

Here is the portion of the dissent that says it all:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

White House Backs 2 Bills Targeting Illegal Immigration

Court partly reinstates Trump travel ban

Will President Trump restrict welfare use by refugees too?

“I’m the victim” said refugee sentenced for sex crimes in Canada, no one told me I couldn’t do this

Did Sec. of State Tillerson’s right hand man, Brian Hook, set a major policy shift on refugees?

Refugee contractors brought refugee lobbyists to Washington (again) last week

EDITORS NOTE: Here are two other comments on this SCOTUS decision:

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel American Center for Law and Justice:

“We’re very pleased with the court granting the stay concerning the most significant aspects of the president’s executive order on immigration. At the same time, we’re very pleased that the high court has agreed to hear the case in the fall. It has been our position from the very beginning that the president – the commander-in-chief – has both the constitutional and statutory authority to issue the order. President Trump acted lawfully and constitutionally with the intent to protect the national security of the United States. We are confident that the high court will conclude on the merits that the president was acting within his constitutional authority.”

Art Arthur, resident fellow Center for Immigration Studies:

“Justice Thomas, Justice Alito and Justice Gorsuch would simply allow the second executive order – the one from March – to go into effect today. The two other more moderate conservative Justices, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy, are on the fence.”

“[Under this ruling, however] some individuals who would seek harm to the American people or our institutions may get in simply because they have relationships with individuals or entities within the United States. But the Supreme Court appears willing to take that risk at the present time.”

President Trump Proposes Solar Panels on Top of Border Wall — Greenpeace and Sierra Club outraged!

/in , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump tells supporters in Cedar Rapids, Iowa that he is considering mounting photovoltaic panels atop his proposed Mexican border wall would allow the project to pay for itself.

President Trump stated, “We’re thinking of something that’s unique, we’re talking about the southern border, lots of sun, lots of heat. We’re thinking about building the wall as a solar wall, so it creates energy and pays for itself. And this way, Mexico will have to pay much less money.”

If approved this would be the largest alternative energy project in the world. But wait…

You would think that organizations who favor alternative power sources such as solar panels and wind power would be pleased with this unique and innovative idea. You would think that they would encourage companies to bid on the Department of Homeland Security contract to build the wall and give those living along both sides of the wall access to renewable energy. Well you would be wrong.

Proposed section of green border wall with solar panels submitted by Thomas Gleason, a Las Vegas construction materials supplier.

In The Daily Signal article titled “How Environmental Groups Are Responding to Trump’s ‘Solar Wall’ Pitch“ Fred Lucas reports:

President Donald Trump’s idea of putting solar panels on his long-promised border wall hasn’t gained a lot of support among top environmental lobbying groups—even though the organizations have long backed solar power as a key renewable energy.

“The problem with talking about solar panels on Trump’s border wall is that it’s science fiction,” Travis Nichols, a spokesman for Greenpeace, a liberal environmentalist group, told The Daily Signal. “Just like clean coal does not exist and will never exist, Trump’s wall with solar panels won’t exist, so it’s irrelevant to discuss climate issues.”

A spokesman with the Sierra Club referred to a tweet storm by the Sierra Club executive director, Michael Brune, reacting to Trump’s proposal for solar panels on the border wall.

Read more.

If solar panels on the border wall is “science fiction” then isn’t the same true for all uses of solar panels?

Here’s a discussion on President Trump’s new green border wall with solar panels designed by Thomas Gleason. He is a construction materials supplier up in North Las Vegas. He says he has submitted a bid for President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall with Mexico.:

President Trump is a builder and entrepreneur. He also keeps his promises. Building the wall is one of those promises. Time for environmentalists and Democrats to jump at this chance to build some big and bold. As President Trump has said, “If your going to think might as well think big.”

It appears those opposing this unique opportunity are small thinkers, or maybe politically motivated?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Lawmakers Cite Evidence Russia ‘Colluded’ With U.S. Green Groups to Block Fracking

Homeland Security Will Start Building Border Wall Prototypes This Summer

GOP Senator Proposes Transferring Sanctuary Cities’ Federal Funds to Border Wall Budget

Supreme Court decision on ‘travel ban’ and refugee ceiling reduction eminent

/in , , , , , /by

According to AP at ABC News, here, they have likely already decided and an announcement will come next week.

There are two major issues at stake (maybe more than two, but two for me!).  The first is whether the President has the authority to ban, for a limited time, all entry to the US from six (mostly Muslim countries that are hotbeds of terrorism) in order to keep us safe while they review the entry screening process.  Again, this involves all those of all religions and ethnic groups entering the US through any means from those six countries.

