Posts

Epic Excuse-Making Follows Near-Fatal Police Shooting By Criminal Alien

When Napa County Sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki initiated a routine traffic stop earlier this month, she probably did not consider that the refusal of California officials to comply with federal immigration authorities had put her in the direct path of a habitual illegal alien criminal with drug and mental health issues.

But that is what happened on Feb. 17 when Jarecki pulled over Javier Hernandez-Morales, who’d been deported three times since 2011 and had arrests for a range of crimes from multiple counts of driving under the influence, battery on a peace officer, illegal possession of a firearm and violating his probation. And there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest, according to Fox News.

After she approached his car window, the Mexican national fired a gun at Jarecki, who shot back, including at least one fatal gunshot.

“It’s unfortunate that our law enforcement partners and the community are subjected to dangerous consequences because of inflexible state laws that protect criminal aliens,” said ICE spokesman Richard Rocha in a statement.

The incident, Rocha said, could have been prevented had ICE been kept in the loop about Hernandez-Morales’ releases from jail. “This is an impactful, scary example of how public safety is affected by laws or policies limiting local law enforcement agencies’ ability to cooperate with ICE,” he said.

When Hernandez immigration status became known, local officials shifted blame and denied wrongdoing by insisting they were following state law.

“We are in compliance with state law. That is the law of the state of California, and the county intends to comply with state law,” Napa County Supervisor Vallea Ramos told a local CBS News affiliate.

The law in question is SB54, a measure signed in 2017 by former Gov. Jerry Brown and that affords protection to all illegal aliens.

The problem for California politicians and local law enforcement who want to absolve themselves of responsibility is that, according to the Los Angeles Times, three detainers for Hernandez-Morales were issued by ICE to Napa County Jail in 2014, 2015 and 2016; and a further detainer to Sonoma County Jail in 2016.

None were honored and all were issued prior to SB54 going into effect.

The controversial law received warranted criticism in December after Newman (Calif.) Police Cpl. Ronil Singh was killed by an illegal alien who had several drunk driving arrests. Like Hernandez, Singh’s murderer should have been deported years ago.

Perhaps the most outrageous displays of blame-shifting is the op-ed penned by Jodi Hernandez, a relative of Jarecki’s attacker.

Published in the Napa Valley Register, the stunning letter implies that Hernandez was merely a victim of an uncaring system that denied him access to mental health care and did not recognize his humanity.

After apologizing to Deputy Jarecki for being forced into a situation where she had to shoot the suspect, Jodi Hernandez launched an assault of her own against enforcing immigration law.

After noting Javier had worked in the vineyards doing work that “kept the engine that is Napa Valley going,” she asserted that America was “rotting from the inside out.”

She went on. Americans, she wrote, “have lost our ability to relate to the rest of humanity from our place of relative affluence in comparison to the rest of the world” and then she argued the nation “cannot ignore the pain and anguish of an individual and expect to have a safe, strong country.”

Javier Hernandez-Morales was a Mexican national. He was in the U.S. illegally. And he was a habitual criminal with an active arrest warrant. The primary responsibility of officials in California is not to tend to his mental health needs of foreign nationals, but the safety and security of their residents and U.S. citizens.

The thinking of open border policymakers and individuals like Jodi Hernandez is not only foolish, but deadly.

COLUMN BY

avatar

JENNIFER G. HICKEY

Jennifer joined FAIR as Web Content Writer in 2017 and brings to the role extensive communications and media background. She began her career as a policy research analyst on multiple national and state political campaigns before entering journalism. In addition to spending over a decade writing for several broadcast and print news outlets, Jennifer directed communications strategy for a member of Congress and a military nonprofit.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Pros And Cons Of TPS For Venezuelans

Congress Fails To Act On “Child Recycling”

Sex and the Temporary Visa Worker

New York Plans Dedicated “Hand-Holders” for Illegal Aliens Seeking Tuition Subsidies

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column with images is republished with permission.

INNOCENT LIVES MATTER: How America can prevent murders like Mollie’s.

Illegal alien from Mexico Cristhian Bahena Rivera

On July 13, 2018, Mollie Tibbetts was murdered when she went jogging in her hometown of Brooklyn, Iowa.  Her alleged killer, Cristhian Bahena Rivera, is an illegal alien from Mexico.

Many articles and commentaries have detailed this horrific crime.

