Note to Bank of America: Some companies don’t scare easily

Leftists are at it again – declaring that corporate America must bow in every way to their agenda or face their wrath. In this case, online activists and some staff at Wayfair (3.3 – Lean Conservative) and Ogilvy (3 – Neutral) have demanded that their leadership stop doing business with U.S. agencies which house immigrant children separated at the border.

Twitter warriors and activist employees already notched a victory – Bank of America (1 – Liberal) stopped financing private detention centers in June. But Ogilvy’s CEO isn’t backing down. Via Buzzfeed, John Seifert pointed out that:

  1. The company has worked with the federal government for decades in various capacities.
  2. The company has worked with many brands which are associated with controversies – from tobacco companies to Coca-Cola to BP after the latter’s 1999 oil spill.
  3. His primary duty is to ensure that Ogilvy survives and thrives during and after his time as CEO.

Seifert noted that Ogilvy’s contracted duty is to help U.S. Customs and Border Protection find qualified staff. Ogilvy is not involved in agency policies or supporting the Trump administration. It is simply doing what it does best – advertising.

Wayfair likewise refused to be cowed. Ranking a 3.3 on the 2ndVote scale, its executive leadership said in a statement that the company follows its obligation to fulfill lawful orders for its furniture. Ironically, opponents of Wayfair’s federal contract say that the company should protest horrible conditions…by not providing furniture for migrant children to sit and lay on. #TwitterLogic

It’s not just Wayfair and Ogilvy which are standing up against these protests. Even leftist-leaning companies like Microsoft (1 – Liberal) and Amazon (1.3 – Liberal) are refusing to stop doing business with the U.S. government despite employee protests.

As elected officials decide on America’s border policies, we urge you to use your second vote to let Bank of America’s CEO know that his cowardice isn’t appreciated – and let leaders at Wayfair, Ogilvy, Amazon, and Microsoft know that you appreciate them doing their jobs instead of engaging in tacit or explicit political action.

You can do this in two ways:

First, e-mail the CEOs who are being politically neutral business leaders. Let them know that you appreciate them standing up to their activist employees and Twitter warriors. Then let Bank of America’s CEO know that you oppose his cowardice.

Second, shop your values. Shop at Wayfair. Let them know in the most important way – with your money – that you value the stand they’ve taken. Be sure to check out their score and all of the other company scoreswhich 2ndVote has compiled so you can make the most informed consumer decisions.

The 2ndVote website allows you to easily communicate directly to any company scored on their individual score page. Take the time to thank companies that focus on business and not social activism, and ask the companies who pander to the radical anti-American agenda that you want them to stop and just provide their good, or services.

Wayfair CEO Niraj Shah – nshah@wayfair.com

Ogilvy CEO John Seifert – john.seifert@ogilvy.com

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos – jeff@amazon.com

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella – satyan@microsoft.com

Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan – brian.t.moynihan@bankofamerica.com

EDITORS NOTE: This 2nd Vote column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

The Secret Agenda Of Muslim Community Patrol Cars

The Christian Action Network has released a shocking report exposing the secret agenda behind the controversial Muslim Community Patrol Cars policing the streets of New York City.

With the aid of confidential informants, the report divulges several alarming facts behind the newly created Muslim Community Patrol & Services (MCP&S), which began launching patrol cars in New York City last November.

The report, which is authored by Martin Mawyer of Christian Action Network and Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project, reveals:

  1. MCP&S officers plan to enforce Sharia law on both Muslim and non-Muslim citizens in New York City.
  2. Organizers plan to expand their modest fleet of three Muslim Patrol Cars to seven by the end of summer 2019, with the goal of reaching 30 cars in the near future.
  3. The individual responsible for deploying MCP&S cars is Siraj Wahhaj, who has documented links to terrorist operatives and who has called for America’s destruction.
  4. The individual responsible for hiring MCP&S officers is Ali Mustapha, who has twice been arrested for murder and convicted once.
  5. The son and two daughters of Siraj Wahhaj were arrested last May on federal terrorism charges for engaging in “a conspiracy to stage deadly attacks on American soil.”
  6. The 72nd Precinct of New York Police Department is training MCP&S officers in both self-defense and suspect-restraining techniques.
  7. MCP&S is seeking to employ off-duty NYPD Muslim policemen so their officers can carry weapons and have the power to arrest citizens.

The 16-page report, titled “The Secret Agenda of New York City’s Muslim Community Patrol Cars,” is being delivered to all New York’s city council members, police precincts and state legislators, including the state’s governor, the city’s mayor and the borough presidents.

“America, especially those in New York, needs to know about the terrorist links to MCP&S and that a convicted murderer is recruiting its officers,” said Martin Mawyer, president of Christian Action Network.

READ THE FULL REPORT BY CLICKING HERE

RELATED ARTICLE: Muslim Community Patrol Officers are being described as ‘bullies’ and ‘gangsters’

RELATED VIDEO: ‘Muslim Community Patrols’ have NYC residents alarmed – OANN

This African Immigration Fraudster Got Caught!

EDITORS NOTE:  As we work on getting this blog and Refugee Resettlement Watch hosted elsewhere there may be a glitch or two along the way.  Yesterday that happened with my update on the Kenyan Killer story, see here, where the link did not work.


Well, at least this Liberian didn’t get away with the all too common marriage scam which we have mentioned in  a couple of posts lately*** involving men who married, or attempted to marry Americans, in order to stay in the US after initially getting into the country on a visitor visa of some sort.

See how he was caught lying……

From Fox News,

Green card scam thwarted by ‘best sex ever’ text that arrived as immigration agent was reviewing phone, prosecutors say

A Liberian soccer player’s attempt to trick U.S. immigration authorities into giving him a green card backfired after an agent in Rhode Island viewing the phone of the woman claiming to be his wife saw an incoming message from another person thanking her for the “best sex ever,” prosecutors say.

