WHY TRUMP’S WALL IS A MUST: And why a “virtual fence” will stop no one.

President Trump has demonstrated, once again, that he is a man of his word, opting to shut down the government rather than accede to the globalist Democrats who refuse to provide funding for the wall to be erected to help secure the dangerous and porous U.S./Mexican border.

Schumer, Pelosi and others, mostly Democrats, have opposed a wall and called for drones and other elements of a “virtual fence” along the southern border insisting that a wall would be too expensive and not needed.

As I noted in an earlier article, America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation, just as the cost of insulating houses ultimately saves money, by keeping warm air from escaping the house in the winter, insulating America against contraband (including deadly, dangerous narcotics), illegals and the criminals and terrorists among them, would protect America and Americans; and help staunch the flow of tens of billions of dollars annually sent out of the United States by illegal alien workers and criminals.

The cost of a secure border wall should be considered an investment in national security, public safety and the livelihoods of American workers.  This is one investment that would not only pay for itself and, indeed pay dividends, but save many, many innocent lives.

For years, drones–also known as UAV’s (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles)–have been deployed along that border at great expense and with little or nothing to show for the costly effort.

The deployment of the U.S. military’s Predator UAV’s to support the Border Patrol’s efforts to secure our borders provided many Americans with a sense of security.  After all, the military relies on those drones and we all know the U.S. military’s prowess at achieving national security goals and objectives.

In reality, for the most part, that sense of security provided by the drones has been false security.  False security is worse than no security.

The stark and irrefutable reality is that drones and other such devices cannot stop the entry of any illegal aliens or contraband.

Drones can spot illegal aliens and contraband only after our borders have been violated.  This is true for all of the technological devices that are deployed along the border.

Furthermore, unmanned drones cannot make arrests.  All that drones, pole-mounted cameras, radar and other sensors can do is transmit alerts and images to alert members of the U.S. Border Patrol that illegal entries into the United States have already taken place.  The Border Patrol then must have the resources to respond to those alerts and images provided by the drones and other costly high-tech devices.

On May 1, 2018 the Cato Institute published the Immigration Research And Policy Brief No. 5: Drones on the Border: Efficacy and Privacy Implications which began with the following two paragraphs:

In response to President Donald Trump’s call for a border wall, some members of Congress have instead offered a “virtual wall”—ocean-to-ocean border surveillance with technology, especially unmanned aircraft known as drones. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) already operates a fleet of nine unmanned aircraft. Although drones have been widely used in foreign battlefields, they have failed to help CBP apprehend illegal border crossers and seize drugs. Drones have led to only 0.5 percent of apprehensions at a cost of $32,000 per arrest.

At the same time, drones undermine Americans’ privacy. Their surveillance records the daily lives of Americans living along the border, and because CBP regularly uses its drones to support the operations of other federal agencies as well as state and local police, its drones allow for government surveillance nationwide with minimal oversight and without warrants. CBP should wind down its drone program and, in the meantime, establish more robust privacy protections.

Drones cannot assist Border Patrol agents who come under attack by illegal aliens and alien smugglers.  All that drones can do is transit images of agents who are being attacked and other agents then need to respond to back up the agents who are being attacked.

Drones are also vulnerable to hacking.  On December 17, 2015 the website Defense One published a report, DHS: Drug Traffickers Are Spoofing Border Drones that include the following statement:

“The bad guys on the border have lots of money and what they are putting money into is into spoofing and jamming GPS systems. We’re funding some advances so we can counter this,” said Timothy Bennett, a science-and-technology program manager at the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees CBP. Those bad guys aren’t ISIS, just traffickers, Bennett said on Dec. 16 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies “It’s more about trafficking drugs and people,” he told Defense One. “We know who’s over there. We can guess who’s doing it.”

On December 24, 2014 the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report“U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Unmanned Aircraft System Program Does Not Achieve Intended Results or Recognize All Costs of Operations” that included the following assessments:

 Although CBP’s Unmanned Aircraft System program contributes to border security, after 8 years, CBP cannot prove that the program is effective because it has not developed performance measures. The program has also not achieved the expected results. Specifically, the unmanned aircraft are not meeting flight hour goals. Although CBP anticipated increased apprehensions of illegal border crossers, a reduction in border surveillance costs, and improvement in the U.S. Border Patrol’s efficiency, we found little or no evidence that CBP met those program expectations.

We estimate that, in fiscal year 2013, it cost at least $62.5 million to operate the program, or about $12,255 per hour. The Office of Air and Marine’s calculation of $2,468 per flight hour does not include operating costs, such as the costs of pilots, equipment, and overhead. By not including all operating costs, CBP also cannot accurately assess the program’s cost effectiveness or make informed decisions about program expansion. In addition, unless CBP fully discloses all operating costs, Congress and the public are unaware of all the resources committed to the Unmanned Aircraft System program. As a result, CBP has invested significant funds in a program that has not achieved the expected results, and it cannot demonstrate how much the program has improved border security.

Given the cost of the Unmanned Aircraft System program and its unproven effectiveness, CBP should reconsider its plan to expand the program. The $443 million that CBP plans to spend on program expansion could be put to better use by investing in alternatives, such as manned aircraft and ground surveillance assets.

An effective wall, however, could prevent the illegal entry of aliens and contraband in the first place.

This should be a matter of common sense, yet many members of Congress have resisted the construction of a wall.

The major corporations that sell the government the drones, cameras and sensors find this to be an extremely lucrative venture.  All too frequently you have to consider the potential for what has come to be referred to as “crony capitalism.”

Of far greater concern however, is the simple and unavoidable conclusion that I came to many years ago.  I have come to refer to this as the magic act, comparable to the magician who promises his audience that he will slice his lovely assistance in half.

Using all sorts of devices, blue smoke, mirrors and lighting, the magician creates a most convincing illusion that he had, indeed, cut the poor young woman in half.  However, to everyone’s relief, after the stunt is carried out, his assistant bounds up onto the stage to the enthusiastic applause and cheers of the audience.

Of course, it is clear that the last thing that the magician would want to do is really slice his assistant in half.  He would go to jail and probably never be able to find anyone willing to work with him again.

Politicians like Schumer and Pelosi know damned well that the great majority of Americans, including their supposed constituents want our borders secured against the illegal entry of aliens, particularly the criminals and terrorists among them.  The politicians know that the voters want to keep drugs out of their communities.  However, the politicians also know that the majority of the special interest groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce want our borders left open so that cheap and exploitable workers can flood into the United States.

Politicians know that they need those campaign contributions from those special interest groups if they are to win their next elections, so they are compelled to meet the demands of their de-facto employers, those who write those big, fat political campaign checks.

Not unlike that magician, politicians have become adept at creating illusions that they are eager to secure our borders and demonstrate this by voting for expensive measures and programs that are largely worthless, but create the convincing illusion that lots of money is being spent to meet the demands of their constituents while, in reality, just as the magician’s assistant is unharmed, the flood of exploitable workers will be able to continue without impediment.

So, while Schumer continues to drone on, and on, ad nauseam, the truth is that America’s borders cannot be secured by blue smoke and mirrors.


Poll: Republicans overwhelmingly support Trump in shutdown

Trump Says Government Shutdown Will Continue Until There’s a Wall

Mark Meadows Says Trump Will Not Budge on Requested Amount for Wall Funding

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission.

How the ‘Zero-sum Struggle’ gave rise to Nationalism [Videos]

There has been much written about the polarization of politics in America and rise of nationalism particularly in Europe.

Much to the amazement of many Donald J. Trump was elected as President of the United States. His campaign slogan was Make America Great Again! At the same time the English people voted to leave the European Union. Both of these historic events inspired Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to state, “The era of liberal democracy is over.”

There is no better proof of the end of liberal democracy than when it’s strongest proponents state,

“[E]conomic or social change or some combination of the two” is “leading inevitably to dissatisfaction with liberal democracy and a readiness to embrace populist, illiberal, or even undemocratic alternatives.”

Sheri Berman’s article “How Liberalism Failed: After decades of relative stability, Western elites forgot how precious and precarious liberal democracy really is” in the Fall 2018 edition of Dissent Magazine provides an insightful analysis of the self-inflicted suicide of liberal democracy. Berman blames the fall of liberal democracy on two narratives:

  1. Economic change.
  2. Social change.

Berman begins by stating,

Today, the West is probably facing its greatest crisis since the end of the Second World War. Liberal democracy has faltered in Eastern Europe, is threatened by populists in Western Europe and the United States, and is being challenged by resurgent authoritarianism in Russia, China, and elsewhere.