The second issue, and the one more interesting to me, is the one addressed by the Hawaii court (9th Circuit), but NOT by the Maryland court (4th Circuit), and that is whether the President has the legal right to come in at any number below the refugee admissions CEILING set last fall (in this case set by Obama), or more specifically has a legal right to announce a mid-year lowering of the admission ceiling for all refugees, of all religions, from all countries! And, does he have the legal authority to put in place a 120-day moratorium (again all countries, all religions) while the federal government reviews the screening process for refugees.

Presidents always come in under the CEILING, some by very significant numbers, and no one has legally challenged previous presidents on that issue.  There may have been some squawking by federal refugee contractors***, who receive a large portion of their budget based on a per head payment, when Bush came in way low in the wake of 9/11, but I don’t think he was taken to court over it.

See what I said here about how Obama failed to reach some of his ceilings:

In FY2011, they were 23,576 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama?

In FY2012, they were 17,762 below the CEILING. Did anyone sue President Obama for leaving thousands “stranded in war-torn countries”?

I have my fingers crossed that Justice Department lawyers knew enough to separate the two issues (the overall travel ban from the CEILING issue) which should never have been addressed in the same Executive Order in the first place.

Here is what ABC is reporting:

The Supreme Court has almost certainly decided what to do about President Donald Trump’s travel ban affecting citizens of six mostly Muslim countries.

The country is waiting for the court to make its decision public about the biggest legal controversy in the first five months of Trump’s presidency. The issue has been tied up in the courts since Trump’s original order in January sparked widespread protests just days after he took office.

The justices met Thursday morning for their last regularly scheduled private conference in June and probably took a vote about whether to let the Trump administration immediately enforce the ban and hear the administration’s appeal of lower court rulings blocking the ban.

The court’s decision could come any time and is expected no later than late next week…..

[….]

The case is at the Supreme Court because two federal appellate courts have ruled against the Trump travel policy, which would impose a 90-day pause in travel from citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the ban was “rooted in religious animus” toward Muslims and pointed to Trump’s campaign promise to impose a ban on Muslims entering the country as well as tweets and remarks he has made since becoming president.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the travel policy does not comply with federal immigration law, including a prohibition on nationality-based discrimination.

That court also put a hold on separate aspects of the policy that would keep all refugees out of the United States for 120 days and cut by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000, the cap on refugees in the current government spending year that ends Sept. 30.

More here.

If the court rules against Trump on this last point, I see the contractors getting what they always wanted—the President’s determination set in September in advance of the fiscal year would become a TARGET that must be reached, and not simply a CEILING not to be exceeded.  (The Refugee Act of 1980 does have a mechanism for increasing the ceiling during the course of the year that requires consultation with Congress, but is silent if the President comes in low.)

For a laugh, as the contractors argue in the Supreme Court that the President (in this case, Donald Trump) doesn’t have the right to set the ceiling, they say this (see here) about a bill in Congress that would eliminate some Presidential power to set the ceiling:

“….it would remove presidential authority to set the number of refugees who may enter the country per year.”

Make up your minds—does the President have the power or not? Truth be told, this is about Donald Trump and not if the president was Mark Zuckerberg!

***Federal refugee resettlement contractors are paid by you, on a per head basis, to place refugees in your towns:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

So did President Trump get blindsided by Dept. of State announcement last month?

LA Times headline is deceptive (yes, can you believe it!)

Zuckerberg in Minnesota….running for Prez in 2020?

How Trump Could Change the Country’s Direction With These Court Vacancies

What you can say, when they say ______

/in , , , , , /by

I’m asked all the time: What can I do?  What can I do?

This is an excellent example of the kind of thing you can do.  This is a list of talking points thoughtfully prepared by Brenda Arthur of the Charleston, WV Act for America chapter.  As a citizen activist, she put some serious time into preparing this point/counterpoint and made it available for all of you!

PROPONENTS OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WILL SAY :

1. Your town is losing population. Bringing refugees will revitalize your city.

  • Truth: Saying that Importing third world poverty into our city or state revitalizes it just defies logic and commonsense.
  • The educational level of many refugees is low. They will only qualify for minimum or low wage jobs. Therefore, they will continue to qualify for some form of government assistance such as Medicaid and/or Food Stamps aka SNAP.
  • Big Business uses refugees for cheap labor thereby depressing wages for Americans with low education levels.
  • The cost of educating a refugee child is apprx $10,000+ per year not to mention the additional cost of English language assistance/interpreters and additional tutoring due to a lack of previous education.
  • Refugees often send some of their money out of the country to family left behind. Those remittances that leave the country are dollars unavailable to the local economy. This is never factored in.
  • As the refugee population grows more languages will be required to be provided by the school system. This erodes the quality of the schools and reduces teaching time for American kids whose parents are paying the bill.
  • In towns where the refugee population has grown, parents are finding 17-20 year-olds in class with their children.
  • Some school districts across the country have as many as 81 languages for which they must provide ESL teachers and interpreters.