But my goal today, in addressing the murder of Mollie Tibbetts, is to provide insight into the lessons that must be learned, from my perspective, as an experienced, 30-year veteran of the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service).

For starters, immigration anarchists on the left decry any mention of the fact that Rivera is an illegal alien because, they claim, that doing so is an attack on all “immigrants.”

But these immoral leftists could not care less about the real carnage created by systematic failures of the current immigration system.  To them, the bodies of those who are killed by illegal aliens are simply “Speed Bumps” on their road to a borderless and defenseless United States.

Let’s be crystal clear:  Rivera is many things. I could use all sorts of terms to describe him and his horrific, infuriating murder of a 20-year-old young woman he, allegedly, committed for no damned reason. However, one name that most certainly does not apply to him is “immigrant.”

Rivera is an illegal alien.  Period!

It is the radical leftists who, themselves, refuse to make the supremely fundamental distinction between legal and illegal immigrants who come into the U.S.

But we must understand the importance of U.S. immigration laws to our nation’s borders.  National sovereignty requires nations to control the admission of foreign nationals, the same way that sensible homeowners exercise caution in deciding on whether to admit strangers into their homes.

Simply stated, Border Security Is National Security.

Consider this – guests and legitimate visitors are expected to present themselves at our front doors and ring the bell, or knock on the door, to let us know that they want to visit.

Legitimate visitors and guests certainly don’t sneak around to the back of our houses and try to climb in through a back window.

Legitimate alien visitors are required to similarly present themselves for inspection at ports of entry by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors.

A section of law contained within the Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182 defines categories of aliens who may be excluded. Among these classes of aliens who cannot enter our country are those suffering from deadly diseases, those with severe mental illness, and, of course, aliens who are smugglers, convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists, or spies.

Aliens evading inspections at our border know that he/she can be barred U.S. entry for one or more the above-noted reasons. They may have criminal histories or known ties to criminal or terrorist organizations.

But, open-border leftists and immigration anarchists use the Orwellian term “Undocumented” to describe the manner of illegal entry of aliens who enter the United States – seeking to minimize the significance of this lawbreaking.   Leftists blithely claim that these criminals “enter the United States undocumented.”  That is a grammatically incorrect, and legally false statement.  When I was an INS agent, my colleagues and I used the factually and legally accurate three-letter acronym, “EWI” (Entry Without Inspection) to describe this method of entry.

In other words, at a minimum, we could refer to these individuals by a term that served as the title of an article I wrote a while back,

Aliens Trespassing.

The term trespassing is particularly noteworthy because as I noted in that commentary,

On October 13, 2014, Schumer posted a press release on his official website that disclosed that because of the threat of terrorism, he had proposed legislation that would make trespassing on critical infrastructure and/or landmarks a federal crime with a maximum prison sentence of five years.​

Schumer’s press release stated:

Currently NYC Law Has Max. Penalty for Trespassing of Under 1 Year – In Light of Terrorism, Fed Law Should Make Loud & Clear, Particularly to Trespassers from Overseas, That Wrongdoers Should Stay Off Bridges, WTC, Statue of Liberty or Other Critical Infrastructure

Schumer said NYPD has done great work pursuing cases, but available punishments are too weak.

Here is another excerpt:

“With terror threats at a high, it must be made loud and clear to any would-be trespassers, adrenaline junkies or potential criminals that the federal government and the NYPD take trespassing on critical infrastructure and national monuments very seriously; a law that makes this a federal crime and raises the current maximum jail time from one to five years would help deter this behavior, and provide the NYPD with stronger tools to combat this disturbing trend.”​​

However, the very same Schumer and his immigration anarchist cohorts insist that aliens who trespass on the United States should be granted U.S. citizenship.

Rivera not only entered the United States without inspection but, reportedly, after illegally entering the United States, procured false identity documents to game the vetting process required to be used by employers.  While there is some controversy over whether or not Rivera’s employer used E-Verify, they apparently made use of a screening system that failed to identify Rivera as an imposter.

In other words, Rivera committed immigration fraud. The issue of immigration fraud was the focus of both an extensive article and a booklet I wrote on the topic, Immigration Fraud, Lies That Kill.

This shows why the claim made by politicians that simply making E-Verify mandatory would end the hiring of illegal aliens is bogus and naive.  In fact, it is dangerous.

Unscrupulous employers who are determined to hire illegal aliens to pay them substandard wages and work them under substandard conditions would simply hire them “off the books” so that these employees don’t appear on company records. Additionally, aliens can, as we have seen in this case, game this process by committing identity theft.