Yoram Hazony, author of The Virtue of Nationalism, discuses the rise of nationalism globally in the below video titled “Why You Should Be a Nationalist”:

How has Liberal Democracy failed?

It has failed just as it failed in the former Soviet Union in 1989 and in Venezuela in 2018. Berman quotes The Captured Economy: How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality by Brink Lindsey and Steven M. Teles:

“When people feel economically insecure, they grow more defensive, less open and generous, and more suspicious of ‘the Other.’ When life seems like a zero-sum struggle, gains by other groups are interpreted as losses by one’s own group.”

Nationalists want to undo the “captured economy.” President Trump’s administration has focused it’s efforts on reducing government control over the economy from unelected bureaucrats (the swamp), eliminating government regulations and ending policies that hinder individual growth and prosperity.

Berman notes that Lindsey and Teles argue:

[H]ow the misregulation of the financial sector enriched the financial elite and introduced unnecessary risks and distortions into the economy; how the expansion of copyright and patent protection has created “monopolies,” limited innovation, and showered “riches on a favored few”; how occupational licensing protects incumbent firms and favored professions and obstructs competition, entrepreneurship, and consumer interests; and how land-use regulations and zoning distort markets, hamper Americans’ ability to move where opportunity is, and instead redistribute wealth to “higher-income homeowners and the bankers who provide mortgage finance” to them.

Berman concludes, “Why has government acted in socially counterproductive and economically inefficient ways? Because it has been ‘captured’ by plutocrats who use economic resources to influence government policy in ways that rig the game even further.”

This idea of the “power of the plutocrats” is best explained in this short video featuring Columbia Law Professor Philip Hamburger:

How Immigration plays a key role in the “Zero-sum Struggle!”

Immigration has been a signature issue for President Trump and the growing numbers of nationalists in Europe, Australia, Africa and beyond. Berman notes how immigration/refugee resettlement has become a seminal issue in the Western world. Sasha Polakow-Suransky in his book Go Back to Where You Came From: The Backlash Against Immigration and the Fate of Western Democracy examines how immigration has roiled Western democracies” argues that liberal’s:

“[F]ailure to confront the real tensions and failures of integration, by pretending violent extremism and attacks on free speech were not problems, infuriated many voters and left them feeling abandoned by mainstream parties.”

When governments fail to protect the indigenous people of a nation they react by abandoning liberal Democratic policies like open borders, unfettered refugee resettlement, multiculturalism, diversity and inclusion. Tucker Carlson explains in the below video “Illegal Immigration: It’s About Power”:

Both Republicans, Libertarian, Social Democrats, Independents and Democrats need to wake up and smell the nationalism revolution. Failure to do so will cost them dearly.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ben Sasse’s Wise Counsel for a Lonely, Polarized Country

EDITORS NOTE: The videos from Prager University are republished with permission. The featured photo is by Randy Colas on Unsplash.

E-Verify and Anti-Sanctuary Bills Filed In Florida

In the space of roughly a week, bills have been filed in the Florida Legislature to require mandatory E-Verify by all employers, and to prohibit sanctuary policies by local governments and state agencies. The Sunshine State’s lawmakers look to be gearing up for a productive session when they convene on March 5, and these bills could be considered during interim committee weeks already scheduled for January and February.


On December 11, Representative Thad Altman (R-Melbourne/Indialantic) filed House Bill (HB) 89. The bill would:

  • Require all private employers to register with E-Verify and use it to verify that all new employees hired after January 1, 2020, are legally authorized to work in the US;
  • Require all state agencies, local governments, public contractors and public subcontractors to register with E-Verify and use it to verify that all new employees hired after July 1, 2019, are legally authorized to work in the US;
  • Create an enforcement process for private employers, run by the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), where employers lose their business licenses for employing illegal aliens;
  • Require DEO to report illegal alien employees to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE);
  • Ban public contracts with contractors or subcontractors who don’t use E-Verify; and
  • Terminate existing public contracts if contractors or subcontractors employ illegal aliens or don’t use E-Verify.

“I think it’s fair and not onerous to businesses that want to follow the law … We are sending a clear message that if you want to do business in this state, you must employ legal U.S. citizens and residents,” Altman said of his bill. Unsurprisingly, the far-left Miami New Times almost immediately ran an op-ed condemning the bill, the E-Verify program generally, and Altman personally as anti-immigrant and racist.

But not to be dissuaded by such rhetoric, a week later, on December 18, Senator Aaron Bean (R-Jacksonville/Fernandina Beach) filed Senate Bill (SB) 164, which with very minor differences mirrors Altman’s bill.

A proposal to put mandatory E-Verify on this past November’s Florida ballot had failed in the Constitutional Revision Commission (CRC) back in April after a coalition of business groups bombarded the CRC at the last minute with unfounded horror stories about how it would impose huge costs and destroy the state’s economy. This was despite the fact that E-Verify is free to use and almost always instantaneous, and also despite that, according to FAIR’s research, in 12 out of 15 states that adopted it since 2008, the unemployment decreased more than did the national rate.

But on the campaign trail in July, now-Governor-Elect Ron DeSantis (R) tweeted, “Cheap foreign labor is not an excuse to let lawlessness prevail in the sunshine state. We want people who come LEGALLY!” He can be expected to strongly support the new bills, so with backing in both chambers and the Governor’s Mansion, prospects for E-Verify in Florida appear good.


On December 18, Sen. Joe Gruters (R-Sarasota) filed SB 168. The following day, Sen. Bean filed SB 170. The bills are identical and would:

  • Define and ban sanctuary policies, both by local governments and state agencies such as public universities;
  • Require local governments and state agencies to honor immigration detainers;
  • Require local governments and state agencies to review available information on the immigration status of people they’ve arrested, and report them to ICE if the information indicates they’re an illegal alien;
  • Create a duty to report sanctuary policies by officers and employees of local governments and state agencies, and give them whistleblower protection against adverse employment action if they report their own employer;
  • Allow anyone to file a complaint about a sanctuary policy;
  • Create an investigation and enforcement process for both local state attorney’s offices and the attorney general, resulting in fines for sanctuary governments and agencies and a potential for removal from office for “sanctuary policymakers”; and
  • Allow people to sue a local government or state agency for damages if an illegal alien injures or kills someone due to a sanctuary policy.

A companion bill has not yet been filed in the House but can probably be expected shortly.

Sen. Bean sponsored SB 308 in the Senate last year to do the same thing. Sen. Gruters is a longstanding supporter of Governor-Elect DeSantis, “has relationships with … [DeSantis’] team,” and is being backed by DeSantis to be the next Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida.

As a candidate, then-Congressman DeSantis promised, “[a]s governor, this is what I am going to do: there are going to be no sanctuary cities in Florida,” and even committed himself to removing public officials from office for supporting sanctuary policies “if I’m able to do so.” These bills are the means to fulfilling those promises, so they are likely to garner his strong support.

Anti-sanctuary bills have now passed the House by wide margins three years in a row, only to die in the Senate without so much as a full committee hearing. But with such clear and strong support so far in advance of session, there is good reason to expect 2019 may be the year that changes.


David Jaroslav

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. © Copyright 2018 Federation For American Immigration Reform, all rights reserved.

TRUMP’S BATTLE FOR A BORDER WALL: National security, public safety, and Americans’ jobs are “on the line.”

The immigration debate has been raging for years.  Advocates for open borders can be found on both sides of the political aisle and in a wide variety of special interest groups who have come to see the immigration system that delivers an unlimited supply of cheap and exploitable labor, an unlimited supply of foreign tourists, and unlimited supply of foreign students and, for the lawyers, an unlimited supply of clients.

That was the premise for my article, “Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design.”

Now the debate about the construction of a border wall is coming to a head.

A line has been drawn, and not in the sand, but along the highly porous and dangerous U.S./Mexican border that permits huge numbers of illegal aliens to enter the United States without inspection and permits huge quantities of narcotics and other contraband to be smuggled into the United States as well.

President Trump is arguably the first U.S. President in many decades who truly understands that border security equals national security.   He also understands that flooding America with exploitable foreign workers from Third World countries is not compassionate for those foreign workers and certainly not for the American workers that they displace.