Prince Mark Boley, 30, is now facing up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine after being convicted by a federal court this week of lying to immigration officials and providing false information on immigration documents, the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of Rhode Island announced.

The steamy text that sparked an investigation into his behavior came in June 2017, when authorities were questioning the validity of his marriage to a U.S. citizen that occurred a year earlier, the office said. Boley was seeking a green card and the woman he claimed to be his wife allowed an immigration officer to review her phone in hopes to make clear that the two truly were in love.

While the officer was going through messages on her device, a new one popped up – from “Chriss”, complimenting her for the “best sex ever”, the Providence Journal reported.

[….]

“At trial, the woman testified that her marriage to Boley was a sham, and that she married Boley solely for the purpose of him obtaining a green card,” the office continued. “She testified that she and Boley did not live together and never had a physical relationship, but that Boley did take steps to create a paper trail that he resided with her, such as having some of his mail sent to her address where he did not live.”

*** Both the Kenyan Killer, Billy Chemirmir, and the Nigerian who brutally murdered the Utah coed either did marry or attempted to marry Americans in order to stay in the country.

How many more are out there?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Supreme Court Rules Trump Can Use $2.5 Billion From Military Spending For Border Wall 

Poll: Immigration ‘Most Important Problem’ Facing US

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Democrats and Republicans Passed an Immigration Bill — But it went largely unreported.

It has been my contention, for many years, that contrary to the lies spewed in the mainstream media that the immigration system is broken while, in reality, the immigration system is not broken, but has become the most efficient delivery system in the United States rivaling Fed-Ex and UPS combined.

What the immigration system delivers is a virtually unlimited supply of cheap and exploitable labor, an unlimited supply of foreign tourists, of foreign students and, for the immigration lawyers, an unlimited supply of clients for immigration law firms.

This was the underlying premise to my article, Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design.

This past month, most of the coverage about the Congress focused on the war of words between President Trump and the Democrats, particularly the venomous and frequently Anti-Semitic statements spewed by “The Squad” that consists of four first-term female members of Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

A virtual mantra has been created that the reason we have an immigration crisis is because the Democrats will not work with the Republicans (or visa versa).

You would think that if there was any movement to create immigration legislation that the media would jump all over it and put the story on page one in the newspapers and the “A Block” on television programs.  After all, the mythology goes, the Democrats and Republicans have steadfastly taken diametrically opposed positions on immigration.

Of course while the Republicans insist that a wall needs to be constructed on the U.S./Mexican border to secure that dangerous and highly porous border against the un-inspected entry of aliens and cargo including such contraband as narcotics, it is worth noting that when they controlled both houses of Congress for the first two years of the Trump administration, money was never provided for the construction of that wall.

As my mom taught me when I was growing up, “Actions speak louder than words.”

Then there were the highly publicized “migrant caravans” that transported more than one hundred thousand illegal aliens to the U.S./Mexican border and the argument between the Democrats and Republicans focused on whether or not there was a “crisis on the border.”

For the most part, the Republicans declared that there was an emergency on the border and that there was a humanitarian as well as a national security crisis along the border.  The Democrats, however, declared that the crisis was manufactured by the Trump administration.

And so it went, arguments and counterarguments hurled back and forth in a “war of words.”

However, what the media somehow managed to ignore was that on February 7, 2019 Zoe Lofgren, the Chairperson of the House Immigration Subcommittee, and former immigration lawyer, introduced a bill, H.R. 1044: Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019.

Of course many bills get introduced during the course of a congressional session so, perhaps this bill was introduced but escaped detection.

The Center for Immigration Studies published a disconcerting analysis of this bill.

Clearly this bill does not provide good news for American high-tech workers or their families, nor does it provide good news for American college students who are running up huge student loans to acquire STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering or Mathematics) degrees to qualify them for high-tech jobs.

Under the provisions of H.R.1044 hundreds of thousands of nonimmigrant (temporary) foreign workers from India, in particular, who are currently working in the United States under the infamous H-1B visa will be fast-tracked for lawful immigrant status and provided with Green Cards.  In other words, they will become a permanent part of the U.S. labor pool.

Chinese investors will be able to more easily acquire lawful immigrant status by investing in the United States, increasing China’s already huge “footprint” in the United States.

There are additional provisions that are problematic.

Yet this bill went largely ignored by the mainstream media that even on July 10, 2019 when that legislative disaster was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 365-65, 57 Republicans voting against the bill.

Furthermore, the bill was voted on without a single hearing and without any amendments being added.

However, the Western Free Press certainly took note of this legislative betrayal in an article entitled, GOP Legislators Back Bill to Replace American Workers.  The subtitle completed the infuriating picture,  H.R. 1044 would flood the country with Indian tech workers and Chinese investors.

Here is an excerpt from the Western Free Press report:

House Resolution 1044 is a bill that will substantially change the scope of the U.S. immigration and green card distribution system. For starters, it removes a safeguard that prevents green card figures from being monopolized by people from a single country. This safeguard, known as the “per country cap,” ensures that visas are available to a diverse global pool of workers from a variety of different occupational industries. Such significant reform to our immigration system shouldn’t be fast-tracked but that’s just what happened Wednesday when the measure passed 365-65 with 57 Republicans voting “nay.”

GOP Legislators who backed the bill praised how it will help foreign workers, companies, and investments. The 65 Legislators who voted against it likely did so because it doesn’t do enough to help American workers and recent graduates. The bill will head to the Senate where Republican Senators are pushing a mirrored version of this bill.

H.R. 1044, called the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, would over-flood visas from two types of applicants: Indian tech workers and Chinese investors. It’s not necessarily shocking that House Democrats were fanatical in their support for the bill but it should be newsworthy that several “America First” Republicans supported it, especially given the impact that H.R. 1044 will have on American workers.