2. Another selling point by the proponents is that “It is our moral obligation. That’s who we are as a country.”

  • Our tax dollars were never meant to be someone else’s charity .
  • We should aid refugees where they are. For every one brought here we can help 12 people there. The administration of mercy belongs to each of us individually—-not to the government.
  • Our first moral obligation is to our own people.

Arthur created this refugee crimes poster to use as a visual aid when she speaks to groups in West Virginia. You can do this too!

3. OVER 800,000 REFUGEES (since 9/11) HAVE BEEN ADMITTED TO THE U.S. AND NO TERRORIST PROBLEMS:

  • Proponents will present the picture that everything is “sweetness and light.” Not true. Many problems are occurring with refugee populations in towns all across America: Gangs, increased drug trafficking, sex slave trade, domestic violence, crime, drug resistant strains of TB, female genital mutilation, and more.
  • Cultural differences are often great and cannot be bridged. Some refugee cultures believe that “honor killing” and rape of non-Muslim women is acceptable.
  • In addition, there have been terrorist acts committed by refugees as well as many crimes. Taxpayers pay for expensive trials, and for those who are sentenced we must bear the cost of imprisonment for many years.

4. NO STATE MONEY IS INVOLVED.

  • Yet another selling point of the proponents is that THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED. IT’S ALL FEDERAL MONEY. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, FEDERAL MONEY IS OUR MONEY.  SECONDLY, LET’S DISCUSS THE STATE COSTS: MEDICAID , STATE EMPLOYEES, EDUCATION, INTERPRETERS, AND LIKELY CASH WELFARE PAYMENTS.
  • DON’T TELL ME OR ANYONE ELSE THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED WITH THIS PROGRAM. It’s a matter of how much.

TO RECAP:

  • Medicaid–Unreimbursed cost to the state
  • TANF–Cash Welfare payments –Unreimbursed costs to the state
  • Interpreters–Provided to students and other refugees as needed
  • Education–Cost for educating children K-12
  • State Employees’ salaries and benefits who work w/refugees

5. The vetting is very, very rigorous.

  • Former FBI Director, James Comey, Obama’s Special Envoy to the Middle East to fight ISIS, General John Allen, Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, Mike McCaul, Chairman of Homeland Security in the Congress , and now we know from the leaked Wikileaks documents that even Hillary Clinton herself said at a private meeting in 2013 that the refugees cannot possibly be vetted.
  • Further, Leon Rodriguez, former Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, reluctantly told former Senator Jeff Sessions’ Senate Committee in September 2016 that some of the refugees get in based solely on their testimony alone.
  • Fraud is rampant in the refugee program. Many refugees come from failed states. They have no documentation. We are supposed to believe the lie that everyone is who they say they are.
  • ISIS has sworn to infiltrate the refugee population. They already have.

6. The refugees become self-sufficient within 5 years.

  • The fact is that the Office Of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) defines self-sufficiency in a way that is contrary to the common understanding of the word. A household is considered self-sufficient if it is not receiving “a cash assistance grant”. But other welfare programs do not count under the ORR definition. Thus, ORR considers and reports them as self-sufficient even if they are receiving other forms of government assistance such as: Food Stamps (SNAP), Housing subsidies, or Medicaid .
  • Don’t be fooled. Make them define their terms.

7. Refugees pay taxes.

  • Consider that the average educational level of a Middle Eastern refugee is 10.5 years. That is not even a high school diploma. This means that the likelihood of them earning more than $9-$12 /hour is pretty unlikely. Having a low wage job is most likely. Further, even if they work and pay taxes the fact that the earnings level is low will often make them eligible for continuing government subsidies. There are other points to consider:
  • Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is available to people whose income is low. Many, if not most, refugees would likely qualify for this.
  • Child Tax Credit up to $1000 per child would apply based on income guidelines. This credit is IN ADDITION to deductions for dependent children.
  • Once the Tax Credits are applied it is possible that they are getting back all or most of the taxes that were paid and potentially more than they paid.

So, there we have it for those of you looking for something to do.  Use Arthur’s points for letters to the editor, arguing with ‘friends’ on Facebook, or when corresponding with your elected officials.

This post is filed in two categories here at RRW:  ‘Comments worth noting’ (here) and in my new category ‘What you can do’ (here).