President Trump is determined to build that wall but incredibly, the Democrats are adamantly opposed to the construction of a border wall.

As I noted in my recent article “Nancy Pelosi, Speaker Of The House – The Sequel (Worse Than The Original),” Pelosi and her Democratic Party colleagues have incredibly declared that a border wall would be as Fox News reported Pelosi’s assertions, “immoral, ineffective and expensive.”

Pelosi and company have created the false illusion that the border wall would seal off the United States from Mexico when, in point of fact, nothing could be further from the truth.  The  border wall would not block access to U.S. ports of entry along that border but simply funnel all traffic to those ports of entry so that the aliens can be inspected and vetted and records of their entry into the United States can be created.  Similarly all cargo would be subject to inspection to keep drugs and other contraband out of the United States.

How could any rational person not want to act to combat the flow of those drugs into the United States?

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) employs approximately 60,000 employees that include the U.S. Border Patrol, the CBP Inspectors at ports of entry and support staff.  The annual budget for CBP is nearly $14 billion.  It makes absolutely not sense for the United States to not secure the U.S./Mexican border against the un-inspected entry of aliens into the United States and against the smuggling of tons of heroin, cocaine, meth, fentanyl and other dangerous drugs into the United States that cost tens of thousands of innocent people their lives in the United States from drug overdoses.  The drugs also provide a huge revenue stream for the drug cartels and, as I noted in previous articles for Hezbollah, the client terrorist organization of Iran.

Drug are also a major factor where transnational gangs operating in the United States are concerned, leading to more violence and more senseless deaths, most often of children living in ethnic immigrant communities across the United States.

Of course the wall that President Trump is determined to construct would not, by itself, end illegal immigration or stop all illegal drugs from flowing into the United States, but would represent a major element of what needs to be a coordinated system that plugs all of the holes in the “Immigration Colander.”

Finally, as I have written in previous articles, the wall would pay for itself.  Illegal aliens provide cheap and exploitable labor for greedy and immoral employers but, as the saying goes, “there is no such thing as a free lunch.”

The cost of educating illegal alien children who are cannot speak, read or write English has been estimated to be 20% to 40% more than for educating children who are English language proficient.

Illegal aliens often use emergency rooms as their primary healthcare provider, creating long lines of those patients who, although they cannot pay for their treatment cannot be turned away.

Illegal aliens send as much of their illegal earnings back to their families in their home countries.  For Mexico the remittances sent by their citizens working illegally in the United States amounts to more than $25 billion annually.  Furthermore, not all money is sent via quantifiable wire transfers.  Money is also smuggled out of the United States to the countries of origin of the millions of illegal aliens who have taken jobs that should be taken by U.S. citizens and lawful immigrants

That money is lost to the U.S. economy and “multiplier effect” exacerbates this loss of money that would otherwise circulate through the U.S. economy if that money was earned by Americans who would spend and invest that money in the United States.

Flooding the United States with Third World workers suppresses wages and working conditions of America’s working poor and, as a consequence, has contributed to increasing homelessness among America’s poor.

If only a fraction of all of these negative results of illegal immigration was prevented, the wall would pay for itself in short order and, as a consequence, enhance national security, public safety and, public health by preventing the entry of un-inspected aliens.

However, many well-intentioned Americans have fallen for the bogus mythology created by the immigration anarchists who advocate for open borders and ineffectual enforcement of the immigration laws from the interior of the United States by promoting the absurd notion that advocates for border security to prevent the illegal and un-inspected entry of aliens into the United States is a bigot and a xenophobe.

In reality the immigration laws of the United States make absolutely no distinction about the race, religion or ethnicity of aliens but rather objectively and dispassionately seek to prevent the entry and continued presence of aliens in the United States when those aliens pose a threat to public health, public safety, national security and the jobs of Americans.

Given the perilous era in which we live, it is unthinkable that anyone would be willing to board an airliner if some of the passengers on that airliner were observed sneaking past the TSA screeners, yet today we live in cities where we live with huge numbers of illegal aliens who have entered the United States surreptitiously by evading the inspections process conducted at ports of entry.

Worse yet, consider how many “sanctuary cities” and even “sanctuary states” have been created across the United States, while “leaders” of the Democratic Party openly call for dismantling ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) altogether.

The immigration anarchists have become proficient at conning huge numbers of Americans into accepting near-anarchy where immigration law enforcement is concerned.

Prior to the Second World War, the enforcement and administration of our nation’s immigration laws was primarily the responsibility of the Department of Labor.  The goal was to make certain that American workers would be shielded from unfair foreign competition for jobs.  Remember at that time the United States was struggling to emerge from the “Great Depression.”

Authority for the enforcement and administration of the immigration laws was shifted to the Department of Justice at the beginning of the Second World War when it became readily apparent that enemy spies and saboteurs were attempting to enter the United States, posing a serious threat to national security.

Ironically, after the terror attacks of 9/11 the responsibility for the enforcement and administration of those very same laws was shifted to the newly created Department of Homeland Security but in a way that undermined that very mission.  This was an issue I wrote about in my article,  Caravan Of ‘Migrants’ – A Crisis Decades In The Making.  When the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) was created, in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, the administration of President George W. Bush apparently failed to follow the Homeland Security Act (HSA), the enabling legislation that created DHS resulting in what Congressman John Hostettler, the Republican Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims referred to as “Immigration incoherence” during a hearing on the topic, New ”Dual Missions” Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.

Here are two excerpts from his statement at that hearing:

Failure to adhere to the statutory framework established by HSA has produced immigration enforcement incoherence that undermines the immigration enforcement mission central to DHS, and undermines the security of our Nation’s borders and citizens.

[ … ]

The 9/11 terrorists all came to the U.S. with-out weapons or contraband—Added customs enforcement would not have stopped 9/11 from happening. What might have foiled al Qaeda’s plan was additional immigration focus, vetting, and enforcement. And so what is needed is recognition that, one, immigration is a very important national security issue that cannot take a back seat to customs or agriculture. Two, immigration is a very complex issue, and immigration enforcement agencies need experts in immigration enforcement. And three, the leadership of our immigration agencies should be shielded from political pressures to act in a way which could compromise the Nation’s security.

It is time for our “leaders” to put America and Americans ahead of their greed-driven political agendas and take Chairman Hostettler’s lament and observations to heart.

RELATED ARTICLE: WATCH: Stephen Miller Absolutely Savages Wolf Blitzer Over Immigration

RELATED VIDEO: Brian Kolfage of We The People Will Fund The Wall Interview With Laura Ingraham

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission. Border wall photo © Tomas Castelazo, www.tomascastelazo.com / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 4.0

BREAKING: Trump Moves Towards Shutdown Over Wall Funding

President Donald Trump informed GOP leadership that he will not sign a continuing resolution passed by the Senate late Wednesday because it does not contain funding for his proposed wall along U.S. southern border, House Speaker Paul Ryan revealed at the White House Thursday afternoon.

Ryan spoke alongside House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy after meeting with Trump for nearly an hour. Ryan told reporters that Trump informed them he would not sign the bill without border security funding. McCarthy said he was optimistic that some deal could be reached within Congress ahead of the Friday deadline.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders quickly released a statement declaring:

President Trump just met with Republican Members of the House. Not surprisingly, they all feel strongly about Border Security — stopping the flow of drugs, stopping human trafficking, and stopping terrorism. We protect nations all over the world, but Democrats are unwilling to protect our nation. We urgently need funding for border security and that includes a wall.

Trump’s declaration to Ryan is the latest in a head-spinning saga of shutdown politics with a central fight for funding his proposed wall along the U.S. southern border. Democratic lawmakers insist they will give Trump no more than $1.3 billion in funding while Republicans say they need $5 billion.

Trump originally pledged to shut the government down during a fiery Oval Office meeting with Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. The president went so far as to declare he would be “proud” to do the shutdown and that it would be politically beneficial to him.

This posture changed significantly, however, when White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders broke from this hardline position Tuesday.

As she related to Fox News, “There are certainly a number of different funding sources that we’ve identified that we can use — that we can couple with money that would be given through congressional appropriations — that would help us get to that $5 billion that the president needs in order to protect our border.”

Trump’s newest declaration to Ryan appears to show he is back where he began and that shutdown may be unavoidable.