The bill essentially rewards tech employers who replace American workers with lower cost contract workers who entered the country on temporary on visas. It creates a fast track to green cards for 300,000 Indian contract workers that are currently backlogged in waiting lines.

On April 30, 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee then-chaired by Chuck Schumer, conducted a hearing on the topic, Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2009, Can We Do It and How? Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank testified.  His prepared testimony included the following infuriating excerpt that addressed the need and benefits to be derived by massively increasing the number of H-1B visa workers:

An accelerated influx of highly skilled immigrants would bridge that gap and moreover, carry with it two significant bonuses.

First, skilled workers and their families form new households. They will, of necessity, move into vacant housing units, the current glut of which is depressing prices of American homes. And, of course, house price declines are a major factor in mortgage foreclosures and the plunge in value of the vast quantity of U.S. mortgage-backed securities that has contributed substantially to the disabling of our banking system. The second bonus would address the increasing concentration of income in this country. Greatly expanding our quotas for the highly skilled would lower wage premiums of skilled over lesser skilled. Skill shortages in America exist because we are shielding our skilled labor force from world competition. Quotas have been substituted for the wage pricing mechanism. In the process, we have created a privileged elite whose incomes are being supported at noncompetitively high levels by immigration quotas on skilled professionals. Eliminating such restrictions would reduce at least some of our income inequality.

In a joint effort, demonstrating true collusion, the Democrats and Republicans have united to shaft Americans!

President Trump must be made aware of the irreparable damage this would do to Americans by undermining his promises and goals and the dreams and aspirations of Americans.

It is time for legislation with a somewhat different name, the “Fairness for High-Skilled Americans Act!”

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump admin plans to make it easier to deport illegal immigrants without a trial

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Did Rep. Ilhan Omar Benefit from Massive Failure of US State Department’s Family Reunification Program?

If you have been following the controversy swirling around the charge that Rep. Ilhan Omar might have committed fraud by marrying her brother, there might have been a fraud committed years before that even.

Back in 2008 I began a series of reports on the so-called P-3 program that permits already resettled refugees in the US to apply to bring in ‘family’ members.

All of that was chronicled at Refugee Resettlement Watch that WordPress suspended.

However, here John Binder writing at Breitbart sums up the State Department scandal and points to an important report by a former ICE attorney who says of the fraud that tens of thousands of Somalis got into the US and once the fraud was revealed there there were no repercussions for the cheaters.

“This was staggering irresponsibility, possibly the biggest blunder in immigration history.”

Here is what Binder says at Breitbart:

A refugee program that allowed foreign relatives of already-arrived foreign refugees to the United States was halted, altogether, more than a decade ago due to mass fraud among applicants.

This week, Powerline blog’s David Steinberg suggested that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) entered the U.S. in the mid-1990s as a third-priority, known as P-3, refugee — that is, a refugee who is admitted to the country due to their ties to an already-resettled refugee.

Steinberg’s report also claims that Omar committed immigration fraud when she falsely entered the country as a member of the “Omar” family that had already resettled in the U.S.

In 2008, after thousands of foreign nationals had entered as P-3 refugees, the program was halted by the *Bush administration* due to mass fraud wherein the State Department, through DNA testing, was able to confirm family relations between the program’s applicants in less than 20 percent of cases.

Overall, about 87 percent of P-3 refugees’ family relation claims turned out to be fraudulent.

BTW, guess who opposed DNA testing for family reunification?

If you guessed the nine federal resettlement contractors—groups like the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service and so forth, you would be correct!

Why? They claimed that the definition of ‘family’ is different in African culture and we should respect their ideas of family.

Binder continues….

Charles Thaddeus Fillinger, a former federal immigration official, has detailed the enormous fraud that has occurred among P-3 refugees in his 30-page policy paper, calling the program “the greatest refugee fraud crisis in modern times.”

More here.

Here is a link to Fillinger’s treatise on the massive fraud perpetrated mostly by Africans for possibly decades.

I am so glad to see that this era of fraud has not been swept under the rug.  Interesting that it would take a scandal swirling around a member of Congress to help bring it to light.

I had to laugh when I saw a guest on Fox News yesterday say that Rep. Ilhan Omar (or whatever her name is) did it right by entering the US legally!

Wonder if we can go back and identify the thousands of  immigration cheats.  Just dreaming!

See all of my previous posts on Rep. Ilhan Omar by clicking here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Two of Michael Hansen’s films: ‘Killing Europe’ and ‘Killing Canada’

Since filmmaker, Michael Hansen’s appearance on InfoWars as well as two articles at Breitbart on his work, there have been requests to see his two films now publicly available so we are posting them here.

Rumors circulate of an updated version of his U.S. film on the state of free speech. We look forward to that a great deal.

Abridged version of Killing Europe:

Killing Canada:

EDITORS NOTE: This entry was posted in exposing IslamExposing LeftismMichael Hansen by Eeyore.

Trump Administration Officials: Refugee Admissions for FY 2020 Could be Zero

“Refugee backers….worry that the doomsday scenario — taking numbers down to zero — could debilitate the resettlement program for years to come.” – (Politico)

I had planned to immediately this morning jump on the Rep. Ilhan Omar (Somali refugee) marriage scam story, but need to tell you about this breaking news first.

A little background….

Every year at this time various administration agencies and the federal resettlement contractors (also called incorrectly ‘charities’) get together to plan for the coming fiscal year and how many refugees should be admitted and from where.

The State Department then in conjunction with the White House prepares the Presidential Determination that is sent to Congress in September for consultation with various committees.  However, it is the President who has the power under the Refugee Act of 1980 to set the CEILING for the coming year.

One step in the process that has now been missing for years is the “scoping meeting” which for many many years was held in May or June and it was an opportunity for the public to weigh in with views on the scope of the program.  Longtime readers of Refugee Resettlement Watch may recall that for a number of years during the Obama Administration those of us with concerns about the program swamped them with comments.