The solution is, not only require all employers to use E-Verify, but to also hire thousands of additional ICE agents to conduct field investigations and audits of employers to identify instances where employers and/or alien employees have defrauded the system to punish the employers and arrest and seek the deportation (removal) of illegal aliens, but to also deter crooked hiring practices by employers and to deter aliens from seeking to enter the United States illegally and to seek illegal employment.

There are several other “take-aways” from this case.

Let’s consider The DACA Sword of Damocles that hangs over our heads.

Rivera’s attorney initially claimed that he was legally present in the United States, and made some remarks about how he had entered the country as a child – presumably because the lawyer wants to claim that Rivera could be eligible for DACA.

Curiously, DHS officials have unequivocally stated that there are no immigration records for Rivera.

Having raised the issue of DACA, here is what we can learn from this case where DACA is concerned.  Even days after Rivera was arrested, neither the police in Iowa nor DHS appears to know when he entered the United States.

Reportedly he entered the United States without inspection between four and seven years ago.  There are no specifics as to his date of entry and, perhaps, of his true identity.

The adjudication of DACA applications would be extremely problematic. While it has been falsely sold as being about “young immigrants,” it would actually provide illegal aliens as old as 37 years of age who claim to have entered prior to their 16th birthdays to apply.

There would likely be millions of applications and only a relative handful of adjudications officers to deal with the onslaught of applications that would flood into USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) the division of the DHS that is responsible for the adjudication of all applications filed for various immigration benefits that range from providing non-immigrant aliens with authority to extend their temporary visits to change their immigration status.  They adjudicate applications for political asylum and lawful immigrant status and finally, they adjudicate applications for United States citizenship.

At present, that overwhelmed agency handles more than six million applications annually.

Adding unknown millions of DACA applications would require that the beleaguered adjudications officers to stop conducting interviews.  There would be no resources for field investigations. To keep up with the tsunami of applications the adjudications, officers would have to make decisions in minutes, not days or hours.

This would cause the adjudications system to implode and fraud would undoubtedly permeate the process.  Immigration fraud was identified by the 9/11 Commission, as being the key method of entry and embedding for terrorists.

A wall on the U.S./Mexican border would certainly go a long way to stemming the flood of illegal aliens into the United States, but it would not stop it.  Some aliens will find an alternative route to enter the United States.  When we get into our cars to drive to work, we are likely to listen to the traffic reports on the radio to find the quickest way of getting to our destination by driving around traffic, construction or accidents.

Effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States must be a part of any coordinated effort to finally gain control over our borders and protect America – and innocent Americans like Mollie Tibbetts – not from immigrants but from illegal aliens.  Enforcing existing laws will, at long last, imbue our immigration system with actual integrity.

Integrity is, of course, a term that scares the hell out of all too many of our politicians.

RELATED ARTICLE: Case of Iraqi refugee linked to ISIS exposes failed vetting system under Obama

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Illegal Alien in Florida Drug Bust Deported 3 Times, Easily Reentered U.S.

A startling drug trafficking case out of south Florida is especially disturbing because the illegal immigrant caught with more than half a million dollars in crystal methamphetamine had been deported three times in three months shortly before the drug bust. A few months after the third deportation, the Mexican national returned to the United States with a partner and a vehicle stuffed with thousands of grams of pure crystal meth. The drugs have a street value of about $560,000, according to estimates issued by federal authorities.

The thrice deported illegal immigrant, Saul Bustos Bustos, and his partner in crime, fellow Mexican Irepan Juanchi Salgado, got arrested when they tried to sell five kilograms of crystal meth to undercover Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents in Miami. The exchange occurred in November and this week both men pled guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute drugs. “During the transaction, the defendants, who possessed a total of 3,717 grams of 98% pure crystal methamphetamine, worked together to transfer the drugs from their vehicle to the undercover officer,” according to a statement from the Department of Justice. “Bustos Bustos also pled guilty to illegal reentry after removal, after reentering the United States subsequent to removal on April 13, 2017, July 6, 2017, and July 19, 2017.”