Border wall symbolizes security, not racism

GoFundMe – We The People Will Fund The Wall

Twice-Deported Illegal Immigrant Embarks on Murderous ‘Reign of Terror’ Thanks to Sanctuary Laws

GoFundMe For Trump’s Border Wall Surpasses $5 Million In Less Than Four Days

White House Condemns ‘Activism’ Of Judge Who Wants Deportees Back in The U.S.

Is Trump Blowing His Last Chance To Get The Wall?

Meadows Calls McConnell’s Short-Term Funding Bill a Gift for Democrats

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images was originally published by The Daily Caller Foundation. It is republished with permission.

What Would Actually Be Affected in a Government Shutdown

“Government shutdown.” Probably no two words strike more fear in the hearts of Washington politicians.

The fact that another shutdown is imminent is a sign of how dysfunctional Washington’s budgeting process really is. What was once an orderly process where timelines were largely met has morphed into a political game plagued by brinkmanship and out-of-control spending.

Despite promises from Congress that the process would be different this year, here we are again.

This time the biggest issue holding up a deal is a confrontation between President Donald Trump and congressional Democrats over border security funding.

As Congress barrels toward a Friday spending showdown, the potential of a partial government shutdown is very real. But what would it actually mean?

A shutdown wouldn’t be good, of course, but it’s not as scary as you think. There wouldn’t be lawlessness in the streets. You’d still get your Social Security check.

Here’s what a shutdown and an alternative might look like:

Government Shutdown

If Congress and the president are unable to reach an agreement by Friday, then the federal government will enter into a partial shutdown. Five of 12 annual spending bills became law in September. That includes the military, so there is no threat to national defense.

It also includes the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Veterans Affairs. In fact, 75 percent of the discretionary budget has already been funded through September 2019.

Still, a partial shutdown would mean that major federal agencies such as the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Justice, Homeland Security, State, and Transportation would be left without funding.

Many of the services they provide, however, would not be interrupted. Four hundred and twenty thousand “essential” federal employees would continue to work, including 41,000 law enforcement and correctional officers and up to 88 percent of DHS employees. America’s safety would not be sacrificed.

You shouldn’t worry about your benefit payments being impacted either. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid payments, as well as veterans benefits, would continue uninterrupted. These programs don’t rely on Congress taking action for annual funding to continue, or their appropriations were already passed into law.

Mail service would also continue as scheduled since the Postal Service has its own revenue stream. National parks would remain open, though with reduced staff.

About 380,000 federal employees would be furloughed for the duration of a shutdown, meaning that they wouldn’t be paid nor expected to work. Agencies that would be most affected include the Department of Commerce, NASA, the IRS, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Based on past government shutdowns, all furloughed employees would likely be paid when the shutdown ends.

A Continuing Resolution

Another possible outcome to get around the current funding impasse is for Congress to pursue a continuing resolution to keep the government open. That scenario played out as the last funding deadline approached on Dec. 7.

Under this situation, agencies would operate at their 2018 budget levels for the duration of the continuing resolution. Congress could choose to extend funding for a short period of time (likely into early 2019) or could opt for a full-year continuing resolution.

If Congress passes a short-term continuing resolution, then it would be back in the same mess in just a few short weeks.

Passing a full-year continuing resolution would put an end to the budget drama for this year. However, it would also leave both Republicans and Democrats unsatisfied, with Trump not getting additional border security money and Democrats unable to enact some of their priorities.

But it would save taxpayers money. If unfunded agencies simply continued to receive money at the 2018 level, it would cut spending by $11 billion.

It’s not a lot, but with the national debt soon expected to cross $22 trillion, every penny counts.

Regardless of what happens, one thing is clear: The budget process is broken, and taxpayers are the real losers. When Congress is constantly budgeting by crisis, it erodes oversight and leads to wasteful spending. Citizens should demand that Congress not only make the budget process better, but also ensure a sustainable budget future.

The cost of failing to do that is much scarier than a government shutdown.

Originally Distributed by Tribune News Service


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images by The Daily Signal is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Vadim Sherbakov on Unsplash.

Growing Blame America First Crowd Rushes To The Border

In describing the 1984 San Francisco Democrats, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Jeane Kirkpatrick said, “They always blame America first.” She was referring of the fringe elements of the Democratic Party.

Unfortunately, because of monopolistic control of the culture-moving powers, what is fringe in the Democratic Party becomes more mainstream over time, and we see that clearly in this era.

The Blame America Firsters have been enthralled at the chance to show how terrible America is at every turn, and the basic national sovereignty issue of having secure borders is just the perfect issue.

Of course Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez cut her protesting chops by going down to the border during the manufactured crisis of separating children from their parents, which was done at the orders of the 9th Circuit Court ostensibly to protect the children and implemented by President Obama. The separating of children was painted as exemplar of Americans not caring about the plight of the poor, and of course being racist — despite the fact that America does more for the world’s poor by many factors than any other country, or most continents, and Africans don’t seem to think we are too racist as they choose America in droves.

Throughout the traipsing northward of the caravan of illegal immigrants (they broke their way into Mexico, so it is accurate to call them illegal immigrants even before trying to break their way into America) there has been a sort of delight at the prospect of being able to paint America as uncaring and racist for having so much and giving so little.

Every poor or dangerous decision made by a migrant on their way illegally across Mexico to America was portrayed as America’s fault.

But this came to a head when a seven-year-old Honduran girl died a few hours after her father knowingly and unlawfully took her across the border. The girl had apparently not eaten or drank for several days. She went into convulsions on the bus on which she was being transported to the nearest border crossing post (where her father should have been seeking to enter) and paramedics had been alerted and were waiting. From there she was emergency flown to a hospital but could not be saved.

She went on a months long trek across deserts and dangerous terrain, was exhausted and clearly depleted of nutrition and water. But here were the headlines splashed everywhere by the Blame America First media:

USA Today’s headline: “Migrant girl, 7, dies in Border Patrol custody of dehydration, shock”

NBC News headline: “Girl who crossed border with dad died in Border Patrol custody”

KTLA headline: “7-Year-Old Immigrant Girl Dies After Being Arrested by Border Patrol”

CNN’ headline: “Thousands of miles away, grieving family wants to know how 7-year-old girl died in US custody”

The CNN story is particularly nauseating in it’s blame America first. Here’s the lead:

“Jakelin Caal Maquin jumped up and down when her father told her they’re leaving their impoverished Guatemalan village for the United States. When the rest of her family sent them off, nobody imagined the 7-year-old girl would not come back alive.

She died last week after Border Patrol agents detained her and her father in the New Mexico desert. Her death, which was only made public Thursday, has raised questions from members of Congress and advocates about how migrants are treated at the border.”

Just shameless. But more.

“The girl’s death comes months after a toddler died six weeks after being released from an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement facility in Dilley, Texas. The toddler’s mother and her attorneys alleged she contracted a respiratory infection after they arrived at the detention center and that ICE provided substandard medical care for the 19-month-old.”

See, an illegal immigrant dies hours after being arrested by American authorities and her dehydration and starvation are not to blame, it’s the American’s fault. But a toddler dies six weeks after leaving an American facility and…it’s the American’s fault. In the same story!

The purposeful juxtaposition of the girl’s arrest by the Border Patrol — which was obviously her best hope for survival — was meant to blame the Americans for her death. No other way to read it. (Yes, this all conflates with raging Trump hatred in the media.)

Even the girl’s father said the American agents did everything they could and he had no complaints about the care — which was probably a thousand times better than it would have been in rural Honduras. Apparently an ambulance chasing lawyer had not gotten to the father to explain he needed to blame America so the lawyer could get a fat check from taxpayers. That will come.

Speaking of lawyers, next in the congo line of Blame America First was the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization just spiraling down the partisan toilet (see Christine Ford and the collapse of civil rights protections for political correctness.)

Cynthia Pompa, advocacy manager for the ACLU Border Rights Center, said the Honduran girl’s death shows the “inhumane conditions” at border patrol facilities. (Ironically, again, so much irony, the facilities would be less overrun if we actually had a wall.)

“Lack of accountability, and a culture of cruelty within CBP have exacerbated policies that lead to migrant deaths,” Pompa said. Because there is no responsibility for anyone anywhere based on their own actions. It’s all America’s fault.

Then came the lowest forms of Blame America First — the politicians, slithering below even the lawyers to slap America.

Twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton tweeted: “There are no words to capture the horror of a seven-year-old girl dying of dehydration in U.S. custody. What’s happening at our borders is a humanitarian crisis.”