That opportunity for public comment was dropped and the Trump Administration has never revived it.  

So here we are again the annual squabble over numbers of refugees for the coming fiscal year has begun (FY20 begins on October 1, 2019).  Previously I saw that the nine federal contractors (Church World Service is one of the nine) who are paid to place the refugees are again pushing for 75,000.

Not happy with what they learned last week from the Trump team, they have leaked to Politico and surely other news outlets to vent and to stir up their minions to put pressure on Congress and the White House so they can continue to be paid to change America by changing the people.

And, get this! Heritage Foundation is on the side of more refugees rather than less!

If only it is so…..

Politico (hat tip: Jeannine):

Trump officials pressing to slash refugee admissions to zero next year

The Trump administration is considering a virtual shutdown of refugee admissions next year — cutting the number to nearly zero — according to three people familiar with the plan.

During a key meeting of security officials on refugee admissions last week, a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services representative who is closely aligned with White House immigration adviser Stephen Miller suggested setting a cap at zero, the people said. Homeland Security Department officials at the meeting later floated making the level anywhere from 3,000 to 10,000, according to one of the people.

The proposal for a near-shutdown of the refugee program is alarming officials at the Department of Defense, who don’t want to see a halt in admissions of Iraqis who risked their lives assisting U.S. forces in that country. The possible move comes after the Trump administration cut refugee admissions by a third this year, to 30,000.

If the administration shuts down refugee admissions, it would give President Donald Trump a powerful talking point as he makes immigration restrictions a centerpiece of his reelection campaign.

At the same time, it would strand thousands of people already far along in the process and damage the ability of resettlement agencies to process refugees in future years, according to advocates tracking the issue.
“In the long-term, it would mean that the capacity and the ability of the United States to resettle refugees would be completely decimated,” said Jen Smyers, a director with Church World Service, one of the nine U.S. resettlement agencies.

What she is saying above is that their budgets would be decimated with the loss of the millions they get from us—US taxpayers! And, of course Politico makes no mention of that fact!

The meeting of roughly 20 officials last week, which took place in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, represents a preliminary step in the annual process of setting the admissions cap, according to those with knowledge of it.

USCIS official John Zadrozny and the State Department’s Andrew Veprek — both known as Miller allies — argued in the meeting that the refugee cap should be low because of ongoing security concerns and the ability of the U.S. to offer humanitarian protections through the asylum process, according to an attendee.

While the two programs similarly protect people facing persecution, refugees apply for protection from overseas, while asylum seekers apply once they’ve arrived at the border or entered the U.S. on a legal visa. Proponents of the refugee program contend it offers the U.S. diplomatic and military leverage internationally beyond its humanitarian aims.

The above paragraph is very important for a couple of reasons.  All of those ‘asylum seekers’ breaking into America right now could end up being declared refugees and receive all of the benefits legitimate refugees receive thus completely swamping our welfare system, schools, health care systems etc.

And, it is pretty outrageous that refugees should be foisted on unsuspecting communities in order for Washington to gain international “diplomatic and military leverage.”

The Miller allies asserted at the meeting that the refugee determination didn’t matter because it was a ceiling, not a floor, and the administration still retained the discretion to admit fewer people, according to one of the people with knowledge of it.

The various agencies will submit their recommendations by Aug. 1, the person told POLITICO.

The presence of Zadrozny and Veprek in the refugee cap negotiations speaks to the influence of Miller over the Trump administration’s immigration agenda. Both are viewed as proxies for the president’s hard-line adviser.

Just what we need (not!): Heritage Foundation says surely we can find “more folks” to bring into the US who are in countries that don’t want to do us harm.

“Even if you’re really hesitant about certain types of conflict-torn areas, I still think there are other areas that are not of concern,” said David Inserra, a policy analyst with the conservative Heritage Foundation. “There are enough refugees out there in the world that I think you could find more folks that you’re not particularly worried about.”

LOL! Below Politico sends out the word that Open Borders agitators need to get out and lobby the administration!  And, therein lies the primary reason there is a scare tactic headline to this story!

The Trump administration doesn’t need to make the refugee determination until next month and there remains time for outside groups to lobby the administration. The administration also must consult with members of related congressional committees regarding the determination, although that requirement has been mostly brushed aside under Trump.

The article is long and there is a lot more information, so go here to read it all.

There is a big discussion in the story about the military wanting to admit more Iraqis, but interesting to me was the lack of any mention of the  thousands of Afghans we have brought in during the Trump Administration.

If there was ever a time to contact the White House, this is it! 

Tell the President—zero refugees for 2020!  After all, hundreds of thousands are arriving illegally and asking for asylum so those should be dealt with first.  (See White House contact in my right hand side bar.)

RELATED ARTICLE: 4 Big Border Issues in Homeland Security Chief’s House Testimony

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Mexican Flag Over ICE Facility Is NOT The Fringe Of The Democratic Party

Another GOP ad is writing itself as Democrat-supporting protesters took down an American flag over an ICE facility in Colorado, defaced it and raised it upside down, vandalized a Blue Lives Matter flag and then raised the Mexican flag above the federal facility. The Mexican flag.

I would like to say these are just fringe extremists, but are they?

A leading Democrat presidential contender, U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (from California) calls this basic, at one point  bipartisan law enforcement “crimes against humanity.” Sure, that’s not overboard at all. And it’s not like she was California Attorney General or anything in charge of law enforcement. She is obviously not fringe. In fact, most of the Democratic candidates have come out opposed to the ICE law enforcement actions and for de facto open borders.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (also from California, naturally) the second most powerful leader in the country and most power Democrat at the moment, is openly advising people here illegally who have retainer warrants on them how to avoid arrest by ICE agents. She has the ability to move legislation changing the law if she does not like it. But instead, she is helping people violate the law — which last I knew means she is an accessory to crime, along with endless other Democratic officeholders, such as the new mayor of Chicago, who are doing the same thing. Again, not at all on the fringe.