And, for all of you interested in Arthur’s home state of West Virginia, go here for my archive on the state.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Crooks, thieves and fraudsters: You will never be told their immigration status

Human Rights Watch badgers Japan to take refugees

Fake Security is More Dangerous than No Security

/in , , , , /by

How the “Improved Visa Waiver Program” creates the perilous illusion of security.

Once again terrorists have attacked and wounded and killed innocent civilians in London, England.

On June 3rd a terrorist attack at London Bridge and Borough Market was carried out by three apparent Jihadists who used a rented van to mow down pedestrians, whereupon the three emerged from that van and attacked still more victims with their knives.

The terrorists have applied to their attacks the principle behind Occam’s razor, that postulates that in attempting to understand how something is accomplished, the simplest solution is most likely the correct solution.

In the case of terrorists, using a simple strategy and crude weapons such as motor vehicles and knives that are readily available, decreases the likelihood that such plots can be discovered and prevented before they are carried out.

While the TSA, was created in the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11 and its FY 2017 Budget of $7.6 billion and more than 42,000 employees exist to safeguard transportation, with particular emphasis on airliners, most terror attacks do not involve airliners.

Continuing with the concept of Occam’s razor, the United States needs to do whatever is possible and reasonable to prevent international terrorists from entering the United States in the first place.

All vulnerabilities must, therefore be effectively addressed.

If an ounce of protection is worth a pound of cure, preventing the entry of such terrorists represents a ton of cure.

As I have noted in a recent article, Border Security Is National Security.

There is no shortage of ways for terrorists to enter the United States.  Recently attention has turned to the way that aliens who enter the United States through the legal inspections process at ports of entry are able to easily disappear within the United States and embed themselves in the towns and cities where they live and quietly go about their deadly preparations.

That issue and others were raised in the report issued on May 23, 2017 by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Visa Overstays: A Gap in the Nation’s Border.  That report served as the predication for my recent article.

Indeed, the 9/11 Commission noted that most terrorists enter the United States through international airports.

Given these facts it is becoming clear that President Trump’s goal of subjecting aliens seeking entry into the United States to “extreme vetting” is a matter of national security.

In fact, the 9/11 Commission found flaws in the way that visas were issued and noted that the visa adjudications process needed to be tightened up.

The Visa Waiver Program runs contrary to that important mission yet, the number of the countries whose citizens may enter the United States without first applying for visas and receiving visas continues to increase under pressure from such special interest/lobbying groups as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in spite of the fact that the nexus between visa overstays and terrorism has been well known for many years.  In fact, on May 11, 2006 I testified before a hearing conducted by the House Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on the topic, Visa Overstays: Can We Bar The Terrorist Door?

Shortly after the attacks of 9/11 the virtual mantra of our leaders was, “To be successful, the terrorists need only get it ‘right’ while our security depends on our government getting it ‘right’ 100% of the time.”

As concerns about terrorists who are citizens of countries who participate in the Visa Waiver Program increased as more terror attacks were carried out in Europe and elsewhere, the Obama administration and the Congress cooperated to modify the Visa Waiver Program through the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015.

The “improvements” to the Visa Waiver Program are illusory and designed to quell the fears and concerns of Americans while making certain that this dangerous program continues to satisfy the demands of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other such lobbying organizations who, as I have previously noted, are far more concerned with head counts on airliners than body counts in the morgue.

By creating this dangerous illusion, the stage has been set for what may be further attempts to expand this wrong-headed program rather than do what is necessary and terminate it altogether.

Here is how the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) has been modified, as noted in the official CBP website:

Under the Act, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the VWP:

•  Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, or countries listed under specified designation lists (currently including Iran and Sudan) at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).

•  Nationals of VWP countries who have been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited government/military exceptions).

These restrictions do not apply to VWP travelers whose presence in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country. We recommend those who have traveled to the seven countries listed above for military/official purposes bring with them appropriate documentation when traveling through a U.S. port of entry.

The vast majority of VWP-eligible travelers will not be affected by the new Act. New countries may be added to this list at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security.

On the face of it, rendering citizens of VWP countries ineligible to enter the United States, if they had recently traveled to countries affiliated with terrorism, is a prudent measure.

However, what is the likelihood that our consular officials or our CBP inspectors at ports of entry will know if such aliens had traveled to Syria, Iraq or other such countries?

Is there truly an expectation that such aliens will show up at U.S. embassies and consulates seeking visas after freely admitting that they have made such trips to those countries?

Are we to expect, perhaps, that such individuals might show up with their transcripts in hand, attesting to their acquired prowess in the construction bombs when they attended terror training camps in the Middle East?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its corporate friends in the hotel, travel, hospitality and manufacturing industries formed an unholy alliance, the Discover America Partnership that, nevertheless, continues to lobby for an expansion of the dangerous Visa Waiver Program, ignoring that ISIS, al-Qaeda and transnational criminals have already “discovered” America.

