Immigration Archives - Page 88 of 179

Appellate Brief Filed on Behalf of Tennessee Challenging The Federal Refugee Resettlement Program

July 6, 2018/in Commentary, Courts & Law, Immigration, Policy, Politics, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Thomas More Law Center

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on Monday, July 2, 2018, filed its opening appellate brief in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Tennessee challenging the constitutionality of the federal refugee resettlement program.

The Thomas More Law Center represents all the plaintiffs in the appeal: The State of Tennessee, the Tennessee General Assembly, and two individual legislators, Senator John Stevens and Representative Terri Lynn Weaver. TMLC originally filed its lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs in a Tennessee federal district court against various federal departments and federal officials on the grounds that implementation of the federal refugee resettlement program violated the Tenth Amendment’s state sovereignty principles and the Spending Clause of the United States Constitution.

The lawsuit sought to permanently ban the federal government from forcing Tennessee to fund the federal refugee resettlement program out of its own treasury. However, a federal district court judge dismissed the case on March 19, 2018. TMLC’s appeal seeks to reverse the court’s ruling.

Kate Oliveri, a TMLC attorney who co-authored the appellate brief, commented, “The federal government is forcing the tax-paying citizens of Tennessee to fund the federal refugee resettlement program despite their elected state officials withdrawing from the program. The federal district court erred, not only in allowing this usurpation of state funds, but also by holding that the General Assembly cannot bring a lawsuit to defend against any usurpation of its power.”

When Congress enacted the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980, the explicit intent was to assure full federal reimbursement of the costs for each refugee resettled and participating in benefit programs provided by the states. Eventually, federal reimbursements to the states for these benefit programs were reduced and, by 1991, entirely eliminated. As a result, the states became responsible for the immense costs of the programs originally covered by the federal government.

Tennessee officially withdrew from participation in the refugee resettlement program in 2007. However, instead of honoring Tennessee’s decision to withdraw from the program, the federal government merely bypassed the State and appointed Catholic Charities of Tennessee, a private, non-governmental organization to administer the program. Catholic Charities receives revenue based upon the number of refugees it brings into the State.

In their brief, the Tennessee-plaintiffs made clear they are not claiming any authority to regulate immigration or to discriminate against refugees or any other category of immigrants. They do contend, however, that the U.S. Constitution prohibits the federal government from commandeering state funds to support the federal government in its implementation of federal immigration and naturalization law.

The fact that the U.S. Constitution grants the federal government authority over immigration and naturalization, does not give it the right to violate the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment state sovereignty principles or the Spending Clause.

Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel, stated,

“This case involves critical constitutional issues regarding the appropriate balance between the powers of the federal government and the states. Our lawsuit and appeal focuses solely on the unconstitutional manner in which the federal program is currently operating in the State of Tennessee. The district court decision dismissing this case conflicts with several U.S. Supreme Court opinions upholding state sovereignty against overreach by the federal government. The purpose of this lawsuit is to preserve the balanced constitutional relationship between the Federal government and the States as intended by our Founding Fathers, and which is so crucial to our individual liberties.”

Click here to read TMLC’s brief.

Polish lawmaker: ‘We will not receive even one Muslim…this is why Poland is so safe’

July 5, 2018/in Culture War, Immigration, National Security, Policy, Politics/by Jihad Watch

“There are a billion people in Africa. In the European Union, we have what, 500 million? How many Africans can we take? Don’t misunderstand me, we want to help the people who are suffering, but we need to help them where they are, at home. It’s not about being racist, nationalist — it’s about adopting a logical, rational system.”

Indeed. But he will be excoriated as a racist nationalist anyway. It’s what the Left does.

“EXCLUSIVE: Polish Lawmaker Speaks Out After Cathy Newman’s Latest Car Crash Interview on Illegal Migration,” by Jack Montgomery, Breitbart, July 3, 2018 (thanks to David):

Polish lawmaker Dominik Tarczyński has stuck to his guns following a frank interviewon the migrant crisis with Cathy Newman, insisting his government will not take a single illegal migrant because that is what his party promised before the elections.

The Channel 4 presenter, who became infamous online following her viral interviewwith Canadian scholar Jordan Peterson, had demanded to know how many “refugees” Poland had taken, to which the Law and Justice Party (PiS) politician replied: “Zero.”

“And you’re proud of that?” Newman demanded.

“If you are asking me about Muslim illegal immigrants, none, not even one, will come to Poland,” Tarczyński repeated.

“We took over two million Ukrainians — who are working, who are peaceful — in Poland. We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised… this is why our government was elected; this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack,” he said.

“We can be called ‘populists’, ‘nationalists’, ‘racists’, I don’t care — I care about my family, and about my country.”

Breitbart London contacted the Polish lawmaker for his thoughts on the explosive interview, asking if he still felt confident that it was Poland’s strategy on the migrant crisis which had spared his country from the radical Islamic terror attacks which have plagued countries such as Germany, Sweden, and Spain.

Mr Tarczyński insisted that “strategy” did not come into it and that the Law and Justice government’s decision to refuse migrants from the Middle East and North Africa came down to something much more simple.

“It hasn’t been about strategy for us, but simply keeping our promises to the Polish people,” he explained.

“We promised to say no to illegal immigrants in Poland before the elections in 2015, and we have kept our promises to the voters who elected us because that’s what they expected,” he said.

“It’s incredible that these people in the European media and the European Commission — who are unelected, by the way — can’t understand this. We made a promise to the people, and we have a democratic responsibility to keep it.”

Mr Tarczyński described how he had visited genuine refugees in the Lebanese camps neighbouring Syria several times — “unlike many of Poland’s critics” — and that they made it clear to them that genuinely needy refugees simply could not afford to pay people-smugglers to make the long journey through the Near East and South-Eastern Europe to the welfare states of North-West Europe.

He added that, as the migrant crisis expanded to take in sub-Saharan Africans as well as the Middle-Easterners, open borders were simply not a viable solution to the problem.

“There are a billion people in Africa,” he said matter of factly. “In the European Union, we have what, 500 million? How many Africans can we take?” he asked.

“Don’t misunderstand me, we want to help the people who are suffering, but we need to help them where they are, at home. It’s not about being racist, nationalist — it’s about adopting a logical, rational system….

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Immigration Anarchists vs. National Security: Dismantling ICE would lower America’s shields in a dangerous era.

July 5, 2018/in Featured, Immigration, National Security, Policy, Politics/by Michael Cutler

Just when you thought you’d heard and seen it all, members of the Looney Left have shown that there is no end to the insanity and depravity that they would foist upon America and Americans.

Their creation of “Sanctuary Cities” has done incredible damage to national security and public safety by harboring and shielding illegal aliens, including those who have serious criminal convictions from detection by ICE. These bastions of anarchy should be referred to as “Magnet Cities” because they attract international terrorists and fugitives and transnational gang members. In point of fact, Sanctuary Cities Endanger – National Security and Public Safety.

Not content with this insanity, some politicians are now demanding that ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) be dismantled altogether, creating a de facto “Sanctuary Country.”

They attempt to justify this lunatic proposal by decrying the separation of illegal alien children from their parents when they are arrested for entering the United States without inspection.

In this Orwellian era, smugglers who assist aliens in entering the United States without inspection are referred to as “Human Traffickers.” Years ago these criminals were referred to as “Alien Smugglers.” In point of fact, I was assigned to the Anti-Smuggling Unit of the New York District Office in the late 1970’s.

There is a major difference in the perceptions created by this deceptive word-smithing, creating the false illusion that somehow these illegal aliens are “victims of human trafficking.”

To be clear, aliens who are brought to the United States through coercion or deception, are truly the victims of human trafficking. However, aliens who pay smugglers to enter the United States illegally are not victims but co-conspirators!

Currently hundreds of thousands of American children are in foster care for a number of reasons that include the fact that their parents have been arrested for committing various crimes and there are no family members who can care for them.

This is the unfortunate but unavoidable consequence of prosecuting any law violators who have children.

The media also ignores that many of the illegal alien children were separated from their families before they came to the U.S. / Mexico border when their parents gave their children over to criminal human traffickers / alien smugglers who then attempted to smuggle these unaccompanied children into the United States. The potential, in fact, exists that even when very young children are found in the care of their “parents” that these adults really are not the parents of the children but are posing as the parents of these alien children in the hopes of not being taken into custody.