No, this is more mainstream Democratic Party, at least among leadership if not rank-and-file.

In fact, you are hard-pressed to find a Democratic leader who will condemn it.

Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who is running for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, was asked Sunday if the protesters should be condemned. He refused to say they should be.

“Well, I certainly respect the American flag, and my whole life I’ve been fighting to make this country…and to make sure this country welcomes everybody, and that this flag represents everyone,” Hickenlooper said on “America’s News HQ.”

When pressed on whether he would say they were wrong and shouldn’t do it, the best he could muster was: “I think there are better ways to unite us.”

I realize the knee-jerk reaction of the Democratic Party today is that if Trump says up, they say down; if he says black they say white; if he says cancer is bad they say he’s a racist (because that’s just the default comeback when stymied.)

But this is an amazing position.

Long, long ago, in the ancient days of the Republic when Barack Obama was president, ICE conducted these actions all the time. Obama defended himself against the activists masquerading as journalists on Telemundo by saying he had to, because he’s “not a king.” It’s good to know he actually realized that. His Department of Homeland Security chief, Jeh Johnson, said these law enforcement actions are right because all of the judicial appeals have been exhausted and these people are in the country illegally. It’s the frickitydiddle law.

Further, some of these illegal immigrants have also committed other crimes while here. Because lawless sanctuary cities by Democrats will not hold a criminal if ICE has a retainer on them, these criminals need to be rounded up by ICE through special law enforcement actions. But Pelosi and other Democrats (who were fine with Obama doing the exact same thing) are actively working to help criminals avoid law enforcement.

Incredible. If Democrats keep acting like this, the GOP won’t even need people to message for them. They can simply run on Democrats’ words and actions — previously listed in this space in terrifying detail — and let the justifiable fear of lawlessness take its natural course.

Oh, and use the picture of the defaced American flag and Mexican flag over a federal facility. Democrats will huff and puff that they don’t approve of that. Why should anyone believe them? Their actions on this issue mean they are totally aligned with the sentiment and the people who did it.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Puts Limit on Asylum Claims at Border

Fake News Covers for Migrant Crimes

Is Texas Democrat Exploiting Loophole by Coaching Migrants to Lie?

I Went to a Socialism Conference. Here Are My 6 Observations.

RELATED VIDEO: Protesters Remove U.S. Flag, Replace It With Mexican Flag Outside ICE Facility In Aurora.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Fake News Begins with Fake Language

Human beings think with words.  We express our thoughts with words.

What truly differentiates humans from all other creatures is our ability to use language and preserve our thoughts in writing, thereby enabling us to pass down our knowledge from one generation to the next.  This is why the study of history is so important, but it is not only history that is passed from generation to generation but knowledge in general.

We often say that “There is no need to reinvent the wheel.”  Consider that if not for written language, each generation would, in effect, be forced to reinvent the wheel and all other forms of technology.

The study of history can help keep us from making the same tragic mistakes, but only if history is accurately written.

As George Orwell sagely observed, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

The words that we use have real impact.

In 1974 an important psychological experiment was conducted that illustrated how altering words can not only have a significant impact on how the test subjects perceived the severity of a car crash but even ultimately impact how they remember the accident creating false memories.

The impact of word choice is not, however, limited to car accidents but applies virtually everywhere.

The report of that experiment Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the Interaction Between Languageand Memory’ included this synopsis:

Two experiments are reported in which subjects viewed films of automobile accidents and then answered questions about events occurring in the films. The question, “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” elicited higher estimates of speed than questions which used the verbs collided, bumped, contucted, or hit in place of smashed. On a retest one week later, those subjects who received the verb smashed were more likely to say “yes” to the question, “Did you see any broken glass?”, even though broken glass was not present in the film. These results are consistent with the view that the questions asked subsequent t o a n event can cause a reconstruction in one’s memory of that event.

Not long after that experiment the Carter administration ordered that INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) employees stop using the term “illegal alien” to describe illegal aliens but use the term “undocumented immigrants.”  There is no way to know if any one in the Carter administration had read the report I noted at the beginning of my commentary, but it certainly causes me to wonder if there is a connection.

In any event, years earlier George Orwell wrote an important novel, “1984,” that was required reading when I was a high school student, too many years ago.  It must be considered “required reading” for all Americans today.

That novel about a fictitious totalitarian government included the creation of the ultimate form of propaganda known as “Newspeak” and an all-pervasive government known as “Big Brother.”

The “Ministry of Truth” was the arm of the government that administered Newspeak.

Today function of the Ministry of Truth is served by the Mainstream Media.

Though the internet, license plate readers, and a variety of other forms of surveillance, the control exerted by Big Brother in 1984 has been far surpassed by our society today.

I wrote about Newspeak and the efforts of those in political power as well as their allies in the mainstream media to alter public perceptions in my extensive article, Language Wars: The Road to Tyranny Is Paved with Language Censorship.

In that article I noted that:

A detailed explanation of Newspeak is found in this paragraph from the Appendix to Orwell’s novel, under the title The Principles of Newspeak:

The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc (English Socialist Party) but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever. To give a single example. The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as ‘This dog is free from lice’ or ‘This field is free from weeds’. It could not be used in its old sense of ‘politically free’ or ‘intellectually free’ since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed even as concepts, and were therefore of necessity nameless. Quite apart from the suppression of definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.

Today, deceptive language is frequently written off as simply being “politically correct” language designed to not insult anyone while, the truth is far more treacherous.  The deceptive language is actually the manifestation of Orwellian Newspeak.