That partnership opposes any efforts to more effectively scrutinize foreign visitors, pushing for the admission of ever more foreign tourists, foreign students and, of course, huge increases in exploitable foreign workers to displace Americans.

My article, “Visa Waiver Program Endangers Our Safety And Security” included a list of six ways an effectively administered visa program helps combat terrorism and protect America and Americans and even enhances airliner safety.

All of those important benefits are utterly lost when aliens enter the U.S. under Visa Waiver Program.  Under this program aliens do not apply for or receive visas.

To cite a few examples as to how the visa requirement enhance national security and public safety:

Visa applications contain information and biometrics that can be essential to conducting investigations into terrorists and criminals.  Aliens who commit fraud in completing that application face up to 25 years in prison, if the purpose for applying for the visa was to further a terror goal.

Aliens who are required to have visas before traveling to the United States are not permitted to board airliners if they have no visas.  Aliens who are denied visas are subsequently barred from boarding airliners.  Richard Reid, the infamous “Shoe Bomber” was, as a British citizen, able to board the airliner destined to the United States without first receiving a visa.

Yet the Visa Waiver program persists as do the risks that this program creates for national security and public safety.

The final blow to our safety and security is provided by Lethal Sanctuary Cities that are eager to harbor and shield illegal aliens, no matter how they entered the United States, from detection by immigration law enforcement officers.

Simply stated, Sanctuary Cities Endanger – National Security and Public Safety.

National security and public safety must be the absolute priority for our government.  Illusions of security are less then worthless- they are dangerous.

The Visa Waiver Program and Sanctuary Cities must, for once and for all, be terminated.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

White House and Department of State leakers in battle over refugee costs

/in , , , , /by

Can you believe it!  Reuters is reporting on four anonymous leakers (inside and outside the Department of State) who are saying chief White House aide Stephen Miller is trying to skew numbers to make the refugee program look more expensive than they claim it is!

Former Asst. Sec. of State Anne Richard

Most interesting to me is that a former State Department “official” is in on the effort to skewer Miller (and Trump of course!).

Can you say ‘Obama shadow government’!

Note: Sorry I’m giving you a quicky post here.  I am preparing for something this evening and have no time for more comment and analysis, except to say that getting at the true cost of the overall migration of impoverished third world refugees to middle America is almost impossible because in most states, the welfare offices do not track and separate out the different classes of immigrants using social services, medicare, or sending kids to school.

For federal budget planning, I’m guessing Miller is trying to get at the true cost to admit the refugees in the first place which is where the federal budget costs are initially incurred for decision-making needed by September.

Here is Reuters on the ‘Deep State’ undermining the White House (again!), getting more cocky by the day aren’t they!

Is Simon Henshaw leaking?

Two studies that President Donald Trump hopes will buttress his case to cut the number of refugees are at the heart of a fight between senior White House adviser Stephen Miller and career U.S. government officials over immigration policy, four current and former officials said.

Trump in March ordered the U.S. State Department and other agencies to tally only the costs of resettling refugees but not the benefits that policy experts said refugees can also bring, including tax revenues, professional skills and job creation. [Virtually impossible, and are we going to tally medicare, schools, housing, SSI and criminal justice system costs for how many years?—ed]

Is Larry Bartlett leaking?

A current official said Miller had convened meetings with State Department staffers to discuss the refugee cost reports. When department specialists proposed including refugees’ economic contributions in the studies to produce a more balanced assessment, Miller rebuffed the idea, one current and one former U.S. official said.

The White House said Miller did not hold meetings on the specific subject of the cost reports and that Trump’s overall fiscal year 2018 budget proposal sought to “make transparent the net budgetary effects of immigration programs and policy.”

The current and former officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they believe, however, that the administration wants to help make a case to restrict refugee flows by creating a skewed analysis.

“It’s a policy outcome in search of a rationale,” said a former U.S. official familiar with the debate.

Continue reading here and prepare to be outraged!

EndNote: If Henshaw and Bartlett are not the leakers, they better find out who is! They are responsible for whoever is talking to the press!  Like it or not, they work for President Donald Trump!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Refugee contractors whine about not meeting 110,000 “target” for FY17

Cop Speaks Up: Illegal Immigrants Murdered My Buddy Execution Style

1.4 million illegals working under stolen Social Security numbers

Illegal Immigrant Held in Beating Death of Virginia Teen

Mark Steyn: ‘Demography explains most of everything’ [video]

/in , , , , /by

Mark Steyn tells Tucker Carlson: “I’m a demography bore”

That comment was in response to the latest (this time failed) terror attack in a Brussels train station yesterday.