It’s not clear how or where Bustos Bustos entered the country after getting deported, but court documents reveal he drove from Atlanta with the drugs as part of an operation based in Georgia and New York. On November 28, the two Mexican men drove to a restaurant in the Miami Dade County city of Hialeah to make the sale. The customer, an undercover DEA agent, followed the drug dealers to a warehouse to complete the transfer and the Mexican men got arrested. Bustos Bustos is scheduled to be sentenced on March 29 and faces life in prison. Salgado’s sentencing date has not been set, but he also faces a lengthy jail sentence for the narcotics conviction. Authorities say his brother, Luciano Salgado, is a renowned meth dealer.

Previously deported illegal immigrants have reentered the U.S. to commit a multitude of atrocious crimes over the years, but this one sticks out because President Donald Trump vowed to tighten border security and the violations occurred after he took office. Under the famously lax Obama rules, this type of thing was par for the course. In fact, the former president’s own uncle, Onyango Obama, an illegal immigrant from Kenya, reentered the U.S. and even got a driver’s license after getting deported. Uncle Onyango lost the license for driving drunk and was somehow able to obtain a special “hardship license” from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles even though he wasn’t even supposed to be in the United States and had been removed.

Just a few months ago a previously deported gang member was charged with attempted murder and kidnapping in the northern Colorado city of Ft. Collins. The illegal alien from El Salvador, Angel Ramos, was deported from Texas to El Salvador last year after getting arrested for domestic violence. Somehow, he reentered the U.S. and tried to kill a woman by stabbing her repeatedly with a screw driver then running her over with his car before trying to stuff her in the trunk. Ramos is a confirmed member of the violent street gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) and is wanted for homicide in his native El Salvador, according to information provided to the media by the U.S. Marshals Service. In November the 36-year-old was charged with attempted murder, assault, menacing with a deadly weapon, kidnapping, domestic violence and criminal impersonation.

Back in 2014 a Judicial Watch investigation uncovered that a twice deported illegal immigrant was a key figure in a sophisticated narco-terror ring. The Mexican national, Hector Pedroza Huerta, plotted a Chicago truck bombing with two of the FBI’s “most wanted” terrorists and was deeply involved in smuggling drugs and weapons. The narco-terror ring that Huerta helped operate after being deported two times from the U.S. runs from El Paso to Chicago to New York. Though he was an illegal alien with a substantial criminal record and deportation history, Huerta lived in El Paso and planned several bomb plots targeting oil refineries in Houston and the Fort Worth Stockyards. He is also alleged to have smuggled explosives and weapons from the Fort Bliss range and exercise areas in concert with corrupt US Army soldiers and government contractors with gate passes at the El Paso base.

RELATED ARTICLE: Florida: Ocala man arrested after mother reported finding ISIS material, Koran, in son’s room

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue reading here for awful details.

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

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

[….]

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

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

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

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

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

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

RELATED ARTICLE: No Allah Please, We’re British

Immigration anarchists are responsible for undermining the civil rights of every American

Immigration anarchists have repeatedly drawn false analogies between their efforts to block the enforcement of immigration laws and the heroic action of those whose hard-fought efforts for decades provided black Americans with civil rights, but at great cost.

These anarchists emulate Jimmy Carter, creator of the Orwellian term ‘Undocumented Immigrant’ by referring to advocates for fair and effective immigration law enforcement as being “Anti-Immigrant.”  This despicable tactic is now being used to falsely attack Senator Jeff Sessions, the nominee for Attorney General, accuse his support for such effective enforcement of our immigration laws as running contrary to civil rights and being against immigrants.

These anarchists refuse to concede what should be obvious, while aliens illegally present in the United States are entitled to human rights and due process, they are not entitled to broad civil rights protections.  It is an outrageous contradiction in concepts to claim that aliens whose mere presence represents a violation of law should be provided with opportunities equal to those provided to American citizens and lawful immigrants.

In reality, immigration anarchists are, themselves, responsible for undermining the civil rights of Americans, particularly American minorities who suffer the greatest harm because of the failures of our government to enforce the immigration laws.  Those immigration anarchists also are responsible for undermining the civil rights of lawful immigrants.

For the sake of clarity and to prevent any potential misunderstandings, illegal aliens, not unlike others, are entitled to human rights and are properly entitled to due process when accused of committing crimes.  There are two reasons why due process must be devoid of consideration as to the immigration status of the accused.  First of all, it is a matter of fairness and justice.

Creating a lower standard for convicting illegal aliens for committing crimes would undermine the judicial system.