The term “Alien” has been all but expunged from the immigration vernacular, even though it is a term that is an integral element of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

In point of fact, 8 USC 1101 is a section of the INA that provides definitions for terminology that has a direct bearing on our immigration laws and defines the term “Alien” this way:

The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.

There is no insult in that term, only clarity. The sort of clarity the immigration con artists are determined to eliminate at all costs.

Therefore the radical left branded the term Alien “Hate Speech!”

Incredibly and hypocritically,, however, the supposedly despicable term “alien” was used to create the acronym DREAM Act. (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) pushed vigorously by the same radical leftists.

The media now uses more obfuscating terms to describe illegal aliens.  In addition to referring to them as immigrants (thereby insulting and impugning lawful immigrants) lately they refer to them as “asylum seekers” and “migrants.”

The term “migrant” is not unique to aliens. Indeed Caesar Chavez who founded the United Farm Workers Union did so to protect the interests of American migrant farm workers and railed against illegal aliens who took the jobs of American migrant workers.  As for the notion that the aliens who run the U.S./Mexican border are “asylum seekers” while many will falsely claim “credible fear” only a very small percentage will actually qualify for asylum and many of these aliens don’t even show up for their hearings because they know that they won’t be approved.  They just make those bogus claims as a tactic to gain entry into the U.S. and make there way to cities across the United States where they easily hide in “plain sight,” knowing that ICE lacks the resources to look for them and Sanctuary Cities will help shield them from detection.

For many Americans, however, the term “asylum seeker” falsely engenders legitimacy and creates sympathy for illegal aliens.

“Sanctuary Cities” promise to protect “immigrants” from ICE.  Immigrants need no such protection.  Those jurisdiction protect illegal aliens including criminals, fugitives and potentially terrorists.

Americans are well-known for being compassionate and thus using such terminology is designed to generate empathy and obfuscate the truth.

Americans historically root for the “underdog.”  Today what many Americans don’t realize is that while they have been manipulated and conned into feeling sympathy for millions of illegal aliens, in reality, they and their fellow American citizens have become the true underdogs, suffering the greatest harm from rampant immigration anarchy at the hands of their own corrupt government.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Antifa Activist Shot Dead Trying to Attack ICE Detention Facility 

Nikki Haley slams ‘disgusting’ silence from Dems after Mexican flag raised at ICE facility

To The Surprise Of Nobody, Dems Internal Polling Shows Swing Voters Don’t Like Progressives 

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

“I love beheading the enemy”: Muslim migrant who supports ISIS is deported from US by ICE

“Extremist, terrorist, tough, brain-washed, radical, I love explosions, booby trapping, beheading the enemy, and am among the supporters of establishing the religion with the sword.”

Charming fellow. Why was he admitted into the US in the first place? Was any attempt made to determine his sentiments regarding jihad? Almost certainly not.

Tunisian national with terrorist ties removed from US,” ICE, June 21, 2019 (thanks to Creeping Sharia):

PHILADELPHIA, Pa. – A Tunisian national with ties to ISIS was removed from the U.S. Wednesday by officers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) after serving a federal prison sentence resulting from an investigation conducted by ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Houcine Ghoul departed the U.S. from John F. Kennedy Airport in New York Wednesday evening, escorted by ERO officers. He was turned over to Tunisian authorities Thursday, upon his arrival in his home country.

In August 2018, Ghoul was sentenced by Chief U.S. District Judge James C. Dever III to 24 months in prison, followed by deportation, for attempted unlawful procurement of naturalization and making false statements on his tax return. ICE lodged a detainer on Ghoul, and upon his release from Bureau of Prisons custody, he entered ICE custody pursuant to the detainer.

Ghoul, a citizen of Tunisia, entered the U.S. in 2001 on a tourist visa. After overstaying his visa, Ghoul married a U.S. citizen, whom he later divorced, and obtained status as a legal permanent resident.

The investigation into Ghoul’s conduct began in April 2014 when Ghoul posted a photo online that explicitly displayed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a designated foreign terrorist organization. This photo displayed an individual holding a sign with the Arabic phrase, “The victory of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,” and then below in English, “ISIS,” and “N. Carolina, USA,” the state where Ghoul was then residing. The photo later appeared in an online propaganda video posted by others to display worldwide support for ISIS. Though he did not use his actual name or identity for the online accounts, Ghoul provided a self-description within the account, “Extremist, terrorist, tough, brain-washed, radical, I love explosions, booby trapping, beheading the enemy, and am among the supporters of establishing the religion with the sword.”

In December 2014, Ghoul applied to become a U.S. citizen. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services interviewed him in reference to his application in February 2017. During this interview, Ghoul made a number of false statements, including, but not limited to: he in no way associated with or had been a member of any terrorist organization, he had never advocated for the overthrow of a government, and he had not married someone to obtain an immigration benefit. He also falsely claimed that he had not made misrepresentations to obtain public benefits. All of these statements were false because Ghoul had sworn allegiance to ISIS and had been an active supporter of ISIS both online and in person, had explicitly advocated for the overthrow of the U.S. through violence, had entered into a sham marriage for the sole purpose of obtaining U.S. citizenship, and had assisted in providing lies to the State of North Carolina in order to obtain childcare benefits.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Failed jihad suicide bomber: “I don’t like life on Earth, my only reward is Allah”

UK: Muslim family forced daughter to marry cousin to stop her from getting “too Western”

RELATED VIDEO: UK: Muhammad cartoons absent from Media Freedom Conference’s display of censored political cartoons.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Why Won’t Muslims Assimilate?

Why Won’t Muslims Assimilate?

We unveil what Islamic doctrine teaches about migration, domination and annihilation.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Paramedic suspended after telling colleagues ‘I don’t like Muslims’

Iran threatens to sink US ships and destroy military bases as fears of war surge

RELATED VIDEO: Brandy Lynn, a victim of a group Muslim attack in Canada, tells her side of the story. Interview begins at the 3:50 minute mark.