Consequently it would be reckless for the Border Patrol to release these very young children along with the adults who brought them here, without first being certain that the adults are truly the parents of these young children.

We cannot rule out the possibility that infants and extremely young children may have been kidnapped by criminals and smugglers to be used as a “get out of jail card” if caught by the Border Patrol.

Therefore I would strongly recommend that DNA testing be conducted before any of these young children are reunited with those claiming to be their parents.

Immigration law enforcement is central and critical to national security, consequently terminating the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would do irreparable harm to national security and public safety and would violate the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission staff comprised of attorneys and agents of various federal agencies noted this about the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior: “abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity.”

Termination of immigration law enforcement from the interior would also flood America with a virtually limitless supply of foreign workers, thus displacing huge numbers of American and lawful immigrant workers, driving down wages, and resulting in huge increases in remittances wired home by foreign workers, greatly increasing the U.S. national debt and stifling the U.S. economy.

The stampede would overwhelm America’s infrastructure including mass transit, education, healthcare and other such systems and services.

The common mission for all five branches of the U.S. military is to keep America’s enemies as far from our shores as possible. However, today not all enemy combatants are members of the military of foreign nations.

International terrorists must also be considered enemy combatants who engage in asymmetrical warfare. Some of these terrorists are supported by foreign governments such as Iran as I noted in my recent article, Congressional Hearing: Iranian Sleeper Cells Threaten U.S.

Unlike enemy saboteurs during World War II, who sought to enter the United States surreptitiously on U-Boats, today’s terrorists and enemy combatants seek to infiltrate the United States by entering without inspection by running our borders or stowing away on ships or by subverting the lawful entry process conducted at ports of entry by committing visa fraud as nonimmigrant (temporary) visitors, as refugees or as lawful admitted permanent resident immigrants.

Border security and the interior enforcement of our immigration laws are, in a very real sense, extensions of the primary mission of the U..S. military, to protect the United States and its citizens from the Damoclean threats posed by terrorists and other enemy combatants.

The official report, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel focused specifically on the ability of the terrorists to travel around the world, enter the United States and ultimately embed themselves in the United States going about their deadly preparations.and carry out an attack.

Here are some key excerpts:

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.

If the United States stopped deporting aliens who entered the United States without inspection, there would be no reason to continue to spend nearly 14 billion dollars per year on CBP (Customs and Border Protection) to conduct inspections at ports of entry and to operate the Border Patrol to interdict those who attempt to evade that important inspections process.

Furthermore, the interior enforcement mission involves much more than simply arresting and deporting aliens who enter the U.S. illegally or subsequent to lawfully entering the U.S. commit crimes and/or violations of their immigration status.

Immigration fraud investigations are critical to the integrity of the immigration system and to national security.

The report, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel addressed immigration fraud this way:

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.”

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.

ICE agents are also conduct investigations into crooked employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens- not out of compassion but greed, paying these employees substandard wages under often illegally hazardous conditions.

ICE agents also play a major role in various task forces.

In fact, ICE contributes the second largest contingent of law enforcement personnel to the JTTF (Joint Terrorism Task Force) because virtually all international terrorists violate immigration laws to enter the United States and embed themselves in our country.

Another critical task force, and one I am intimately familiar with, is the Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) where I was assigned for the final ten years of my INS career.

There is a clear nexus between alien smuggling and drug smuggling and, indeed, today much of the alien smuggling crimes are committed by members of major drug trafficking organizations.

Furthermore, since heroin and cocaine are not produced in the U.S. and much of the meth and marijuana sold by drug trafficking organizations are smuggled into the United States, aliens tend to head up most of these operations in the U.S.

Calls for terminating ICE are tantamount to calling for “shields down” in a particularly dangerous era.

Politician who seeks the termination of ICE should hear from the voters in the voting booth.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

ICE + Local Police Cooperation — A winning formula.

July 2, 2018/in Immigration, National Security, Policy, Politics, Regulation/by Michael Cutler

On June 21, 2018 ICE posted a news release, Honduran man pleads guilty to transporting illegal aliens. This successful prosecution was only possible because of the able assistance provided to ICE by a Fairfax County police officer.

Here is an excerpt from this news release:

According to court documents, Danny Josue Zelaya-Ortiz, aka “Jose Castro”, 29, was part of a conspiracy to charge illegal aliens in the United States a fee for transporting them from Texas to other states across the country. In April 2018, Zelaya-Ortiz picked up at least six alien passengers, all of whom had been smuggled into the United States from the Mexico border. Zelaya was driving the passengers towards Maryland and the New York area when his vehicle was stopped in Virginia by Fairfax County Police on April 25, 2018. He was cited for an improper vehicle tag display and driving without an operator’s license. Homeland Security Investigations special agents responded to the scene after it was determined Zelaya-Ortiz and the passengers had no lawful status in the United States. Zelaya-Ortiz admitted he knew the passengers were illegal aliens and that he received payments for his role in the scheme. At the time of the crime, Zelaya-Ortiz had been in the country illegally after having been twice removed by immigration officials.

Before criminals can be successfully prosecuted for their crimes, these law violators obviously must first be identified and evidence of their crimes must be accumulated.

The above-noted case illustrates the importance of routine and effective cooperation between local police and ICE to facilitating federal investigations into immigration law violations. In this instant case Danny Josue Zelaya-Ortiz, aka “Jose Castro,” an illegal alien from Honduras who had been arrested and deported on at least three previous occasions was taken into custody by ICE, along with several illegal aliens he was caught transporting. from the U.S./Mexican border to Maryland and ultimately to New York City.

This illustrates that illegal immigration impacts every state of the United States, from border to border and coast to coast.

Zelaya-Ortiz is also an apparent co-conspirator in an alien smuggling criminal organization. He is subject to prosecution for multiple federal immigration-related crimes including illegal re-entry, which, depending on his possible criminal history, may expose him to a maximum prison sentence of up to 20 years in prison under the provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Smuggling, transporting, harboring and shielding illegal aliens are felonies under the provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1324.

The illegal aliens who were also taken into custody in this case, may also have committed various felonies but identifying those possible crimes will fall to the ICE agents who are pursuing this investigation.

Those illegal aliens, for reasons known only to them, had entered the United States surreptitiously without inspection. This in and of itself poses and obvious potential threat to national security and public safety.

The only reason that Zelaya-Ortiz was prosecuted is that a sharp-eyed police officer in Virginia took the initiative to contact ICE.

It is entirely possible that an ensuing investigation may also help ICE to identify the alien smuggling/human trafficking organization with which Zelay-Ortiz conspired.

It has been said that the longest voyage begins with the first step. Often the arrest of a member of a criminal conspiracy may well represent that first step along the path to the ultimate investigation into a massive criminal conspiracy.

To understand just how important this is, consider the following quote from the 9/11 Commission Staff Report 9/11 and Terrorist Travel found on page 61:

Exploring the Link between Human Smugglers and Terrorists

In July 2001, the CIA warned of a possible link between human smugglers and terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.149 Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that since 1999 human smugglers have facilitated the travel of terrorists associated with more than a dozen extremist groups.150 With their global reach and connections to fraudulent document vendors and corrupt government officials, human smugglers clearly have the “credentials” necessary to aid terrorist travel.

In this dangerous post-9/11 era we are frequently implored by our political leaders, “If you see something, say something.”

The idea is that because of a shortage of law enforcement officers, civilians must act as the “eyes and ears” of the police to augment the often sparse numbers of law enforcement officers.

This is an effective and obviously commonsense approach to law enforcement and public safety. However mayors of Sanctuary Cities prohibit law enforcement officers under their jurisdiction from applying that approach when they encounter those who violate our nation’s immigration laws, despite the fact that both the 9/11 Commission Reportand the official report prepared by the 9/11 Commission staff, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel repeatedly noted that multiple failures of the immigration system not only enabled the 9/11 hijacker-terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves, but was a major fact in other international terrorists found in the United States that the 9/11 Commission studied.

Additionally, in the years since the attacks of 9/11 a list of other foreign terrorists operating in the United States also exploited multiple failures of the immigration system.

Although mayors of Sanctuary Cities claim to be acting “compassionately” to protect “immigrants” from immigration law enforcement, in reality, lawful immigrants and nonimmigrant aliens such as tourists and foreign students need no “protection” from ICE as long as they abide by the terms of their respective admissions into the United States.