Grandstander Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, said Homeland Security officials would face questions on the matter in a hearing scheduled for Thursday. We “will be demanding immediate answers to this tragedy,” Nadler said.

Lost in all of this rush to blame America first is the actual tragedy of a 7-year-old girl who is dead and a father who is grieving — neither of which would have happened if the father had not made a series of choices that put her in such a dangerous situation. The only role America played was being the most attractive country in the world in which to live.

We probably shouldn’t apologize for that.


The Ominous Prosecutorial Misconduct Pattern Emerging In America
Our Politics Are About To Get Much, Much Worse
Sailing With Tucker Carlson On The Ruling Class’ Ship Of Fools
Maybe Democrats Won On Brett Kavanaugh After All
One Indisputable Takeaway From Comey Performance: Thank God Trump Won

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act. It is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Sophie Potyka on Unsplash.

Attack at French Christmas Market Reminder of Looming Threat Islamist Terrorists Pose in Europe

The deadly attack by a gunman Tuesday at a Christmas market in France was an unwelcome reminder of the threat Islamist terrorists pose in Europe and around the world. While police shot and killed the gunman Thursday night when he opened fire on them, the sad truth is that we can expect more attacks by terrorists like him for generations to come.

In fact, French security forces say there are 12,000 young men, often with immigrant backgrounds, in the country who they call “gangster jihadists.” As The Guardian reported, some “start with petty crime, drug dealing and robbery, and graduate to terrorism.” Police say they can’t keep an eye on all of these people.

French police identified the dead terrorist as Cherif Chekatt, 29. He was born in France and is the son of immigrants from Morocco.

When Chekatt opened fire at the crowded Christmas market in the French city of Strasbourg he yelled, “Allahu Akbar”—Arabic for “God is greatest”—and then killed three people, left another brain-dead, and injured a dozen others, authorities said.

Thankfully, the tempo of terrorist activity in Europe this year has dipped after the carnage that took place far too frequently from 2015 to 2017. The drop may have occurred because the ISIS terrorist group has lost territory in Syria.

While there is still much to learn—from Chekatt’s whereabouts to any potential links he had to ISIS or other terrorist groups—what has emerged so far feels extraordinarily familiar.

It was predictable that France was targeted first, because it is the European country that Islamists attack more than any other.

While the most high-profile terrorist plots were those in Paris in 2015 and the Bastille Day attack in Nice a year later, 2018 has also seen five Islamist plots that led to deaths or injuries in France.

The most potent attack so far this year was that carried out by Radouane Lakdim, the Moroccan who shot and killed four and injured 16 in southwest France.

Authorities said Chekatt had a whopping 27 previous convictions for theft and other crimes across France, Germany, and Switzerland. While in prison in 2015, Chekatt apparently became receptive to Islamist ideology and was subsequently put on a watch list.

The petty hood turning to radical Islam during a stint in jail is now a grimly predictable turn of events, particularly in France.

In addition, the fact that France is suffering from another case of homegrown terrorism with a North African tinge is unsurprising. Homegrown terrorism is not the principle threat to other European nations—plots in Germany, for example, are often perpetrated by foreign nationals.

However, terrorists who target France tend to be born and raised in the nation, often with their parents coming from former French colonies.

The timing of Chekatt’s attack was all too familiar. ISIS supporters regularly make threats toward the West in the Christmas holiday period. Last year, the State Department issued a travel warning for Americans visiting Europe, with the targeting of Christmas markets specifically mentioned.

And with good reason: In December 2016, ISIS guided a Tunisian terrorist, Anas Amri, to take a truck and attack a Christmas market in Berlin. Amri killed 12 and injured 48.

Islamist terrorists contemplated hitting Christmas markets even before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States. One such plot was thwarted in 2000–ironically in Strasbourg.

The challenge facing Europe, the U.S., and other parts of the world is to find a way to prevent more young people from embracing Islamist terrorism. No matter how many terrorists authorities arrest or kill, as long as new ones keep emerging it will be impossible to stop the deadly violence they spread.

Originally published by Fox News

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


Portrait of Robin Simcox

Robin Simcox

Robin Simcox is the Margaret Thatcher Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. Photo: Abaca Press/Dupressoir Sophie/Abaca/Sipa USA/Newscom.

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House — The Sequel [Worse than the Original]

In the movies sequels are usually worse than the original. Since Washington has often been referred to as “Hollywood for ugly people,” it is perhaps appropriate to consider another sequel in the making, not in film but in politics. Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House and soon-to-be Speaker of the House of Representatives, once again was the subject of a video posted on December 7, 2018 by Fox News, in which she rejected the notion of constructing a wall along the highly porous U.S./Mexican border to prevent the entry of illegal aliens, narcotics and other contraband.

Her outrageous statements and positions on immigration law enforcement and border security seemed to strike a new low during her first stint as Speaker. She has yet to resume that position and is already providing a disturbing peek into what America and Americans are in for with her in the position that provides her with a “leadership” role in the Congress and puts her in the chain of succession to the U.S. Presidency.

As my dad used to say, “Nothing is so good it could not be better or be so bad it could not get worse.” As hard as it might be to imagine, bad as Pelosi was the last time she held the position of Speaker, she may actually prove my dad was right.

This is the Fox News video:

It is unfathomable how Pelosi could declare that protecting the United States from threats posed by international terrorists, transnational gangs and the flow of narcotics into the United States is “immoral.”

It is similarly impossible to understand how Pelosi could determine that it is immoral to prevent the illegal entry of foreign workers who all too frequently displace American and lawful immigrant workers and drive down wages and working conditions of American and lawful immigrant workers who are similarly employed.

A wall would not prevent the lawful entry of a single person into the United States. The wall would not block America’s ports of entry but would funnel all traffic destined to the United States through ports of entry where they are subject to inspection by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Inspectors and where a record of their entry into the United States is created. These issues have significant national security implications.

This is comparable to the way that guests who visit us are expected to knock on our front doors to ask permission to enter our homes. It would certainly be unacceptable for a stranger to enter our homes by climbing through a back window. Similarly an effective border wall would prevent aliens entering the United States surreptitiously.

In a very real sense, entering without inspection is, at a minimum, comparable to trespassing and, as I noted in my recent article, “Democrats Stand With Foreign Rioters,” Chuck Schumer’s hypocritical and contradictory position on trespassing on critical infrastructure and national landmarks versus aliens who trespass on America is astonishing.

Here is the relevant excerpt from my commentary:

Aliens who evade the vital inspections process conducted at ports of entry are, at a minimum, trespassing on the United States.  This is a violation of law and poses a threat to national security and public safety.

On October 13, 2014 Schumer posted a press release on his official website which announced that because of dangers created by trespassers, particularly in this era of terrorism, that he had proposed legislation that would make trespassing on critical infrastructure and/or landmarks a federal crime with a maximum prison sentence of five years.

However, Schumer, who actually cited the antics of a 16-year-old boy in his press release, had declared that anyone who trespasses, including “adrenaline junkies,” should face a five-year prison sentence.

However, when aliens trespass on the United States, even where violence is concerned, Schumer and his Democratic colleagues are determined to provide those illegal aliens with U.S. citizenship!

The open-borders immigration anarchists refer to aliens who run our borders as being “undocumented immigrants.” In point of fact, aliens who evade the inspections process conducted at ports of enter the United States without inspection.

Such an entry is in violation of U.S. Code § 1325, a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

Some “journalists” have actually seized upon this linguistic sleight of tongue and have come to refer to illegal aliens as “immigrants who lack documents,” conjuring up the image of a student who went to the bathroom without taking the hall pass. The issue is not a lack of paperwork but legal authorization to enter the United States and remain here. Some of these aliens have no shortage of documents. In my 30-year career I encountered quite a few aliens who had been deported numerous times, some having been arrested and convicted of so many crimes during each of their illegal forays into the United States that their arrest record or “rap sheet” and their immigration files could have provided wallpaper to decorate a moderately-sized house, if you like hanging garbage on walls!

Aliens who seek to evade the inspections process do so because they know that they belong to one or more categories of aliens who are legally ineligible to enter the United States. Race, religion and/or ethnicity do not have any bearing whatsoever on the admissibility of aliens who seek to enter the United States.

In fact, 8 U.S. Code § 1182 enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded from the United States. It is clear that the purpose for this section of law is protect national security, public safety and public health and protect the jobs and wages of American workers.