QUESTIONS THE CANDIDATES MUST ANSWER: And the one question that will expose those who actually hate you.

The first two Presidential primary debates are behind us but before Election Day there will be many, many more to come.

Typically the news media not only broadcast the debates but are quick to report on the statements and responses made by the candidate participants.

However, what receives little attention are the questions that were asked and the questions that were not asked by the journalist-moderators. This is a new version of “don’t ask – don’t tell!”

The importance of questions cannot be underestimated. My dad sagely told me that the only “dumb” question is the one you don’t ask.

The French philosopher Voltaire famously opined that you should judge a person’s intelligence by the questions he asks.

As an agent, my ability to ask the right question at the right time was a vital skill and one that I worked at for my entire career.

The questioning of an individual in a formal setting comes in two forms, the initial question and the follow-up question(s). I compare this to boxing. The initial question is not unlike the jab while the follow-up question is like the punch to the jaw and may actually score the knockout.

During the first two Democratic Primary debates many issues were raised that actually have relevance to the immigration crisis, yet this connection was never made.

Inasmuch as the “war on terror” continues and the “all clear” has not sounded and is not likely to sound for quite some time, I would want to start out by asking each and every candidate for any significant political office, but particularly for the Presidency, if he/she had read the 9/11 Commission Report and the companion report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel in their entirety.

The 9/11 Commission was convened specifically to learn from our mistakes to protect America and Americans from future terror attacks.

The President of the United States is also the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and is also of all federal law enforcement agencies.

Any serious candidate for the Presidency must consider those reports to be “required reading.”

The preface of the report 9/11 and Terrorist Travel begins with the following:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

It went on to state:

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.

In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

Here is yet another excerpt:

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

This then lays the groundwork for these followup questions:

  1. Given the above-noted, how could any serious candidate call for permitting aliens to enter the United States without vetting and then permit them to apply for political asylum?
  2. How could you insist on a massive amnesty program to provide unknown millions of illegal aliens with lawful status even though there are no resources to interview all of these aliens, let alone conduct field investigations?
  3. We have seen terrorists easily commit immigration fraud, what would you do to address this vulnerability. Indeed, the candidates who demand the dismantling of ICE need to be pointedly asked how they could justify such a dangerous tactic?

On April 30, 2019 the Justice Department issued a press release, Jordanian National Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy to Bring Aliens into the United States, which noted that in 2017 the smuggler smuggled aliens from Yemen, a “Special Interest Country” into the United States without inspection from Monterrey, Mexico to Piedras Negras in Texas.

On April 12, 2017, the Washington Times reported, Sharafat Ali Khan smuggled terrorist-linked immigrants.

During the debate Bernie Sanders stated that there are individuals fleeing from Honduras because of gangs. He made it clear that he would permit all of these aliens to enter the United States and apply for asylum. He was never challenged as to how he would prevent the gang members from Honduras or any other country, for that matter, from entering the United States where they easily ply their violent, sociopathic “trades” often targeting the members of the ethnic immigrant communities.

Mr. Sanders should read the transcripts of several hearings on the issue of transnational gangs:

On June 20, 2017 the House Homeland Security Committee, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence conducted a field hearing on Long Island in Central Islip, New York, on the topic, Combating Gang Violence On Long Island: Shutting Down The MS-13 Pipeline.

On June 21, 2017 the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on “The MS-13 Problem: Investigating Gang Membership, its Nexus to Illegal Immigration, and Federal Efforts to End the Threat.”

On November 21, 2013 the Washington Times reported, Mexican drug cartels exploit asylum system by claiming ‘credible fear.’

The report quoted Bob Goodlatte, the then-Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee:

It’s outrageous that members of Mexican drug cartels and others involved in illicit activity are so easily able to exploit our asylum laws and live in the U.S. virtually undetected,” said Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Virginia Republican.

Our asylum laws are in place to help individuals who are facing truly serious persecution in their country,” he said. “However, dangerous criminals are gaming the system by claiming they have a ‘credible fear’ of persecution when often they’ve been the perpetrators of violence themselves.

Concerns about the lack of integrity to this system were the focus of two House Judiciary Committee hearings conducted as a result of Chairman Goodlatte’s concerns:

Asylum Abuse: Is it Overwhelming our Borders?

Asylum Fraud: Abusing America’s Compassion?

Of course while one of the hearings focused on how asylum abuse was overwhelming our borders, in reality, asylum abuse is overwhelming the entire immigration system throughout the entire United States of America.

At the conclusion of my recent interview on Fox & Friends First to discuss the border crisis, I asked the rhetorical question that should be asked of all of the candidates:

“Would you board an airliner if you saw several of your fellow passengers sneak past the TSA at the airport?- Why then are we being forced to live among millions of aliens who ran our borders and evaded a similar vetting process conducted at ports of entry?”

At the conclusion of my recent interview on Fox & Friends First to discuss the border crisis, I asked the rhetorical question that should be asked of all of the candidates, “Would you board an airliner if you saw several of your fellow passengers sneak past the TSA at the airport?- Why then are we being forced to live among millions of aliens who ran our borders and evaded a similar vetting process conducted at ports of entry?”

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Ilhan Omar’s 4th of July message is critical of US, after she celebrates Somali Independence Day

If it weren’t already clear where her loyalties lie, the contrast between these two messages should remove any doubts anyone may still have.

Ilhan Omar Sends Somber Fourth Of July Message Days After Celebrating Somali Independence Day,” by Molly Prince, Daily Caller, July 5, 2019:

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar urged Americans to celebrate the Fourth of July by reflecting on “how much further we have to go,” standing in contrast to her joyful celebration of Somali Independence Day four days prior.

“Today gives us all a chance to reflect on how far we have come as a country and how much further we have to go to achieve full equality for all people,” Omar tweeted July 4. “We are at a tipping point for progress right now.”