The only aliens who should be concerned about immigration law enforcement are those who violate those laws.

By prohibiting their police officers from cooperating with federal immigration law enforcement authorities mayors of Sanctuary Cities undermine the Constitution, the rule of law, public safety and national security. They place the law enforcement officers who operate under their command in the untenable position of having to violate their oaths of office.

By falsely, recklessly and maliciously portraying ICE agents and other law enforcement personnel who are engaged in the enforcement of our immigration laws, as “terrorists,” endangers the safety of those agents and their families as we have seen in recent news reports, and may compromise and obstruct their efforts to enforce our immigration laws- fundamental to national security and public safety.

The open hostility shown towards ICE agents by a laundry list of anarchist politicians on all levels of government, is also likely to have a chilling effect, inhibiting citizens and aliens alike from cooperating with ICE agents and reporting immigration crimes that result in the exploitation of aliens as well as the presence of foreign terrorists and transnational criminals.

This is certainly contrary to commonsense, morality and the well being of America and Americans.

One of my previous articles, Sanctuary Cities Protect Crooked Employers and Human Traffickers focused on the irreparable damage created when police officers are prevented from working with ICE personnel, ostensibly creating a “sanctuary.”

In reality, the only individuals who are being protected by these insane and illegal policies are transnational criminals, international terrorists and international fugitives from justice. However, this creates a virtual “free fire zone” for innocent people, often the ethnic immigrants, who live in the various ethnic immigrant communities around the United States all too often fall victim to the predatory crimes of these pernicious aliens who infest those beleaguered communities because they were shielded from discovery by ICE although they should have been removed from the United States.

Where criminal aliens are concerned, the surest way of effectively dealing with recidivism is deportation!

As I noted in yet another previous article, Sanctuary cities Betray America, Americans and Immigrants.

Conversely, synergistic cooperation between local police with ICE agents and other immigration law enforcement personnel can be a highly effective force-multiplier to combat dangerous crimes that may well have far-reaching consequences.

This coming election the question that must be asked by the electorate is simple and straight-forward, “Does the candidate stand with Americans or with transnational gangs and international terrorists?”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Border Patrol Rescues 6-Year-Old Boy Abandoned By Immigrant Smugglers In The Arizona Desert

Mexico Reduces Legal Age Of Sexual Consent To 12

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

IMMIGRATION FRAUD: ICE investigation uncovers company that defrauded Americans out of jobs.

July 1, 2018/in Culture War, Economy, Immigration, Policy, Politics, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Michael Cutler

Immigration fraud has been identified as a key method of entry and embedding for international terrorists, and fugitives from justice and for transnational gang members. This was the underlying premise for my booklet, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill.

However immigration fraud may also be committed by companies who seek to create the illusion of complying with our nation’s immigration laws while, in reality, discriminating against American workers by hiring foreign workers for whom they apply for temporary work visas such as the H-2B visa.

It is important to remember that prior to World War II the primary authority for the enforcement and administration of our nation’s immigration laws was primarily vested in the Labor Department to protect American workers from unfair competition from foreign workers. This was of particular importance back then as America was attempting to dig out of the Great Depression.

Our immigration laws were enacted to protect national security, American lives and the livelihoods of Americans.

Nevertheless, wacky candidates for political office such as television actress Cynthia Nixon, who is seeking to unseat New York Governor’s Andrew Cuomo, has called for dismantling ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) as reported in the June 22, 2018 New York Post article, Cynthia Nixon labels ICE a ‘terrorist organization’

On June 26, 2018 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Justice Department Settles Claims Against Landscaping Company for Discriminating Against U.S. Workers.

Here is how the DOJ press release begins:

The Justice Department today reached a settlement agreement with Triple H Services LLC, (Triple H), a landscaping company based in Newland, North Carolina, that conducts business in Virginia and four other states. The agreement resolves the Department’s investigation into whether Triple H discriminated against qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status by preferring to hire temporary workers with H-2B visas, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

The Department’s investigation found that although Triple H went through the motions of advertising over 450 landscape laborer vacancies in five states, it did so in a manner that misled U.S. workers about the available positions and prevented or deterred some from applying. The Department found that Triple H did not consider several qualified U.S. workers who applied for positions in Virginia during the recruitment period, and instead hired H-2B visa workers. In several states where jobs were available, the Department found that Triple H prematurely closed the online job application process for U.S. worker applicants, filled positions with H-2B visa workers without first advertising the jobs to U.S. workers in the relevant locations, or advertised vacancies in a manner that did not make the postings visible to job seekers using state workforce agency online services.

The Department concluded that in taking these actions, Triple H effectively denied U.S. workers access to jobs based on its preference for hiring temporary H-2B visa workers to fill the positions. Refusing to consider or hire qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status violates the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, regardless of whether an employer has complied with other rules governing the use of temporary employment-based visa programs.

A common claim made by anti-American globalists is that the “immigrants do the work Americans won’t do” while blithely ignoring that Americans will do any job, for a reasonable wage under lawful conditions.

On a personal note, my dad was a tradesman/construction worker, a plumber who worked with his buddies in the construction trades on all sorts of job sites building houses and office buildings. He worked on the 1964 New York World’s Fair and on John F. Kennedy International Airport.

For my dad and his co-workers, the word “impossible” did not exist. For them that word simply represented a challenge because they did not believe that any job was too filthy, dangerous or back-breaking to do.

Today millions of hard-working Americans of every race, religion and ethnicity continue to trudge off to their jobs the are fundamental to our nation, happy to earn that all-important paycheck.

Unscrupulous employers, however, seek to slash their costs by hiring and exploiting foreign workers who are often less qualified than their American counterparts but are willing to work for substandard wages under substandard conditions.

While globalists frequently attempt to play the “compassion card” there is nothing compassionate about exploiting foreign workers or screwing American workers out of their jobs.

The Democratic Party that used to represent American blue collar workers have sold them out by advocating for the flooding of America with huge numbers of foreign workers. Often American and lawful immigrants pay for this betrayal with their jobs and their ability to support themselves and their families. All too often this results in these American and lawful immigrants becoming homeless.

Homelessness has soared to record levels, often engendering the separation of children from their parents. Ironically while the Democrats vociferously wailed about the administration prosecuting illegal aliens who are caught entering the United States covertly, without inspection and hence separating the children from their parents, these same politicians completely ignore the way that American kids have been taken from their homeless parents.

The investigation into the discriminatory hiring practices of Triple H Services addressed in the DOJ press release uncovered apparent fraud.

Undoubtedly there are many, many other companies operating throughout the United States who defraud various elements of the immigration system to displace American workers to drive down wages and, perhaps, force their workers to work under illegally dangerous conditions.

All that continues to protect them from discovery is the abject lack of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents.

As I noted in my previous article, neither of the bills proposed by House Speaker Ryan or House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte include the funds to hire a single additional ICE agent, although the Goodlatte Bill would increase staffing at CBP (Customs and Border Protection) by 10,000 employees, with half going for the hiring of additional Border Patrol agents.

However, help is on the way.

On June 26, 2018 ICE posted a press release that simply reads, ICE is Hiring.

As we have seen with ramping up enforcement along the U.S./Mexican border, by the stated policy of “Zero Tolerance” for illegal entry of aliens, focusing all efforts on that dangerous and problematic border will not, ultimately succeed.

In November 2001, just weeks after the attacks of September 11 I testified at a hearing before the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus chaired by Congressman Tom Tancredo to explore how the immigration system had failed to abysmally as to permit our nation to suffer the worst terror attack in the history of our nation.

In my prepared testimony I raised the issue of the need to think of the immigration enforcement program as resting on the three legs of what I described as the “Immigration Enforcement Tripod.” In my concept the Border Patrol enforces our immigration laws from between ports of entry, the Inspectors enforce the immigration laws at ports of entry and the special agents of the INS (today ICE) enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.

Traditionally, that third leg representing the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States has always been much shorter than the other legs. Consequently aliens came to expect that if they can, by whatever means possible, enter the United States, they will have little to fear if they violate our immigration laws, commit crimes or attempt to defraud the immigration system to acquire lawful status by committing immigration fraud.

Similarly, employers who hire illegal aliens or engage in fraud to discriminate against American workers also have virtually nothing to fear.

Of course, the abomination of Sanctuary Cities exacerbate this problem in apparent violation of Title 8 U.S. Code § 1324 which deems the aiding, abetting, inducing, harboring and shielding illegal aliens from detention to be felonies when done by individuals or organizations.