Among these classes of aliens who are to be prevented from entering the United States are aliens who had been previously deported from the United States, aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable diseases or extreme mental illness, are convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies are to be excluded as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment, thus displacing American workers or driving down the wages of American workers who are similarly employed and aliens who would likely become public charges, thereby burdening the economies of the towns and cities where they would live.

Pelosi claims that the wall would be “ineffective.” In fact, had a wall been erected the “Caravan of Migrants” (aspiring illegal aliens) would likely have been deterred from streaming to the U.S./Mexican border.

However, more must be done to address the immigration crisis than simply constructing a wall along the southern border. As I have frequently noted, a wall along the border is comparable to a wing on an airplane. Without a wing the airplane will not fly, but a wing by itself goes nowhere. A border wall must be erected and additional enhancements must also be made to the enforcement program of the Department of Homeland Security. Currently ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) has about 6,000 agents for the entire United States and they do not only enforce immigration laws but customs laws and other laws that have nothing to do with immigration. (The “C” in ICE is, after all, Customs.) ICE is more focused on those who produce counterfeit Gucci loafers than counterfeit passports. To put things in perspective, the NYPD has about 38,000 police officers, the Border Patrol has about 20,000 agents, and our armed forces have more than one million enlisted men and women.

Obviously many more ICE agents, immigration judges and support staff should be hired, not to deport all of the illegal aliens who are present in the United States (likely more than 30,000), but to imbue the immigration system with meaningful integrity and convince aspiring illegal aliens around the world that the United States takes its laws and its borders seriously.

Finally, as to the issue of the cost of constructing the wall, the wall would pay for itself just as the cost of insulating a house is payed back to the homeowner many times over through savings in the costs of heating and cooling the house. I drew upon that analogy in my article “America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation,” in which I noted that each year tens of billions of ill-gotten dollars flow out of the United States in the form of remittances and other means of moving the money out of the U.S. that is earned by illegal aliens and as the result of the drug trade. Finally securing that border would help to stanch the flow of money and save many, many lives as an added bonus.

Of course, as I have noted in my article “Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design,” the multiple failures of the immigration system are not the result of inability to enforce our laws but an abject lack of desire by political leaders of both parties to enforce the immigration laws.

To put it bluntly, while our borders and our immigration laws are America’s first and last lines of defense against transnational criminals and fugitives and international terrorists, to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a laundry list of other organizations and special interest groups including immigration lawyers, they are viewed as an impediment to their wealth.

While Nancy is a highly-visible proponent for open borders, there are precious few members of Congress in either party who actually disagree with her.

That is the real horror show!

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission. Photo by DonkeyHotey

Illegal Immigration and the Cost of Stupidity

Boggles the mind. I mean really, have a look at the numbers and tell me what I am missing. Illegal Immigration and the Cost of Stupidity. It boggles the mind. Or does it? As you think through this, you may come to realize that they are de-cloaked. The enemy within has been going through a full scale de-cloaking and they are now hidden in plain sight. Check out my recent interview at INFOWARS for a more in depth view about the enemy within and their intentions (Globalization) and vision for America.

Nationalism vs. Globalism

So we can see in the recent transparent exchange between Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and President Trump (with VP Pence quietly and wisely observing) that we are heading for a showdown in a matter of days. Fundamentally, it comes down to this. Nationalism vs. Globalism, a clash of world views. I will tell you this. Trump will get his wall and Mexico in the end, will be paying for it.

I talked about the cost of illegal immigration recently in this interview. The immigration segment begins at time marker 36:10. But before we get into the cost of illegal immigration which is detailed below, I would like to share with you some views with regards to this subject. Why all the attacks and backlash against then candidate Trump and now President Trump? This is an easy one to explain. You see once you come to understand the ruling elite’s goal for a New World Order, a one world government (Globalism), it all begins to make sense.

Stripping away the sovereignty of nations began in Europe. The consolidation became known as the European Union. Border-less neighboring nations, one currency. Ah, kumbaya-not! Can you say BREXIT? So how did that work out? Disastrous. Turn on the evening news. Been to Paris lately? Meanwhile on the streets in Poland, England and France thousands are chanting “We want Trump”. Oh yeah, MSM failed to cover that. So Trump gains global support and is the most loved man alive today. But back on point.

As you stroll through somewhat recent history you find that the globalist’s plan was quite similar for the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. A parallel move to the European Union and the Euro, was to be the North American Union and the Amero. Sure they called it a conspiracy, but as we know many of the conspiracy theories of yesterday have proven to be the conspiracy facts and realities of today in this great awakening that is taking place around the world today.

During George W. Bush’s time in the White House marching to the beat of Globalism just like his Poppy, (may he rest_ _ ), the plan was simply this. The U.S., Canada, and Mexico was to become the North American Union, a border-less nation with one currency called the Amero. Don’t believe me? It was on the floor of Congress.  Look it up. Get some skin in the game. Lou Dobbs, when at CNN at the time had this to say about the North American Union.

So here comes candidate Trump, upsetting the globalists apple cart. You can clearly see now in this de-cloaking stage I referred to earlier, why low energy Jeb, GWB and now deceased Poppy Bush all spoke out against then candidate Trump even after winning the GOP nomination. Nor did they did attend the RNC acceptance event. All three Bush’s also have denounced the now sitting President, President Donald Trump.

So again, here comes candidate and now President Trump. So why all the border backlash then and now? Well besides stripping the sovereignty of the U.S. via the North American Union, that border makes the deep state globalists a lot of money and feeds their goals to over throw America in many ways as well as feeding their sick, evil, demented perverted appetites. It is through this Mexican border where they control and cash in on running drugs, weapons and child sex trafficking.Thus catch and release and open border policies. Well there is a new Sheriff in town and this is about to end.

The Front Door is Closed

We all have a front door wherever it is that we live. It has a lock or locks on it too. Why? Well of course to keep us safe from uninvited intruders. After all you would not just let anyone into your home unless you invite them, know who they are, and why they will be coming into your home. Why? Because you want to protect yourself and your loved ones from being assaulted, raped, or killed. You want to protect the things you own from being damaged or stolen. Same goes for our country. My good friend Dr. Richard Davis, (R.I.P.), contributed this article to my website. Please read it. It is called My Front Door.

And Now The Numbers

Go ahead – have a look. Feast your eyes on these numbers. (then rush to the toilet because it may make you sick). You will never look at Pelosi and Schumer the same again giving our great President a song and a dance for $5 billion! These figures are excerpted from my book “Trump and the Resurrection of America” in chapter sixteen titled, “Immigration”.

1.  $14 billion to $22 billion dollars are spent each year on welfare to illegal aliens (that’s Billion with a ‘B’)

2. 22 billion dollars a year are spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens

3.  $7.5 billion dollars are spent each year on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

4.  $12 billion dollars are spent each year on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they still cannot speak a word of English

5.  $27 billion dollars are spent each year for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

6.  $3 Million Dollars ‘PER DAY’ is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.  That’s $1.2 Billion a year.

7.  28% percent of all federal prison inmates are illegal aliens.

8.  $190 billion dollars are spent each year on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.

9.  $200 billion dollars per year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

10.  The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that’s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens.  In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

11.  During the year 2005, there were 8 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border with as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from other terrorist countries.  Over 10,000 of those were middle-eastern terrorists.  Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin, crack, guns, and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border.

12.  The National Policy Institute, estimates that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.

13.  In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $65 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin, to their families and friends.

14.  The dark side of illegal immigration:  Over one million sex crimes have been committed by illegal immigrants in the United States!

The Denver Post?

Even the liberal Denver Post ran an article titled “What if They Left“. An excerpt is below,

I, Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, “Mexican Visitor’s Lament.” I interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez said, “Illegal aliens pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes. What happens to your country’s economy if 20 million people go away?”

Hmmm, I thought, what would happen? So I did my due diligence, buried my nose as a reporter into the FACTS I found below. It’s a good question… it deserves an honest answer. Over 80% of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacated America? The answers I found may surprise you!

In California, if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico, it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupt hospitals and overrun prisons. It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested. Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominant language again.

In Colorado, 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grandchildren would move back “home,” mostly to Mexico. That would save Colorado an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 billion) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs.  It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.  Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens.  Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.  Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67% dropout/flunk rate because of thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages.  At least 200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado.  Denver’s 4% unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.

In Florida, 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America, the rule of law, and English.