Additionally, unscrupulous prosecutors who simply wanted a “quick kill” would be encouraged to seek the conviction of illegal aliens who did not actually commit the crime.  This is immoral and unjust.  Secondly, under such circumstances, law enforcement authorities would stop looking for the actual criminal who would therefore remain at large and continue to pose a threat.

Civil rights laws were initially enacted to address the wrongs visited upon black Americans beginning with slavery and then segregation.

Today those laws are focused on providing citizens, irrespective of race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexual identity or orientation, with equal protection under our laws and equal opportunities, thereby enabling them to be full participants in the communities where they live and throughout our nation.

Sanctimonious and hypocritical mayors of “Sanctuary Cities” portray themselves as heroic figures, perhaps on par with the “Freedom Riders” who, decades ago, at great personal risk, fought to end racial discrimination and segregation in the South.

Make no mistake, those Freedom Riders were heroes who should be lauded and remembered for their morality, courage and achievements.

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities, however, are anything but heroes.  They are betrayers.  Betrayers of the Constitution, betrayers of their oaths of office, betrayers of national security and public safety and betrayers of their constituents.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of their constituents and those who reside in, or visit their cities by turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of those who reside in, or visit their cities, because they are turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

The ultimate “hate crime” involves acts of violence committed against members of a community because of factors such as race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation.  Transnational gangs often target their victims because of such factors.  Failures of immigration law enforcement have enabled such violent gangs to flourish across the United States.

Beyond undermining national security and public safety, Sanctuary Cities additionally attract massive numbers of illegal aliens who have no legal authority to work in the United States yet are able to secure illegal employment, thereby displacing American workers.

This includes American teenagers – often American minority teenagers, who find themselves unable to find a job, creating for them the conundrum of not being able to get a job without a resume but not being able to assemble a resume without first getting a job.

Furthermore, labor is a commodity.  Flooding the labor pool with foreign workers, suppresses the value of labor.  Consequently, even Americans and lawful immigrants who don’t lose their jobs to illegal aliens likely face wage suppression because of them.

It is more than mere coincidence that the division of the Civil Rights Commission that deals with discriminatory employment practices is referred to as the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission.

Employment, in point of fact, provides opportunities to those who are able to work.

Opportunities to be self-sufficient, opportunities to succeed and advance and prosper all revolve around the ability to be gainfully employed.

Blocking qualified workers from job opportunities deprives them essential and fundamental opportunities to be successful.

Politicians who comply with the demands of campaign contributors and others who exert pressure on them to flood America with cheap and compliant foreign labor to displace American workers and suppress wages.

The destruction of the middle class is not an “unintended consequence” but the goal of their duplicitous conduct.

A news report on how job losses create multiple stresses quoted Michael McKee, a psychologist at the Center for Integrative Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic who articulated his concerns about how the possible loss of financial ability to support oneself and family my lead to a loss of self-respect and the respect of others.  Thus leading to the loss of identity, security and daily structure, ultimately leading to people who lose meaning and hope.

A study published a couple of years ago found that poverty stresses the brain so much that it’s like losing 13 IQ points.

Prior to the Second World War the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws was vested primarily within the Labor Department to make certain that Americans would not have to compete with foreign workers for jobs.  This is how America created the largest and most upwardly mobile middle class of all countries on this planet at the time, thus creating the “American Dream.”

Civil rights laws also enforced in conjunction with our immigration laws to make certain that employers treat all employees equally including aliens provided that the aliens in question are authorized by law to be employed in the United States.  Indeed, even where the employer sanctions provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended segregation and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, discriminatory employment practices were prohibited to insure, equal employment opportunities.  Over time these laws were amended to protect additional groups of protected workers and even include aliens who are authorized to work in the United States.

In fact, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has posted the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) on its website.  Among the provisions of IRCA was a massive amnesty program for millions of illegal aliens and the provision that, for the very first time, deemed the knowing employment of illegal aliens to be a violation of law.

The EEOC has a vested interest and, indeed, jurisdiction, in cases involving allegations of Employment Discrimination.

Not only does the EEOC have jurisdiction when Americans claim employment discrimination, but it also has jurisdiction if an allegation is made that an alien, authorized to work in the United States seeking employment, suffered discrimination during the hiring process by an overly zealous employer who went beyond the requirements of preparing the Form I-9 to verify the identity and eligibility of an alien applying for a job or if an alien, authorized to work in the United States, faced discriminatory policies by his/her employer.