While a border wall would help to secure that dangerous U.S./Mexican border, without meaningful interior enforcement of our immigration laws, aliens will continue to find ways of entering the United States, spurred on by Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States and a lack of assets for the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.

Once again the Trump administration is acting to close the loopholes and thus protect national security, public safety and the livelihoods of American and lawful immigrant workers.

Only fools could argue with those vital goals.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

They’re coming to America

July 1, 2018/in Commentary, Immigration, Policy, Politics/by Victor Sharpe

Neil Diamond’s acclaimed hit song, “They’re Coming to America,” was his patriotic interpretation of historic and legal immigration into the United States. The powerful melody ends with an interpolation of the traditional and patriotic song, “My Country, Tis of Thee.”

But now we have illegal aliens infiltrating our 1,989-mile-long southern border, and many are coming to the sound of a very different and horribly discordant melody, one often tinged with Islamic and Arabic overtones.

According to released data from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency as far back as 2014, an estimated 5,063 individuals from nations that harbor Islamic terrorists were arrested in that year alone trying to cross into America from Mexico. None of these were Mexicans, Guatemalans, or Hondurans; they were citizens from far-away nations consumed by militant Islam. It has been going on for many years and here are some of the figures from five years ago:

Afghanistan, where U.S. troops are still battling the Taliban, was the home of 70 people arrested at the southern frontier in 2013 alone.

Syria, birthplace of ISIS and a civil war ravaged nation, with some 400,000 dead, saw 72 of its nationals captured at our southern border.

Sudan, designated by the State Department as an official “state sponsor of terrorism,” where Christians in the south have been the subject of massive genocide by the Arab Muslim north, was the starting point for 168 individuals who were stopped heading to the U.S.A.

Iran, the ultimate Islamic state sponsor of terrorism, busy trying to build atomic weapons, saw a total of 257 Iranians caught infiltrating our southern border in 2013.

Nigeria – headquarters of al-Qaeda offshoot Boko-Haram, which practices child-sex slavery and anti-Christian genocide, is the nation from which 492 people departed before getting caught on their way into America.

But these are only the culprits that were caught. Those that escaped capture and successfully infiltrated the U.S. may now well run into the thousands and constitute numerous sleeper cells waiting to unleash atrocities in our towns and cities in the name of Allah. Indeed, the past numbers quoted above are dwarfed by the current rate of infiltration.

The U.S. Transportation Safety Administration recognized the following nations as either state sponsors of terrorism or as countries of interest. They included Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, and Yemen. This information was available in Table 34 of the 2013 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics. Every one of these states are Muslim with the exception of Nigeria, which remains torn in bloody conflict between the Muslim north and the mostly Christian south.

It can be assumed that many of the illegal aliens infiltrating our southern border from the suspect countries are not necessarily terrorists, but we know from bitter experience how much horror can be inflicted upon America by just a handful. 9/11 vividly illustrated the mass carnage that 19 such evildoers from Saudi Arabia could perpetrate and how it changed America for ever.

Congressman Ted Poe (R-TX) had told CBS’s local Dallas Fort Worth affiliate some years ago that he believed ISIS would use Texas’s southern border to enter the United States. At the time he said:

“Of course the way they would come to the United States would be through the porous border with Mexico. The drug cartels will bring people, including young children, into the country no matter who they are – for money … It is well known that drug cartels are assisting Islamic terrorists in gaining entrance and crossing the border. In fact it’s been going on for some time.”

President Obama’s sweeping plan to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens had been enacted by executive order, bypassing Congress and considered by many to be an illegal act. As Obama had chillingly said on attaining the presidency: “elections have consequences.”

Obama pushed forward his 10-part plan, which included a deportation reprieve, known as “deferred action,” for illegal aliens who came to the U.S. as children, Those provisions gave some 5 million illegal aliens already in the U.S. the right to stay and work. Liberals, liars and lefties call them the “dreamers.”

So-called ‘progressives’ loved the move by Obama, seeing it as bringing in people who will vote Democrat and perhaps destroy any chance of Republicans ever again gaining a majority in Congress, let alone seeing another conservative Republican President in office. The Left loves it as it also affirms that other alarming promise of Barack Hussein Obama that he would “transform America.”

Never was an American president more contemptuous of the United States than Obama or acted in a manner that revealed itself to be a clear and present danger to America’s very survival.

But Donald J. Trump is now our president and is driving the loony Left into a seething maelstrom of incandescent frustration. We need look no further than the irrational and disgusting outbursts towards the First Lady than that of the likes of Peter Fonda and other “celebrities” along with unfunny comedians, ad nauseam. Or how about the appalling encouragement of mob violence spewing from the mouth of Maxine Waters who called for harassment and intimidation of President Trump’s cabinet members whenever they are seen in public.

Meanwhile, DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who was recently attacked by a mob of Democrats while she was at a restaurant, reported that: “From October 2017 to this February, we have seen a staggering 315% increase in illegal aliens, fraudulently using children to pose as family units to gain entry into the country.”

And a source told The Daily Caller that some of the so-called “family units” that have been “broken up” after crossing the southern border aren’t actually families but illegal aliens posing with children in an attempt to gain asylum in the United States.

Meanwhile, threats to America’s very survival must be prevented at all costs. Muslim immigrants who come to America, but nevertheless embrace Islamic Sharia law over the Constitution and laws of the United States remain a threat, just as they have become in Western Europe and the United Kingdom.

President Trump seeks to apply our already existing immigration laws, seal our border and return to the model of legal immigration whereby new Americans enthusiastically embrace the Constitution and take part fully in American life as proud fellow citizens. We pray that he succeeds.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Renew America. © Victor Sharpe

Reporter files assault charges against Maxine Waters after confrontation on Capitol Hill

June 29, 2018/in Courts & Law, Immigration, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Defend The Border

Source: Bizpac Review, by Samantha Chang, June 27, 2018

Journalist Laura Loomer filed a police report accusing Congresswoman Maxine Waters of assaulting her when she did to Waters what the California Democrat urged liberals to do to Trump aides: Confront them in public.

Loomer tweeted: “I filed a police report w/Capitol Police against Maxine Waters. Yesterday when I confronted her on Capitol Hill, she ASSAULTED me. She hit my hand, then she swatted me in the face twice w/her papers. I’m pressing charges.”

Loomer chronicled the alleged assault on video and blogged about it at Big League Politics.

The brouhaha erupted when Loomer asked Waters why she incited her supporters to confront Trump aides and not allow them to eat or do anything else in public without being bullied by an angry mob.

Loomer approached Waters by saying: “I’m a Trump supporter. I’m also a conservative journalist.”

Waters cut her off by saying: “Please come to my office and sit down with me.”

Loomer followed up by saying: “I just wanted to ask you: Where are conservatives allowed to go? Do we have to sit at the back of the bus? Where can we eat? Where can a conservative eat at a restaurant in Washington, D.C.?”

Waters responded while scurrying away: “Please come to my office and talk with me.”

Loomer then asked, “You’re talking about civility. Do you think it’s civil to call for the harassment of Trump officials?”

When Waters approached the elevator, she hit Loomer in the face with a bunch of papers. A burly man then got in Loomer’s face and pushed her away while repeatedly shouting: “Ma’am, it’s a members’ elevator!”

In the background, Waters is seen gloating and apparently sticking her tongue out as Loomer is pushed away from the elevator door.

Maxine Waters appears to tauntingly stick her tongue out at Laura Loomer, an American voter.

Waters — a 13-term Congresswoman — recently urged her supporters to gather a crowd, surround, and harass Trump aides to protest the longstanding immigration policy that she helped sign into law many years ago.

After Waters’ incitement of mob bullying, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders and her children were kicked out of Red Hen and stalked when they went across the street to eat at another restaurant.

Shortly afterward, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was surrounded, bullied and spit on by an angry mob at a movie theater.

Maxine Waters said nothing when the Obama administration separated children from their illegal-immigrant parents and mass-deported illegals during his eight years in office.Waters has been a member of Congress for the past 27 years and said nothing about the issue until this month, when it became a Democratic talking point amid the flailing Mueller investigation.While Waters claims she’s a champion for minorities, in fact many members of her own community can’t stand her.As BizPac Review has reported, Waters’ career highlights include being rated one of the “most corrupt” members of Congress in 2005, 2006, and 2008 by the George Soros-funded liberal watchdog CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington).