In Chicago, Illinois, 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free experience.

If 20 million illegal aliens returned ‘home,’ the U.S.economy would return to the rule of law.  Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn’t be working off the books.  That would result in an additional $401 billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local, state and city coffers.

No more push ‘1’ for Spanish or ‘2’ for English.  No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids.  Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.

We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually.  That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country.  In cities like L.A., 20,000 members of the ’18th Street Gang’ would vanish from our nation.  No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!

Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock.  Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!

America’s economy is drained.  Taxpayers are harmed.  Employers get rich Over $80 billion annually wouldn’t return to the aliens’ home countries by cash transfers.  Illegal migrants earned half that money un taxed,which further drains America’s economy which currently suffers a $20 trillion debt.  $20 trillion debt!!!

At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle.

At least 86 hospitals in California, Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupt out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act.  Americans wouldn’t suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country – brought in by illegals un-screened at our borders.

Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities.  It would also put the ‘progressives’ on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11% of our greenhouse gases.

Over one million of Mexico’s poorest citizens now live inside and along our border from Brownsville, Texas, to San Diego, California, in what the New York Times called, ‘colonies’ or new neighborhoods.  Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, drugs, crimes, no sanitation and worse.  They live without sewage, clean water,streets, roads, electricity, or any kind of sanitation.  The New York Times reported them to be America’s new ‘ Third World ‘ inside our own country.  Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonies.  (I’ve seen them personally in Texas and Arizona; it’s sickening beyond anything you can imagine.)  By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico.  We should invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico.  We already invite a million people into our country legally annually, more than all other countries combined.  We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing lawlessness at every level in our nation.

It’s time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life.


Immigration and the cost of stupidity? It’s not about the numbers as you can see. This game from Pelosi and company will backfire. Trump will build his wall. Mexico will pay for it. Oh yeah…follow Q. Carry on my friends, carry on.

It’s no longer about Democrat vs. Republican, left vs. right. This facade is nothing more than a corrupt controlled, contrived divide and conquer. We shall unite for the good of humanity as we strive to resurrect America from this post constitutional republic of utter lawlessness. We are now embarking upon this path.

The ultra left? Forget about them. We will deal with them at a later date. But your friends, neighbors, associates, family members who are Democrats? They are coming aboard. And soon the swamp will be drained both left and right. Share with them this post. Intelligent common people of good will may see the light. There are any fronts where we can help our friends and neighbors to see the light. This article focused on immigration. There are many unifying topics that will bring us together in life and at the ballot box in 2020. Pedophilia for example. I have written about this subject on and off over the past two years as well as in my book “Trump and the Resurrection of America. Here is a link to get you started.

Dangerous and challenging times indeed. But when your children and grand children ask you”What were you doing when the global governance was being thrust upon America and the world?” What will YOUR answer be? Freedom, it’s up to us! Stay safe. Pray for our President. Stay the course. We are winning my friends, we are winning!

RELATED ARTICLE: White House, Congress Gear Up For a Potential Government Shutdown Over Border Wall Funding 

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Brandi Ibrao on Unsplash.

Apple CEO Tim Cook Is a Big Fan of Discrimination

There are few better examples of left-wing hypocrisy than Apple CEO Tim Cook. This is the same CEO who ferociously opposed the very modest HB2 law in 2016 and Indiana’s brief religious liberty law in 2015 because of his beliefs on discrimination…all while cozying up to Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China. Ironically, Cook — whose company supports laws to restrict the rights of businesses when it comes to LGBT issues — declined to donate money to the Republican National Convention in 2016 because of personal beliefs about then-candidate Donald Trump.

Well, now Cook is at it again. The Federalist caught this doozy earlier in December:

Apple CEO Tim Cook said Monday night that not using one’s judgement to kick certain people off of tech platforms is a sin. While accepting the first-ever “Courage Against Hate” award from the Anti-Defamation League in New York City, Cook said that Apple is proud of exercising its judgement to kick certain people off of its platforms.

“At Apple, we’re not afraid to say our values drive our curation decisions,” he said. “And why should we be?”

“We only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division, and violence: You have no place on our platforms,” Cook said. “You have no home here.”

“I believe the most sacred thing each of us is given is our judgement, our morality, our own innate desire to separate right from wrong,” Cook said. “Choosing to set that responsibility aside at a moment of trial is a sin.”

It’s simple, really. Cook is a hypocrite. Given how he and his company attacked conservatives who wanted to ensure that right for business people and their customers in 2016, apparently only some people to have the right “to separate right from wrong.” None of those people are traditional-minded Christians. His company wants to strip the right to live out one’s faith in the public square. They’ll do this while happily doing whatever it takes to improve their bottom-line, even sell iPhones in Iran.

Perhaps we should all take a page out of Cook’s book and get our phones anywhere but Apple? After all, he is definitely pushing division. His company supports the hateful and violent actions of the Iranian regime. And Christians’ “judgement…morality…[and] innate desire to separate right from wrong” is definitely opposed to the left-wing agenda which Apple continues to support.

Many of our better Christmas alternatives have online retail options and all the items in our 2018 Christmas Gift Guide are linked to vetted online retailers. 

Help us continue providing resources like this and educating conservative shoppers by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is from Shutterstock.

Why Our Country Needs the Wall, and Now

The United States is the most generous, pro-immigrant country in the world. Annually, we take in more immigrants than any other country on the planet.

Couple that with the fact that immigration has been a driving issue in the last two campaign cycles, and it is more than reasonable to demand that the next funding bill include commonsense border security measures.

With only days left before Congress gavels out and the power in the House of Representatives shifts from Republicans to Democrats, we, as members of Congress, must fulfill the promises we made to the American people to uphold the rule of law and secure our borders.

Congress must fund President Donald Trump’s border wall and close the “catch and release” loopholes in the upcoming must-pass spending bill. We must do it now.

The statistics are frightening. This fall, Border Patrol arrested a massive number of people coming across the border, as loopholes in our immigration laws continue to pull illegal aliens into the United States—more than 100,000 people in October and November alone.

These significant illegal immigration attempts are giving immigrants a bad name. Historically, immigrants to America have come here legally to seek a better life and contribute to our economy. In the case of illegal immigrants, their very first act on U.S. soil is to break the law.

That’s why it is critical that we stop the inflow. Doing so will allow us to focus on reforms that prioritize legal immigration and reward law-abiding people for doing the right thing. And we know how to do this: a border wall, and ending catch and release.

Catch and release is the natural result of a series of loopholes in current U.S. asylum laws that encourage lawbreaking. Because of various legal settlements and the unintended consequences of a 2008 law, when families come to the U.S. to claim asylum, they are released out of legal custody into the country to await a hearing. Many never show for their hearings, and simply disappear into America.

Armed with this knowledge, illegal immigrants game the system to get into the U.S. and plant roots, undermining our laws. Fixing this and making it easier for border agents to send illegal immigrants home will discourage illegal immigration and encourage people to immigrate the right way.

We need to pair this with a border wall, so that illegal immigrants cannot physically cross our border in the first place. And we know border walls work. When Israel constructed a barrier along its southern border, it cut down on illegal immigration by 99 percent. Along the U.S.-Mexico border, in the places where we currently have strong barriers, illegal crossings have also been drastically reduced.

Like so many entrenched, partisan issues in our country, the problem of illegal immigration is solvable, but will require compromise.

A good place to start will be with border security measures that Democrats have historically agreed to, and closing loopholes in current laws. Then, we can get back to doing what we have historically done best: welcoming legal immigrants from around the world with open arms.


Portrait of Ted Budd

Ted Budd is the U.S. representative for North Carolina’s 13th district. Twitter: .


Here’s the Latest Ways the White House Says It Will Pay For the Wall

ICE Arrests 6.5K Convicted Murderer, Sex Offender Illegal Aliens This Year

RELATED VIDEOS: President Trump’s Message on Border Security

Capital Research Center  on Immigration Entitlement by Hayden Ludwig


Video Shows Schumer, Hillary, Obama All Agreeing With Trump on Border Security…Before They Knew He Supported It

Ivy League Study Finds Liberals ‘Patronize’ Minorities, Conservatives Don’t

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. Photo: Pappis Jean Pierre Polaris/Sipa/Newscom.

Trump Meeting with Pelosi and Schumer a Sign of Pending Disasters for Democrats.