He went on to say: “Demography explains most of everything.”

Yes, agreed Carlson.

Steyn related his comment as  well to the close Georgia House race yesterday to explain that demographic changes in Georgia made it possible for a progressive to even think he had a chance to pull off an upset there.  (Georgia is a leading refugee resettlement state, btw).

Steyn told Carlson in a two minute portion of a longer segment that when your city (in this case Brussels) is 25% Muslim because your country has made the fatal mistake to think that you can replace an aging population with a hostile culture, the country will see increased tension and chaos.  In my view, it will ultimately collapse into an Islamic state.

Carlson asked about Japan, and Steyn told him that Japan has chosen to NOT invite in the third world, that saving their unique Japanese culture was more important to them.  Only time will tell if the Japanese (and the Poles, the Czechs and the Hungarians) can do it.

As I have said repeatedly, only one way to save western societies (and countries like Japan), in addition to limiting immigration, encourage our women to have babies—lots and lots of babies!

Here is the video from last night’s show:

For the Steyn demography segment begin at the 8:20 mark.

If you have never read America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It  by Mark Steyn, you must. Steyn’s 2006 predictions are coming true.

Illegal alien kills a 17-year old Muslim girl, discredits ‘open borders’ propaganda

/in , , , , , , /by

Illegal alien from El Salvador allegedly murdered Nabra Hassanen a Muslim teenager walking with a group from the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center.

Diversity is supposed to be beautiful, right?  Immigrants who come to the great American melting pot are supposed to love and respect multiculturalism, right?  Unlike in Europe, we do everything to foster ‘assimilation’ of races, religions and cultures, right?

Well, here is a case that goes so far against the Left’s message that many predict it will disappear so fast you will think you imagined it …  This is not supposed to happen!

It is just run-of-the-mill road rage says Fox 5 headline:

Man charged with murder of Muslim teen; road rage appears to have led to killing, police say

HERNDON, Va. – A 22-year-old man has been charged with murder after police say he killed a 17-year-old Reston girl whose body was found in a pond hours after being reported missing during an early morning road rage incident in Virginia.

Illegal alien Darwin Martinez Torres (left); seventeen year old Nabra Hassanen (right)

Fairfax County Police say the victim, Nabra Hassanen, was with a group of teenagers of about 15 people walking and riding their bikes along Dranesville Road from a McDonald’s restaurant at around 3:40 a.m. Sunday. The group got involved in a dispute with the driver of a vehicle after they attended an overnight event at the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center, a mosque located in Sterling and is one of the largest mosque in the country.

Police say a teenage boy got into an argument with the driver, identified as 22-year-old Darwin Martinez Torres.

Continue reading here for awful details.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in a statement regarding Torres [guess this means he was not a DACA darling?—ed]

“On June 19, ICE lodged a detainer on Darwin Martinez Torres, a citizen and national of El Salvador, with the Adult Detention Center in Fairfax, Virginia. ICE lodges detainers on aliens who have been arrested on local criminal charges when the agency has probable cause to believe an alien is removable from the United States. Mr. Martinez Torres has no prior encounters with ICE.”

[….]

On Monday afternoon, Fairfax County police say the killing appears to be the result of a road rage incident and they have no evidence that Hassanen was targeted.

“No evidence has been recovered that shows this was a hate crime,” said Fairfax County police spokesperson Julie Parker. “Nothing indicates that this was motivated by race or by religion.”

However, Mahmoud Hassanen, the victim’s father believes otherwise and says his daughter was targeted because she is Muslim.

Just a reminder readers that this is Virginia, a leading diversity-is-beautiful state if there ever was one! You can tell the authorities are working overtime to keep a lid on the story.

This is a story, not about refugees, but one about the idea that we can continue to pour immigrants (legally and illegally) of all sorts in to the US at such a rate that the tensions will inevitably build and become so disruptive to the social order that civil unrest is inevitable.

If you see more on this case going forward, please send links my way.

RELATED ARTICLE: No Allah Please, We’re British

TAKE ACTION: Put the brakes on the refugee resettlement program

/in , , , , , /by

Thanks to reader Denise for making a very cool flyer to remind you to call your Washington representatives to counter the lobbying campaign by the refugee industry this week.  They are ginning-up thousands of calls to Congress in advance of World Refugee Day tomorrow.

This is a very handy way to get the phone numbers for your representatives.  I just tried it, and in addition to my reps in Washington, I received phone numbers for my state reps too!

Post is filed in ‘What can you do’ because you asked!