In June 2017, Waters was slammed by a black female voter from her California district. The woman accused the 13-term Congresswoman of being a “black racist” whose rhetoric and inactions have caused African-Americans to lose jobs to illegal aliens.

The black Trump supporter said she’s disgusted that Waters constantly race-baits to win votes from black constituents and then callously ignores them after they re-elect her.

“You are a black racist! You hate blacks!” the woman said. “All the jobs went to illegals! You gave our jobs to illegals! We want you out!”

From JFK to the Resistance: What has happened to the Democratic Party?

June 29, 2018/in Culture War, Featured, Immigration, Policy, Politics, Taxes/by Dr. Rich Swier

The July/August 2017 issue of The Atlantic had an article titled “What’s Wrong With the Democrats?” by Franklin Foer. Foer wrote:

Leaderless and loud, the Resistance has become the motive power of the Democratic Party. Presidential hopefuls already strive to anticipate its wishes. Elected officials have restructured their political calculus to avoid getting on its wrong side. The feistiness and agitation of the moment are propelling the party to a new place.

But where? The question unnerves Democrats, because the party has no scaffolding. All the dominant leaders of the last two generations—the Clintons, Barack Obama—have receded. Defeat discredited the party’s foundational strategy—or, at the very least, exposed it as a wishful description of a more distant future, rather than a clear plan for victory in the present. Resistance has given the Democrats the illusion of unity, but the reality is deeply conflicted. Two of the party’s largest concerns—race and class—reside in an increasing state of tension, a tension that will grow as the party turns toward the next presidential election.

To produce a governing majority, the party will need to survive an unsettling reckoning with itself. Donald Trump didn’t just prevail over the Democrats; he called into doubt their old truths. [Emphasis added]

The Democratic Party is eating its own. Watch this video about how a Hispanic socialist candidate won the Democrat primary in New York because she targeted her Democratic opponent was white.

As a young man I was a JFK Democrat. He was my American idol. It was the time of Camelot and at the peak of American economic, political and military power. JFK embodied a vision of the future that Americans embraced.

Allow me to point out a few examples of what JFK brought to the Democratic Party:

JFK was a Catholic. He held those beliefs and spoke about his beliefs. JFK stated, “For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew— or a Quaker or a Unitarian or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you — until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.”
JFK was a decorated Navy Combat Veteran. JFK Commanded PT109. He served proudly and loved the military. He created the U.S. Army Special Forces, which led to the creation of special operations forces such as the Navy SEAL program. JFK said, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” JFK supported compulsary military service and noted, “A young man who does not have what it takes to perform military service is not likely to have what it takes to make a living. Today’s military rejects include tomorrow’s hard-core unemployed.”
NASA and reaching for the stars. It was JFK who believed in American ingenuity and wanted to put a man on the moon. He and his policies did just that.
The National Rifle Association. JFK was a life member of the NRA. On March 20, 1961 JFK became a life member and in a letter to the NRA President Franklin L. Orth stated, “Through competitive matches and sports in coordination with the National Board for Promotion of Rifle Practice, the Association fills an important role in our national defense effort, and fosters in an active and meaningful fashion the spirit of the Minutemen.” BHO hates the NRA and all it stands for. BHO, his administration and Democrats have taken an adversarial position on the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. JFK supported Second Amendment rights for Americans, saying in an April 1960 statement, “By calling attention to a well-regulated militia, the security of the nation and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, our founding forefathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of government tyranny, which gave rise to the Second Amendment, will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains a major declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason, I believe the Second Amendment will always be important.”
JFK added the M16 (AR15) rifle into the U.S. military inventory. It was JFK who introduced the Armalite M16 (AR-15) rifle into the inventory of the U.S. Military. Under JFK, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14 , the AR-15 and the AK-47 . The Army’s test report stated only the M14 was suitable for Army use, but Vance wondered about the impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to investigate the testing methods used, who reported that the testers showed undue favor to the M14. McNamara ordered a halt to M14 production in January 1964. In November, the Army ordered 85,000 XM16E1s for experimental use, and the Air Force ordered another 19,000. Meanwhile the Army carried out another project, the Small Arms Weapons Systems (SAWS) , on general infantry firearm needs in the immediate future. They highly recommended the immediate adoption of the weapon, so much so that they started referring to it as the M16.
Immigration policy was much different under JFK. JFK in his book “A Nation of Immigrants” wrote, “The interaction of disparate cultures, the vehemence of the ideals that led the immigrants here, the opportunity offered by a new life, all gave America a flavor and a character that make it as unmistakable and as remarkable to people today as it was to Alexis de Tocqueville in the early part of the nineteenth century.” In his book JFK Kennedy outlines three main reasons why immigration to the U.S. took place: freedom from religious persecution, political oppression and economic hardship. While JFK believed in a generous, fair and flexible immigration policy he did not believe in open borders and no immigration policy.
On Federal taxation and balancing the budget. As JFK wrote on September 18, 1963, “A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget….As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.” BHO has raised taxes, spent like no other president and increased the federal deficit to historic levels.
Communism and the Free World. As JFK stated in his 1961 inaugural address, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This much we pledge —- and more. To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder….We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.”
JFK and McCarthyism. Joseph Kennedy had befriended McCarthy because he found him to be a likable fellow Irish-Catholic who had all the right ideas on the domestic communist menace. These warm feelings were quickly transferred to the entire Kennedy family. JFK liked the fact that McCarthy went after the “elites” in the State Department whom JFK regarded with contempt. Even before McCarthy made accusations against the State Department of subversion, JFK had already aligned himself with the militant anti-communists who blamed the Truman State Department for the “loss” of China. So JFK declared on the House floor in January 1949, “The responsibility for the failure of our foreign policy in the Far East rests squarely with the White House and the Department of State.”

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

Just like Foer, I ask, “What has happened to the Democratic Party?”

REWIND: When Obama Created A Humanitarian Crisis

June 28, 2018/in Commentary, Immigration, Policy, Politics/by Rod Thomson

When conservatarian talk show host Glenn Beck, accompanied by Sen. Ted Cruz, took soccer balls and teddy bears to the waves of children illegally swamping the southern U.S. border, conservatives were somewhat conflicted.

Many appreciated the compassion but sharply criticized the move for potentially adding to the problem by making it more attractive for more children to come (be sent) which would swell the problem. Many liberals considered it a cheap publicity stunt. The media yawned and barely covered it except to question Beck’s motives.

The year was 2014. Barack Obama bestrode the halls of the White House. And U.S. policy at the border was chaotic at best. But Beck didn’t create the situation. He responded to it. The Obama Administration’s lax enforcement of national laws and insinuations of a warm welcome had prompted the humanitarian crisis of tens of thousands of Central American children stacking up at the border.

Of course, as has been the case in recent years, Mexico was a bad actor in this. As this terrible neighbor is doing today, it created a secure path for the children to be ushered straight through from their decrepit and corrupt countries to be dumped at America’s steps.

The media covered the crisis as a humanitarian one that just sort of arose, and put the Obama administration in a tough spot. How would they deal with it? But this did not simply happen like a hurricane or tornado. It was man-made in Central America, Mexico and Washington, D.C. — exactly like the current family separation issue, except add in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals mandating that families cannot be kept together.

About 18 months before this, President Obama unconstitutionally, and probably illegally, granted blanket amnesty to about 800,000 mostly Central Americans who came to the country illegally. He did not follow the law or enforce the law. He simply bypassed it. Further, he began releasing illegal aliens into the interior of the country.

News of changes to American border policies travel like wildfire through Mexico and Central America.

“One of the consequences we’re seeing on the border is a humanitarian crisis that is a direct consequence of Obama’s lawlessness,” Cruz said at the time. He was making the totally plausible case that by granting amnesty to such large numbers of illegal aliens and relaxing border enforcement, Obama sent a message throughout Central America that precipitated a “change in behavior” — sending children northward.

Cruz was not alone. Many Republicans and Americans saw in the President’s actions an open invitation to all aspiring illegal aliens. So did the human-trafficking cartels and coyotes who run people across the border. So did the Mexican government that created the corridor for passage as long as they did not stop in Mexico. They would be America’s problem — just like Mexico’s poor.

The result was the 2014 humanitarian crisis on the border that captured considerable attention without assigning any substantial blame to Obama.