It looked like a family gathering for a holiday meal. What ostensibly began as a peaceful meeting for a friendly conversation quickly devolved into a classic, round-the-table political fight about the wall and who would pay for it.  In the end, everyone left angry, but no one got to eat any of the food.

It was a classic Donald Trump move and one that continues to serve him well.  Find the issues his base wants to see solved and take the fight directly to the people. Yesterday was no exception when Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer appeared for a meeting before the press at the White House.

As things usually go in the finely choreographed world of Washington politics, Schumer and Pelosi sat around a table with Vice President Mike Pence and President Trump for what normally would have been a time for photographs and softball questions from the press.

Instead, the President delivered a full-fledged argument on border security and wall funding.  Trump, once again demanded that the wall be funded to the tune of $5 billion while Schumer and Pelosi insisted that no more than $1.7 billion should be allocated to the project by way of a continuing resolution.

The conversation devolved when President Trump observed the difficult position in which Pelosi found herself as she tried to secure the votes necessary to get her elected Speaker of the House.  This prompted Pelosi to chastise the President for suggesting that she did not have the overwhelming support of House Democrats. In the meantime Schumer kept accusing the President of wanting to shut down the government.  The President finally concluded the meeting by resoundingly accepting the responsibility of shutting down the government if his demands for wall funding were not met.

In the end, it was the most fascinating political exchange ever with drama rivaling those seen in the best reality shows and replete with an ending reminiscent of a “You’re Fired” episode.  It was so entertaining, in fact, that it has earned a “Feature Video” status in our Library page.

To be sure, the exchange was the first of many heated confrontations to surely take place over the next two years.  But there are other insights to be gained from this meeting.

First, you can rest assured that President Trump will shut down the government when Schumer and Pelosi fail to bring him the necessary votes to fund the wall in an amount he believes is necessary.  Second, for all those Democrats who thought they would be seeing a more subdued Donald J. Trump as a result of the gains they made in the House of Representatives, they should reconsider that impression.

And finally, like Pelosi and Schumer did Tuesday, the Democrats are going to appear paltry and petty when they continue to resist the President over an extra $3.3 billion for a wall in a budget numbering in the trillions of dollars.  As a matter of fact, Pelosi and Schumer may have just handed President Trump his own “Reagan-youth-and-inexperience” moment.


Pentagon Confirms: DOD Could Fund Border Wall

Why Our Country Needs the Wall, and Now

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Federalist Pages.

Suspected Terrorist Leading Migrant Group Demanding Entry Into U.S.

A suspect in a 1987 bombing that wounded six American soldiers in Honduras is leading a group of migrants demanding entry into the United States.

Alfonso Guerrero Ulloa organized a march of approximately 100 migrants to the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana, Mexico, on Tuesday, The San Diego Union-Tribune reported. Ulloa delivered a letter to the consulate on behalf of the migrants, asking for either entry into the U.S. or a payment of $50,000 per person.

“It may seem like a lot of money to you,” Ulloa told the Union-Tribune. “But it is a small sum compared to everything the United States has stolen from Honduras.”

Ulloa has lived in Mexico since 1987 after fleeing Honduras in the wake of a bombing that wounded six soldiers. Ulloa was suspected of planting a bomb in a Chinese restaurant, but received asylum from Mexico, whose government described the suspected terrorist as a “freedom fighter.”

An appropriations bill passed by Congress in December 1987 included Congress’s findings that “the bomb was directed at American soldiers and did in fact wound American soldiers and an American contractor.” The report noted that Ulloa was a suspect in the bombing.

Ulloa has posted on Facebook about his role in organizing the migrants in Mexico, which he is open about, and the accusations against him from 1987, which he denies.

Ulloa posted a video on Tuesday of the migrants marching to the consulate. He described the group as a “caravan” of Honduran migrants.


Ulloa posted a lengthy diatribe about the 1987 bombing to Facebook in June 2017.

In the post, Ulloa again denied any role in the bombing, though he admitted to being a member of Popular Revolutionary Forces-Lorenzo Zelaya — a now-defunct left-wing group whose members claimed responsibility in 1982 for hijacking a plane and taking hostages, including eight Americans.

report published by the U.S. government in April 1990 described the group as one of several “leftist guerrilla groups [in Honduras] that have resorted to terrorist tactics in the past.”

Ulloa also railed against the presence of American military members in Honduras and called on “gringo trash” to leave the country.


Peter Hasson | Reporter

Follow Hasson on Twitter @PeterJHasson


Why Our Country Needs the Wall, and Now

Trump: Mexico Is Still Paying For The Wall

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Compares Migrant Caravan To Jews Fleeing Holocaust

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Media Buries Key Facts to Conceal Migrant Health Threat—TB, Hepatitis, HIV

Here’s a great example of the mainstream media distorting information to promote a liberal agenda, an act that is especially pervasive when it comes to immigration coverage. A story published by NBC news, and reiterated by various other outlets, claims illegal immigrants don’t bring disease into the United States.

The headline reads: “Migrants don’t bring disease. In fact, they help fight it, report says.” The article focuses on a study commissioned by a medical journal called the Lancet and University College London. The finished product is titled “Global patterns of mortality in international migrants: a systematic review and meta-analysis” and one of the researchers, Dr. Paul Spiegel, proclaims that migrants spreading disease is a “false argument” used to keep them out. The editor of the Lancet said; “In too many countries, the issue of migration is used to divide societies and advance a populist agenda.”

Nevertheless, buried deep in the news article the reporter offers this important nugget from the study, only after writing that migrants are less likely than people in their host countries to die of heart disease, cancer, respiratory diseases and other ills: “The exceptions are hepatitis, tuberculosis and HIV.”

Last we checked those are deadly diseases and Judicial Watch has interviewed medical experts that confirm illegal immigrants do indeed pose a serious public health threat to the U.S. by bringing dangerous diseases into the country. This includes tuberculosis, dengue and Chikungunya. Just last month a prominent physician in a key border state warned that the caravan streaming north from Honduras will undoubtedly bring infectious diseases into the U.S. Among them are extremely drug resistant strands of tuberculosis and mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue and chikungunya that are widespread in the region.

The same week Judicial Watch published the story about the caravan health threat a major newspaper reported on the health crisis created by the influx of Venezuelans fleeing to neighboring countries. The migrants are spreading malaria, yellow fever, diphtheria, dengue, tuberculosis and AIDS throughout South America. Many of the diseases had been considered eradicated in the neighboring Latin American countries, according to government officials cited in the article, which states that “contagion from Venezuela’s economic meltdown is starting to spread to neighboring countries—not financially, but literally, in the form of potentially deadly diseases carried among millions of refugees.”

As an example, the story reveals that “measles reappeared with a vengeance” in a Brazilian city near the Venezuelan border that had declared the highly contagious airborne disease “vanquished” nearly two decades ago. “Measles is already spreading beyond the Brazilian Amazon to other Brazilian states, as well as Colombia, Peru and as far south as Argentina, according to recent Pan American Health Organization reports,” the article states. “Other diseases racing through communities in Venezuela are now crossing borders and raising concerns among health authorities as far away as the U.S.”

Years ago, when Barack Obama let tens of thousands of illegal immigrant minors into the country, health experts warned about the serious hazards to the American public. Most of the Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) came from Central America, like the current caravan, and they crossed into the U.S. through Mexico, in the same way that the caravan expects to.

Swine flu, dengue fever and Ebola were among the diseases that the hordes of UACs brought with them, according to lawmakers and medical experts interviewed by Judicial Watch during the influx. At the time, a U.S. Congressman, who is also a medical doctor, told Judicial Watch about the danger to the American public as well as the Border Patrol agents forced to care for the UACs. The former lawmaker, Phil Gingrey, referred to it as a “severe and dangerous” crisis because the Central American youths were importing infectious diseases considered to be largely eradicated in this country.

Many migrants lack basic vaccinations such as those to prevent chicken pox or measles, leaving America’s young children and the elderly particularly susceptible, Gingrey pointed out then. To handle the escalating health crisis the CDC activated an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) that largely operated in secrecy.

Even the recent study twisted by the mainstream media acknowledges that illegal immigrants are likely to carry hepatitis, tuberculosis and HIV. Selectively burying the information doesn’t change the severity of the matter. Though not a mainstream media outlet, a popular leftist news and opinion site went so far as to label those who claim migrants pose a threat to public health racist.

EDITORS NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Fancycrave on Unsplash.