RELATED ARTICLE: 117 Leftwing groups/refugee contractors oppose bill to BEGIN to reform refugee program

Trump must fight on refugee issue as he did on climate ‘deal’

/in , , , , /by

Our friend Leo Hohmann at World Net Daily tells us what he thinks of the Trump Administration’s weakness on the refugee issue.

From WND.  Read it all, but here is the wrap-up:

Hohmann does not believe Trump is taking the refugee resettlement issue seriously enough. The veteran journalist warned in his book there is a historic demographic shift of Muslims out of the Middle East and Africa into Western Europe, Canada and the U.S. That shift is known as “civilization jihad,” and the resettlement of Muslim refugees in the West is one component of it.

“This is a situation where 1,500 foreign nationals are entering our country now every week,” Hohmann cautioned. “In many cases, when they come from chaotic, broken nations like Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, we have no idea who these people are and are simply accepting whatever story they give us about their so-called persecution. Yet, we allow Christians who are legitimately under a genocide in Iraq and Syria to languish there unprotected.

“Something must change, and soon, or there will be no more hint of Christianity in the Middle East, which is where the faith took root 2,000 years ago. Trump the candidate seemed to understand these troubling trends, but Trump the president seems confused, misdirected and ill-advised.”

Hohmann wishes Trump would fight the establishment on the refugee issue the same way he fought it on the climate change issue.

“I’d like to see the president approach the refugee issue with the same wisdom, energy and courage with which he approached the Paris climate-change deal,” the writer stated. “It took a lot of guts to defy the globalists and pull out of that bad deal, so we know President Trump has it in him to take on these entrenched, anti-American interests.”

More here.

Readers ask me all the time: what can I do?  Read ‘Stealth Invasion’ and contact the White House by clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

A picture worth a thousand words, civil war coming to Europe?

Refugee admissions not ramped-up yet

70 MEN held in Australian offshore detention will soon be told if they are moving to Anytown, USA

436 ‘refugees’ came to US from S. Africa (so far) this fiscal year, zero are South Africans

Tennessee: World Relief accused of not taking care of their refugees

/in , , , , , , /by

When refugees were initially being placed in the county where I live (now more than 10 years ago), our community’s first impression was that the ‘Christian’ resettlement agency—the Virginia Council of Churches—was basically dropping off a couple hundred refugees, placing them in deplorable housing, and then not providing them with some of their basic needs.

I wanted to know what sort of program was this.  Did the government allow this? But, of course as we know now, nine major federal resettlement contractors (including World Relief)*** are federal government contractors who oversee a network of over 300 subcontractors.  The nine sign agreements with the US State Department laying out what services they will provide refugees in their care. Indeed the contractor is paid by the head for each refugee it is assigned.

Over the years, we have reported on many cases like this one being made in Tennessee that the contractor is not fulfilling its end of the bargain.

Abdou Kattih has been an outspoken critic of efforts by the legislature to keep Shariah law out of Tennessee and to rein-in the refugee industry in the state.

From The Tennessee Star:

During the March “Murfreesboro Muslim Youth” (MMY) meeting soliciting help for refugees brought to Rutherford County by federal resettlement contractor World Relief, it was disclosed that goods and services that the government paid for were not provided to the new refugees.

Abdou Kattih

According to Abdou Kattih, founder and president of MMY, were it not for his organization, special emergency needs such as getting medical care for the refugee who arrived with a broken jaw or simply providing household essentials and even clothing, would not have been addressed, explaining they had taken care of “someone that does not have literally anything but the clothes they had off of last month.”

Melissa Sohrabi, who merged her group “Roots for Refugees” with MMY, was more direct in detailing the deficiencies of the government contractor in this talk she delivered in March:

“There is an expectation of what should happen and there’s reality of what really does happen. . . Why didn’t World Relief give them a table and chairs? Why didn’t they bring them a couch? What’s going on? . . . Not only did it not happen but if it did happen, those families are charged for every belonging, every item that is donated to World Relief, the family is then charged for, for having it delivered to them.”

World Relief (WR), based in Baltimore, is one of nine national refugee resettlement organizations that sign a “Cooperative Agreement” with the U.S. State Department to receive federal funding to resettle refugees. This is taxpayer money allocated for each refugee brought to a community; the funds are split between the refugee and the agency. In addition, the resettlement agency is required to provide the goods and services as detailed in the signed agreement.

Between fiscal years 2016 -17, WR was paid over $40 million by the federal government to resettle refugees in communities where they operate local offices which also receive federal funding through grants administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Continue reading here.

One of several things that came to mind when I read this, is something I have been wondering about for some time.  Five of the nine resettlement contractors are ‘Christian charities’, one is Jewish and three are secular.