Yet the conditions that resulted from Obama’s actions were arguably much worse than the conditions in which children were separated from their families and placed in the care of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

But the media did not blame Obama for the human suffering and misery. He was not called a cruel animal, racist and xenophobe. No mass protests erupted. No groups targeted his staff in restaurants, at movies or other public places. No Republican Congressmen urged political opponents to harass Obama staffers wherever they found them.

Trump has played his role in the poison in our society right now, but it is not the major one. Trump is in many ways a response to the slow-drip poison injected by a deeply agenda-driven media that alternately lectured or vilified conservative, traditional Americans and ran interference for the endless scandals throughout the Obama administration. It’s a response to the ceaseless demonstrations and protests against traditional America, and Republicans’ inability or unwillingness to fight back.

It’s worth remembering Obama’s role in generating a full-scale crisis — and the lack of responsibility attached to him.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

The Democrats’ Soap Opera

June 28, 2018/in Commentary, Courts & Law, Culture War, Immigration, Policy, Politics/by Tim Bryce

When asked about the recent problem of separating children from their illegal immigrant families, I burst out laughing, which didn’t go over well with some people in the room who thought I was being insensitive to their plight. Of course I am sympathetic, but I realized this was just another soap opera manufactured by the Democrats. Separating children from illegal immigrants is certainly not new as it was done for at least the last two administrations. President Trump certainly didn’t invent the law, he just enforced it. Democrat strategists are perfectly cognizant of this, but they desperately want to convince the American public the president is evil. As such, they have turned this into a huge photo op to try and demonstrate their compassion and the president’s lack thereof.

We are now just five short months away from the midterm elections, and with each day it becomes painfully obvious the Democrats have no proposals for solving any problems. So, instead of working through the legislative process, they attack the president. Their mission is simple: keep the heat on President Trump, thereby defacing him and anyone associated with him, particularly Republican candidates.

The theatrics of the Left is rather entertaining as they can now produce crocodile tears on demand, quote Jesus to justify their position (someone they abandoned years ago), and claim outrage over the slightest disagreement. Their histrionics of pseudo-sympathy is all rather amusing but not the slightest bit credible. They may impress the main stream media, but the American public is not swallowing it.

In a recent Gallup Poll, Americans who are satisfied with the direction of the country has reached a twelve year high, going back to September 2005. In the survey, all age groups and genders showed a marked improvement, but in particular, independents showed an eleven point bump, making it bad news for the Democrats.

Since the Democrats have no policy or program to offer American voters, other than increased taxation and larger government, they practice attack politics, where character assassination is commonplace and identity politics is used to ridicule their opposition. From now until the November elections, the Democrats will spend little time legislating and more time attacking the president.

This is all being choreographed rather precisely. As soon as the public has grown weary of the illegal immigration problem, another “catastrophe” will emerge with considerable fanfare. The Democrats cannot win by attacking the economy, the military or veterans, so they will go after such things as the environment and the EPA, housing and HHS, or the FCC, FDA, or Department of Transportation. In other words, a systematic attack on the various government departments affecting our lives. The brouhaha du jour is all designed to generate hate against the Republicans. Again, the people are seeing through this as evidenced by the recent Gallup poll.

Do not ask the Democrats about the growing Gross Domestic Product, the decreasing trade deficit, the shrinking unemployment rate, or the diminishing number of people on food stamps. These are all indicators of a prosperous economy improving under the Trump administration, something simply not discussed by the Left.

The main stream media plays a large role in all of this and could easily clear up misunderstandings if they wanted to. The problem is, they do not want to. As an instrument of the Left they are complicit in the shenanigans of the Democrats. It is no wonder, the American public no longer trusts the media. As one of my readers recently said to me, a lawyer from Tampa, “We’ve stopped watching the mainstream media. They are becoming irrelevant, except as a foil to show our disgust.”

The Democrat’s Soap Opera in the media reflects a desperate party resorting to desperate measures. Regardless of how they spin it though, the American public is not buying into it. The Democrats, therefore, are only burying themselves by not offering viable solutions. Although the media would have us believe a “Blue Tide” is rising, the truth is the Democrats are facing a brutal disaster in November, one which will reshape their party for years to come.

Keep the Faith!

Neither ‘Reform’ Bill Would Solve the Immigration Crisis: Here’s why they’re doomed to fail — by design.

June 27, 2018/in Culture War, Featured, Immigration, Policy, Politics, Religion, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Michael Cutler

Two well-known and powerful members of the House of Representatives, Speaker Paul Ryan and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte have proposed legislation to address the DACA aliens and a many other issues that all comprise failures of the immigration system.

The Goodlatte bill is seen as the “tougher” of the two bills.

It would fund the hiring of 10,000 additional employees for Customs and Border Protection including 5,000 additional Border Patrol Agents but no additional ICE agents.

Today, ICE has 6,000 agents, but half of them are enforcing customs or other non-immigration related laws.

Before we go further, consider this hypothetical question:

If President Trump was able to build the wall along the southern border that was 50 feet tall and topped with ultra high-voltage electrified concertina wire, what would a determined alien need to defeat that wall?

Some pundits would say that such an alien would simply need a 55 foot ladder. So to make things interesting, let me add that the device that could defeat President Trump’s wall could fit in the alien’s pocket.

We will consider the solution to the problem a bit further on, but first, on June 18, 2018 the Washington Times Examiner article, Paul Ryan’s immigration bill gains traction ahead of House votes provided an extremely limited comparison of the two competing bills as noted in this excerpt:

Goodlatte has acknowledged his own measure lacked the votes to pass, leaving the Ryan bill as the sole Republican option with any chance of becoming law.

The Ryan legislation includes four immigration reform requirements outlined by President Trump in January. That includes providing a special pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million Dreamers who came here as children, a reduction in chain migration, an end to the visa lottery system, and money for a wall along the southern border.

The Goodlatte/McCaul measure provides a more difficult pathway to citizenship and only for the approximately 800,000 people now enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program put in place by President Barack Obama. Goodlatte’s bill would end chain migration, the visa lottery system, and would authorize border wall funding.

Two outside groups who favor reduced immigration rates are critical of the Ryan plan, arguing that it amounts to amnesty for those who came to the country illegally, continues chain migration, and does not include a mandate for companies to use E-Verify, which some immigration reform advocates say is needed to curb illegal immigration. E-Verify is a system that ensures new hires are in the country legally.

Ryan has promised a vote on E-Verify in July and has also pledged consideration of a bill to create a program for immigrant agriculture workers.

President Trump has expressed a willingness to sign an immigration reform bill to finally end the immigration crisis.

Whether or not he would sign either of the two bills is not certain but interestingly, Chairman Goodlatte stated that even though he is the author of one of the two bills being considered, he would be willing to support the Ryan bill.

Both bills emphasize constructing the wall along the U.S. / Mexican border. Goodlatte’s bill would only provide legal status to aliens who have already participated in the DACA program while Ryan would also provide lawful status to aliens who would claim to have been eligible to participate in the DACA program but, for one reason or another, did not do so.

Estimates as to how many additional aliens could thus be processed for lawful status vary widely, from 1.8 million to double that number (3.6 million).

No one really knows how many aliens would actually make that claim but as I noted in a previous commentary, DACA: Trump and Congress Must Look Before They Leap- 800,000 DACA aliens just became 3.6 million.

There is absolutely no way to know how many aliens would attempt to game this program by falsely claiming to have entered the United States prior to their 16th birthdays. Records of entry are not created when aliens enter the United States without inspection by running our borders or stowing away on ships. The Ryan bill would enable aliens who are in their mid-thirties to file applications.

There would be so many applications that no interviews of applicants and field investigations to verify the information contained in applications would be possible.

The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel detailed numerous examples of instances where terrorists made use of visa and immigration benefit fraud- including political asylum fraud to enter the United States to also embed themselves in the United States.

Page 54 contained this excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot.”

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.

That excerpt above provides the answer to my question. An alien who has a green card or passport with a visa would not have to scale that wall but simply stroll into a port of entry and be cheerfully welcomed into the U.S. by CBP personnel. This is why immigration fraud is so dangerous.

Neither immigration bill calls for the hiring of a single additional ICE agent.

I tackled the necessity of effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws in my article, Border Security and the Immigration Colander.

Mandatory E-Verify is absolutely essential, however, without ICE agents to conduct field investigations, unscrupulous employers could easily defeat mandatory E-Verify by hiring illegal aliens “off the books.”