“Happy 4th of July,” she added.

Omar’s congressional office also tweeted a Fourth of July message, stating that Independence Day is a time to celebrate American values such as freedom of the press, equal protection of all minorities and America’s role in guaranteeing human rights worldwide.

While there was no mention of America’s independence from Britain, the tweet listed the Constitution, despite the holiday actually celebrating the Declaration of Independence.

Omar’s congressional office also included “freedom from foreign influence” as a reason to celebrate the Fourth of July. Omar faced massive backlash in February after she suggested Jews’ support of Israel is paid for. She later denied the age-old anti-Semitic canard contending she was simply referring to “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

“We must continue to strive to make our union even more perfect,” Omar’s office added to the Independence Day tweet.

The message of reflection comes only days after Omar posted a video of herself joyfully dancing along during a Somali Independence Day celebration.

“Happy Independence Day Somalia,” Omar tweeted July 1 before adding “Somalia hanoolaato,” which translates into “Long live Somalia.”

The congresswoman’s celebratory tweet also included a passage from Somali’s previous national anthem that translates roughly into English as “Somalis, wake up, wake up and support each other. Support your country. Support them forever.”

Omar, a Somali immigrant, became one of America’s first Muslim congresswomen when sworn into office in 2018. Her time in office has been embroiled in allegations of anti-Semitism and anti-American sentiments….

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Vladimir Putin on Liberalism and Mass Migration to the West

We had our own people (thank you Darlin|<) check the translation from the soft coded titles in the YouTube version of this and it checked out. It is too important an interview to get this wrong. So here it is:


Video link

RELATED ARTICLES:

CBC: A towering testament to the effectiveness of communist subversion through perversion and corruption

Brilliant maiden speech by BREXIT MEP

WordPress Would Not Tell Me Why They Removed Refugee Resettlement Watch

Dr Bill Warner and Graham Moore Talk Sharia

RELATED VIDEO: UK Muslim rape gang victim, “I will get justice even if its with my own bare hands.”

The Democrats’ Positions on Immigration Are Starting to Worry a Lot of Democrats

The death of the so-called Gang of Eight bill in the House of Representatives in 2014 marks the point at which the Democratic establishment dropped any pretense of support for immigration enforcement. The last week in June 2019 will almost certainly mark the point at which the party’s leaders declared not only their unconcealed hostility to immigration enforcement, but their rejection of the very notion that the United States should even have immigration laws.

The week began with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the party’s highest ranking elected federal official, declaring “A violation of status is not a reason for deportation. That’s just not so.” 8 U.S. Code Section 1325 says otherwise, but why let a little thing like a federal statute stand in the way of a political agenda? Pelosi went on to tout a House supplemental appropriation to deal with the humanitarian fallout from the border crisis, “We have legislation to go forward to address those needs,” and also stated clearly her view that anyone who makes it into the country, however they got here, should be allowed to remain. “[I]n terms of interior enforcement, what is – what’s the point?”

But Pelosi’s musings were just the Democratic locomotive approaching the sharp curve at high speed. Just a few days later, the two dozen or so presidential contenders who hope to supplant her as the nation’s highest ranking elected Democrat held their first debate over two nights. That’s where their positions on immigration really went off the rails in the opinion of some high profile opinion columnists whose opinions tend to lean toward the Democrats’ world view.

Andrew Sullivan, writing in New York Magazine, and Jeff Greenfield in Politico, were both left wondering whether the Democrats had lost all touch, not just with reality, but with voters outside of the bubble of the party’s increasingly radical base. “I suspect that the Democrats’ new position — everyone in the world can become an American if they walk over the border and never commit a crime — is political suicide,” wrote Sullivan. Similarly, Greenfield noted, “These candidates aren’t explicitly advocating open borders, but taken together, the policies advocated amount to almost the same thing.” And not just advocating for open borders, observed Greenfield, but also all manner of “’free stuff’ to millions of people who broke the law to get here in the first place.”

Former Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Julian Castro, who apparently is familiar with Section 1325 openly called for its repeal. He also conceded that many of the people who are now violating Section 1325 are really economic migrants. “A lot of folks that are coming are not seeking asylum — a lot of them are undocumented immigrants,” who should be allowed to remain here anyway, Castro said.

While there was some disagreement among the presidential wannabes about whether we should care if people cross our borders without permission, there was none when it came to the question about what expensive benefit programs illegal aliens should be entitled to. All. When the debate moderator asked the candidates on stage if they agreed with South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttitieg’s suggestion that illegal aliens be made eligible for federal health insurance benefits, every hand went up. The cost of such a plan? Apparently it would be crass to even calculate the cost of allowing everyone who shows up here to exercise their “right” to health care at the American taxpayer’s expense.

Whether last week’s assertions by the Democratic leadership amount to “political suicide,” as Sullivan suggests, will be determined by the voters in 16 months. What is clear is that the week was a definitive turning point. As Greenfield conclude, “Right now, it seems clear that if either of the past two Democratic presidents had shown up Thursday and advocated their positions from five or 20 years ago—the ones that helped them win a general election—they would have been booed off their own party’s stage.”

 COLUMN BY

IRA MEHLMAN

Ira joined the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in 1986 with experience as a journalist, professor of journalism, special assistant to Gov. Richard Lamm (Colorado), and press secretary of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. His columns have appeared in National Review, LA Times, NY Times, Washington Post, Newsweek, and more. He is an experienced TV and radio commentator.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ken Cuccinelli says 1M illegal immigrants have court orders to leave the US

Criminals Profit When Illegal Aliens Crash the Border

A Fine Strategy? Making Deportable Fugitives Pay

Trump Derangement Syndrome Will Guarantee The President’s Re-Election

Things Are Looking Up For Trump, GOP In 2020

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission. All rights reserved