They all eagerly resettle Muslim refugees, but I have wondered when will some Muslim charity demand to get in on the federal gravy train? Laying the groundwork in this story?

Here are the nine federal contractors that monopolize the US Refugee Admissions Program:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

IRC gives up plans for new resettlement site in Asheville, NC; write to Congress!

CIS: More on the Australian “dumb deal;” ‘refugee’ deal gets dumber by the day!

Australian Prime Minister mocks Trump at journalist gathering in Canberra

/in , , , /by

Check out the news here at Australia’s Nine News.

So here’s my idea!

Nauru refugees in Australia

Donald Trump could get the last laugh by cancelling the “dumb deal” Obama agreed to that would bring up to 1,250 of Australia’s unwanted so-called ‘refugees’, presently held in offshore detention facilities, to (your!) American towns.

Bringing them here would save Turnbull’s political neck, while American taxpayers foot the bill and risk our lives! Some deal!

See my post yesterday about the deal! (A deal implies both sides get something!).

Looking for something you can do? 

Contact the White House and tell them to scrap the “dumb deal” with Australia!

Click here.

Then tell your Congressman too!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

BIG MEAT wants the cheap refugee labor, no wonder Congress won’t reform law

Refugees do NOT bring in more tax dollars than they consume in social services

EU launches legal action against 3 countries refusing refugees

Ninth Circuit rules, HIAS crows as Judicial coup is confirmed

/in , , , , , /by

It is not a surprise that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against the President and his legal Constitutional power to keep America safe.

I’m in a hurry this morning to get to my chores, so just want to give you Daniel Greenfield’s reading of the decision here at FrontPage magazine:

9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Announces It Is In Charge of Determining National Interests

Here is his opening paragraph:

The Judicial coup against democracy rolls on. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals announced with its latest ruling that it has the powers of the executive branch. To understand how insane the latest illegal and unconstitutional judicial effort to block common sense migration reform is, here are the powers that the 9th has decided it possesses.

Continue reading his excellent analysis.

As I have said till I’m blue in the face, I regret the fact that the 50,000 CEILING was announced in an Executive Order when the President already had the power to admit any number under the 110,000 CEILING set by Obama last September without even mentioning any cap.  He could have quietly slowed the flow the minute he took office.  At that time we had admitted just over 30,000 refugees in this fiscal year.  Now, the Trump State Department is approaching 50,000 with months yet to go.

But, more troubling is the utter confusion created by proposing a complete ‘travel ban’ from six countries in the same EO as an announcement on refugee admission numbers and a temporary moratorium from across the world (across all nationalities and all religions).  What a mess!

Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society cheers along with two other federal resettlement contractors which have a financial stake in keeping numbers of refugees high—they are paid by the head to place them in your towns and cities.

HIAS was joined in its amicus brief by the International Rescue Committee and the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants—all multi-million dollar federal resettlement contractors who have a pecuniary interest in the outcome.

HIAS press release yesterday begins:

WASHINGTON—Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling in the challenge to President Trump’s March 6 executive order barring the resettlement of refugees for 120 days, banning the entry of people from six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days, and cutting the overall number of refugee admissions for the year by more than half. The challenge was initiated by the State of Hawaii on behalf of individuals impacted by the executive order, and supported by HIAS and other refugee and human rights advocates in the public and private sector.

After hearing oral arguments before a three-judge panel on May 15, the court has affirmed the injunction on the parts of the order that would suspend entry of nationals from the six designated countries, suspend refugee admissions for 120 days, and cap the number of refugees to be admitted this fiscal year at 50,000. This ruling will allow refugees to continue finding safety in the United States through the refugee admissions program, unless the Supreme Court chooses to reverse the Ninth Circuit.

The Fourth Circuit case does not address the 50,000 CEILING issue. So, let’s hope that lawyers for the Justice Department are doing their homework and separating the CEILING issue from the ‘travel ban.’

And, HIAS knows they are on shaky ground regarding the President’s power to limit the numbers from all over the world (all religions/all ethnic groups) and so they continue to mix the ‘Muslim travel ban’ issue with the 50,000 cap to confuse their donors and the uninformed public.

If you missed it, see (here) how far below the CEILING other Presidents have gone—even Obama was tens of thousands below some of his earlier CEILINGS.

Also, see that HIAS, a federal contractor dependent on millions of your tax dollars, organized an anti-Trump rally, here in February.  There ought to be a law—federal contractors shouldn’t be able to stage anti-government protests!  Did they use any federal dollars???

Imagine the outrage if a military contractor was staging demonstrations because they wanted more federally-funded work!