Immigration fraud undermines national security. While Goodlatte does call for assigning ICE agents to embassies around the world to enhance visa security, many aliens acquire various immigration benefits inside the United States by defrauding the adjudications process.

The Tsarnaev brothers who attacked the Boston Marathon and their other family members were granted political asylum by lying about “credible fear.” They were ultimately granted lawful immigrant status and one of the two terrorist brothers became a naturalized citizen by committing fraud.

The Goodlatte bill also has lots of other “goodies” for aliens, employers and immigration lawyers including a massive guest worker program for agricultural workers.

Without agents to police this program there would be no way to assure that aliens would not apply for such visas and then disappear, never showing up for work.

The Goodlatte bill would require that the employers of such errant workers to notify ICE, but without any ICE agents to seek these aliens, they will likely remain at large, joining the millions of other such illegal alien absconders who play the successful game of “Hide and seek” in America, because ICE has no agents who can seek.

Neither bill would address this major deficiency.

While on the topic of agricultural workers, the previously noted 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel contained this passage:

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.

Not all DACA aliens are from Latin America- indeed some are from the Middle East.

On March 21, 2012 the House Committee on Homeland Security that was then chaired by New York Congressman Peter King conducted a hearing into these planned operations. The topic of the hearing was, Iran, Hezbollah, and the Threat to the Homeland. The Huffington Post reported about that hearing, Peter King: Iran May Have ‘Hundreds’ Of Hezbollah Agents In U.S. If you think this is old news, read my recent article that focused on a recent hearing chaired by Peter King this past April 2018, Congressional Hearing: Iranian Sleeper Cells Threaten U.S.

“Sleepers” often commit immigration fraud to acquire lawful status as an embedding tactic.

Why in the world doesn’t either Ryan or Goodlatte seek increased resources for critical interior enforcement?

Only they can answer that question.

Finally, Goodlatte would provide an additional 55,000 high-tech foreign workers with visas. Not exactly good news for unemployed or under-employed highly-skilled, highly-educated and highly-experienced American workers or their families.

Neither bill would enable President Trump to keep his campaign promises to Americans and make America safe again!

RELATED ARTICLE: Immigration Fraud: Lies That

RELATED VIDEO: Violent Left Replaces American Flag with Refugee Flag.

EDITORS NOTE: The column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Comparing the Border Situation to Nazi Germany? That’s a Form of Holocaust Denial.

June 27, 2018/in Courts & Law, Culture War, Elections, Immigration, Must Read, Policy, Politics/by The Daily Signal

Last week, on the MSNBC show “Morning Joe,” MSNBC contributor Donny Deutsch said that every American who votes for President Donald Trump is a Nazi. His exact words: “If you vote for Trump, then you, the voter—you, not Donald Trump—are standing at the border like Nazis going, ‘You here. You here.’”

Now, as virtually every Jew of Deutsch’s generation knows, a Nazi saying, “You here. You here,” refers to guards at Nazi extermination camps sending Jews to gas chambers or to work the barracks.

Also last week, Gen. Michael Hayden, a former director of the CIA (a fact that, among other things, gives credence to the increasingly widespread realization that our intelligence elites have been morally and intellectually compromised) tweeted a photo of the tracks leading into Auschwitz-Birkenau, the most infamous Nazi extermination and concentration camps, with the caption: “Other governments have separated mothers and children.”

Deutsch, Hayden, and the myriad other fools who compare Trump to Hitler and the Nazis have utterly trivialized the Holocaust. As everyone who isn’t on the left knows, there is nothing morally analogous between the way the last three presidential administrations dealt with some children of immigrants who are in the country illegally and what the Nazis did to Jewish children.

American children are routinely separated from their parent when that parent is arrested, and if the arrestee is a single parent, the child is taken into government custody until other arrangements can be made. With regard to immigrants who are in the country illegally, the only way to avoid separation is to place the children in detention along with their arrested parent(s).

But this was expressly forbidden by the most left-wing court in America—the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—if detention lasts longer than 20 days, as it nearly always does when either a not-guilty plea or an asylum claim is made.

Moreover, as awful as separation from a parent is, these children were not treated like animals in cages but transferred to the care of relatives or foster homes, or housed with other detained children where they were provided with room, board, education, sports facilities, etc.

By contrast, Jewish children separated from their parents by Nazi guards were sent to gas chambers to die a gruesome, painful death by their lungs being filled with poisonous gas. And their parents almost always eventually suffered the same fate unless they were worked, starved, or tortured to death.

Comparing the two is not only a trivialization of the Holocaust; it is actually a form of Holocaust denial.

If Jewish children were treated by the Nazis the same way Central American children have been by America, then everything we know about the Holocaust is false.

Jewish children weren’t subjected to torturous medical experimentation, and they weren’t gassed and cremated. They were simply separated from their Jewish parents for a finite period of time, sent to stay with Jewish relatives or provided for by foster families while their parents were detained pending due-process legal proceedings.

According to Deutsch, Hayden, and all the leftists comparing America and Trump to the Nazis, Jewish children weren’t gassed; they played soccer while waiting to be reunited with their parents.

What is even more depressing than Deutsch and Hayden is the reaction—or silence—of most American Jewish organizations.

The Anti-Defamation League, which once defended Jewish interests, is becoming just another leftist interest group. I looked for some condemnation of Deutsch or Hayden and found none. Instead, in the words of the left-wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the Anti-Defamation League “made a direct comparison to the Holocaust.”

It tweeted: “Children separated from their parents during the Holocaust speak out about the trauma it has caused. How can anyone defend such inhumane policies?”

The only criticism the Anti-Defamation League could muster was this: “People need to be extremely careful in drawing comparisons to the Holocaust and the Nazi regime in whatever context it is used.” But it offered no condemnation of those who actually made this odious comparison.

Leftism has poisoned much of American Jewish life. That is the primary reason, as reported in the just released American Jewish Committee poll, American and Israeli Jews are so divided on so many issues.

There were rabbis who announced they fasted when Trump was elected. Non-Orthodox synagogues around America sat shiva (the religious mourning period for a deceased immediate family member) when Trump won. And the Hebrew Union College, the Reform Jewish movement’s rabbinical seminary, had an Israel-hating writer as this year’s graduation speaker.

If you support Trump or Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or hold almost any traditional Jewish worldview—like God creating the human being as male and female—you must either hide your opinion or risk being ostracized at almost any non-Orthodox synagogue.

To their credit, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Zionist Organization of America, and a few other organizations did condemn those who equate America under Trump with Nazi Germany. But most Jewish organizations kept quiet, offered tepid caution, or actually echoed the sentiment.

In other words, at this time, many American Jewish organizations are bad for the Jews, bad for Judaism, and trivialize the Holocaust in order to score political points.

If it’s any comfort (and it isn’t), things are no better in mainstream Protestantism or at the Vatican.

But here is real comfort: If the left keeps on smearing nearly half its fellow Americans as Nazis, it will assure more Republican victories this coming November.

COMMENTARY BY

Dennis Prager

Dennis Prager is a columnist for The Daily Signal, nationally syndicated radio host, and creator of PragerU.

RELATED VIDEO: First Lady visits ICE facility for children and families.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of MSNBC contributor Donny Deutsch is by BT1/Brian To/WENN/Newscom)

Shariah Crime Stoppers Videos for American Citizens Released

June 27, 2018/in Courts & Law, Culture War, Hot Topics, Immigration, National Security, Policy, Religion, Video/by Defend The Border

All videos shown below are for Citizen Briefings, to engage the communities and discussions needed to inform the public and the local Law Enforcement. The briefings are meant to provide a sample of what is included in the certified Law Enforcement training being offered.

To begin those discussions, an introduction is available here:

Citizen Briefing videos available below:

Women & Sharia
Sharia Compliant Mosques

To see the full list, place your cursor in the upper left corner of the video window and click on that icon for all of the videos available.

ABOUT SHARIA CRIME STOPPERS

Sharia Crime Stoppers is a forthright campaign demanding that the American justice system effectively deal with the criminal aspects of Islamic Law, otherwise known as Sharia. Law Enforcement and Prosecutors must be trained in the ideology of Sharia and Citizens must demand that the full force of American law be applied in their communities, despite political pressure to the contrary.

Sharia Crime Stoppers is a campaign to provide training to citizens across America so they can engage their local Law Enforcement, from the Officers on the Street to Judges, in a conversation to determine the depth of their understanding of Sharia sanctioned crimes.

Sharia Crime Stoppers training is free to all attendees and also available to churches, synagogues, and community groups… in a variety of formats. Only cost is for instructors travel expenses.

Certified Law Enforcement Training

Citizen Briefings

Questions for Local Law Enforcement Officials – THEY MUST BE ABLE TO ANSWER!

Certified Law Enforcement Training and Citizen Briefings are available. Check out our Facebook page: Sharia Crime Stoppers.

To discuss details or schedule training, contact : spearpoint911@shariacrimestoppers.org

Stop Forcing Black Citizens to Subsidize Non-Citizens. Prohibit Illegal Immigrants From Accessing Public Services.

June 26, 2018/in Culture War, Economy, Immigration, Policy, Politics, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by National Center for Public Policy Research

Washington, DC – Illegal immigrants should be prohibited from accessing all but emergency public services because the cost of these services unfairly and disproportionately falls on black families, according to the black leadership network Project 21 in its “Blueprint for a Better Deal for Black America.”

The Blueprint is Project 21’s 57-point plan for removing barriers blocking blacks from empowerment and ensuring that they have their chance of attaining the American dream.

The influx of millions of illegal immigrants has strained public services and placed a disproportionate burden on black communities, Project 21 notes. In education, for example, Project 21 says black students are more likely to suffer the consequences of expanding class sizes to accommodate immigrants than their white counterparts, noting that – in 83 of the largest 100 cities – black and Hispanic students attended schools with majority non-white populations.

Horace Cooper

“Millions of people being able to stay in our country illegally not only demonstrates the failure of our immigration system, but also causes a significant strain on public services – especially at the state and local level. Our neediest Americans, particularly blacks in urban communities, must compete for education and health programs with those who shouldn’t even be here,” explained Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper, a former professor of constitutional law and senior counsel to congressional leadership. “At the same time, much of the funding for these local programs comes from regressive taxes that hit poor and working-class blacks the hardest. This means they actually pay for the privilege of having unlawful immigrants in their neighborhoods. This is unfair, and it should end.”

Illegal immigration costs taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level, according to figures from the Federation for American Immigration Reform. About $84 billion is absorbed by state and local governments that mostly derive funding through property, sales and income taxes.

Black citizens pay their share of these taxes, Project 21 notes, yet the government programs funded through these taxes are then reduced or unavailable to black Americans in too many communities due to illegal residents taking advantage of them.

There are four specific proposals in Project 21’s Blueprint designed to give black citizens a better deal and prevent them from being forced to subsidize those residing illegally in the United States:

Bar illegal aliens from accessing any public services, except emergency services.
Terminate federal funding of any social service agency that provides non-emergency services to illegal immigrants.
Prosecute providers and recipients who allow scarce federally-funded social services to be used by those who are in the country illegally.
End states’ special programs for assisting unlawful immigrants, redirecting those funds to needy citizens.

Christopher Arps

“To the political left, illegal immigrants are the ‘new blacks.’ Thus, its entitlement agenda now prioritizes those who enter our country illegally over the lawful citizens whose ancestors were here and fought for this country as far back as its founding. It’s appalling and a disgrace,” said Christopher Arps, a principal with Red Tail Strategies and co-founder of the Move-On-Up black social media network. “What’s equally appalling and disgraceful are so-called black leaders who push these policies of unfair wealth transfer. These giveaways to non-citizens must end.”

Every Monday between now and July 9, Project 21 will continue to release reform recommendations from its “Blueprint for a Better Deal for Black America” covering a specific subject area. The tentative remaining release schedule is as follows:

Strengthening Faith-Based Communities (June 25)
Promoting Self-Determination (July 2)
Ending Excessive Regulation (July 9)

Project 21 leaders have been briefing key staff at the White House and with congressional leadership about the 57 policy ideas – spread out over 10 subject areas and covering education, criminal justice, economics and more – that are available in its “Blueprint for a Better Deal for Black America.”

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over 25 years, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research. Its members have been quoted, interviewed or published over 40,000 times since the program was created in 1992. Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated, and may be earmarked exclusively for the use of Project 21.

Founded in 1982, the National Center for Public Policy Research is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from some 60,000 individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations. Sign up for email updates here.

EDITORS NOTE: Follow Project 21 on Twitter at @Project21News or general announcements. To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by Project 21 members, follow our media appearances Twitter account at @NCPPRMedia.

Democrats Have Zero Tolerance for Solutions to Illegal Immigration

June 25, 2018/in Immigration, Labor & Unions, Must Read, National Security, Policy, Politics, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by The Daily Signal

As soon as the Trump administration adopted a “zero tolerance” policy requiring law enforcement to prosecute all immigrants who crossed the border illegally, it became clear that officials weren’t prepared to deal with the crush of kids who would find themselves under their supervision. Nor were they able to implement the policy in a humane way.

Family separation is callous and ineffective, but its existence doesn’t excuse the ginned-up moral panic, the pious grandstanding, or the historically illiterate associations to Nazi death camps unleashed by its critics. Nor does it excuse the fact that Democrats have shown zero interest in dealing with the undermining problems that propel these situations.

“Why won’t the GOP stand up to Donald Trump?!” is the well-known refrain from those who lockstepped their way through the eight-year hard-left turn of Barack Obama. Yet every Republican member of the Senate claimed to support legislation to fix existing laws that separate children from parents who are caught crossing into the United States illegally even as the president defended it.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, despite criticism from the president, has proposed perhaps overly optimistic legislation expediting asylum claims by adding more immigration judges and prioritizing families to be processed first.

So maybe the House (also working on legislation) and the Senate won’t be able to come to an agreement. Or maybe Trump will veto the bill. We don’t know. Not that any of it is going to matter if Democrats block the legislation, which is what they were promising to do before even seeing it.

“There are so many obstacles to legislation, and when the president can do it with his own pen, it makes no sense,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who is a co-sponsor of proposed Democratic legislation to supposedly fix the problem, stated. “Legislation is not the way to go here when it’s so easy for the president to sign it.”

Now, I realize Democrats have gotten used to the idea of a president ruling with a pen while concocting immigration law unilaterally. But even though Trump acquiesced to pressure and signed an executive order, the subsequent action will not be “easy.”

Democrats know that the administration could be stopped by the courts and that the long-standing Flores consent decree complicates efforts to enforce border laws and keep families together. They know that only legislation could allow both to happen. They’re more interested in returning to the status quo.

Someone should ask leading Democrats whether they believe that any immigrant illegally bringing children should be detained at the border for any reason whatsoever—because these Democrats, who ignore the moral cost associated with thousands of children wandering over the border, have yet to explain how we can possibly know whether these kids are going to be OK if we have no way of ensuring their parents’ compliance with a court.

Someone should ask Schumer whether he opposes the “child separation” policy or he opposes a “zero tolerance” policy on illegal immigration. Has any Democrat clarified why the latter position wouldn’t incentivize more migrants to bring children (sometimes their own and sometimes not) on the dangerous trek over the border rather than to ports of entry? There’s been a spike in the number of families and unaccompanied children at the border over the past five years. Claiming amnesty after apprehension is basically a get-in-free card.

Someone should ask Democrats what kind of undocumented immigrant they believe doesn’t deserve de facto asylum. I’m well aware that most of the people flowing in from Central America are escaping poverty and violence, and I’m highly sympathetic to their plight. But I assume migrants who properly ask for asylum are in the same situation—other than being punished for following rules.

I’m a pretty liberal guy on immigration—open to more asylum-seekers, bigger immigration, more temporary workers, etc. But I’m not a huge fan of chaos. And I suspect I’m not alone.

Yet we have Democrats and activists calling for the elimination of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. We have a Democratic Party unwilling to make any compromise on the issue even when we’re faced with a surge of migrant children.

As Gabriel Malor pointed out in The Federalist this week, the proposed legislation co-sponsored by every Senate Democrat was so carelessly written that it would prevent “federal law enforcement agencies almost anywhere inside the United States from arresting and detaining criminals who are parents having nothing to do with unlawfully crossing the border and seeking asylum.”

It’s not healthy for the country or the people who come here seeking a better life to be thrown into a system that doesn’t work. Nor, as we are increasingly seeing in Europe, is it politically tenable to rely on emotionalism as a means of ignoring all law.