However, all of the laws and regulations that have been promulgated to end workplace discrimination are undone by the veritable army of foreign workers who have displaced beleaguered American workers.

Think of how many politicians running for office promise to help “create jobs” and to “bring back jobs to America.”

Whether politicians are running for political office on the local, state or federal level.  Whether they seek to become a member of the city council, mayors or governors.  Even if they are candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate or even the Presidency of the United States, they all make that same  promise about jobs and “getting Americans back to work.”

Failures of the immigration system make those promises largely meaningless when American workers are displaced by aliens.

For open borders/immigration anarchists, failures of the immigration system are to be engineered and then celebrated.

In reality, those failures are devastating to America and Americans and undermine the letter and spirit of our civil rights laws.

If immigration anarchists want to point to those responsible for undermining civil rights, they should stand in front of a mirror and point at themselves.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sanctuary Cities Pose a Danger to Our USA

Austin Mayor Colluded with Obama to Accept Refugees Despite Governor Halting Program

President Trump’s Immigration Challenge: To undo Obama’s catastrophic damage

On January 20, 2017 President Trump can and likely will end all of Obama’s illegal immigration executive orders, but he needs to do more.

For decades the effective enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws was hobbled by lack of resources in general and a particularly devastating failure to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.

For decades the Border Patrol was perceived as the primary enforcement arm of America’s immigration laws and for the Border Patrol this worked out fine.  They got the lion’s share of publicity and, far more importantly, the funding while INS special agents and the interior enforcement mission were all but ignored

When the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) was created in the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11, the former INS was dismantled and broken into several components of the DHS and mixed in with other agencies, principally the U.S. Customs Service.

Bad as it was for INS agents to operate in the shadow of the Border Patrol, the creation of the DHS was disastrous and caused many of the INS agents nostalgic for “the good old days.”

On May 5, 2005 the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims conducted a hearing on the topic, “New ‘Dual Mission’ Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.”

I was one of four witnesses who testified at that hearing.  In point of fact, I testified at several hearings that sought to understand the challenges that the creation of the DHS created for the effective enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws.

In my testimony I clearly articulated my concerns about the myriad issues created when the DHS was established and the former INS was dismantled.

Consider this excerpt from the testimony of then-Subcommittee Chairman John Hostettler in which he articulated the importance of immigration law enforcement and that was, however, hobbled by the creation of the DHS:

The first two Subcommittee hearings of the year examined in detail how the immigration enforcement agencies have inadequate resources and too few personnel to carry out their mission. The witnesses mentioned the lack of uniforms, badges, detention space, and the inevitable low morale of frontline agents who are overwhelmed by the sheer volume of incoming illegal aliens. If this were not enough, these ”immigration enforcement” agencies also face internal confusion resulting from dual or multiple missions in which immigration has all too often taken a back seat. Sadly, contrary to Congress’ expectations, immigration enforcement has not been the primary focus of either of these agencies, and that is the subject of today’s hearing.

The Homeland Security Act, enacted in November 2002, split the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, or INS, into separate immigration service and enforcement agencies, both within the Department of Homeland Security. This split had been pursued by Chairman Sensenbrenner based on testimony and evidence that the dual missions of INS had resulted in poor performance.

There was a constant tug-of-war between providing good service to law-abiding aliens and enforcing the law against law-breakers. The plain language of the Homeland Security Act, Title D, creates a ”Bureau of Border Security,” and specifically transfers all immigration enforcement functions of INS into it. Yet when it came down to actually creating the two: new agencies, the Administration veered off course. Although the service functions of INS were transferred to USCIS, the enforcement side of INS was split in two, what is now Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to handle interior enforcement, and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to guard our borders.

ICE was given all Customs agents, investigators, intelligence and analysis-from the Treasury Department, as well as the Federal Protective Service to guard Federal buildings, and the Federal Air Marshals to protect our airplanes, and finally the INS investigators.

CBP was given all Treasury Customs inspectors at the ports-of-entry, Agriculture Inspector from the Department Of Agriculture, and INS inspectors.

At no time during the reorganization planning was it anticipated by the Committee that an immigration enforcement agency would share its role with other enforcement functions, such as enforcement of our customs laws. This simply results in the creation of dual or multiple missions that the act sought to avoid in the first place.

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

It is not certain on what basis it was determined that customs and agriculture enforcement should become part of the immigration enforcement agency, except to require Federal agents at the border to have more expertise and more functions.

It is also unknown on what basis the Federal Air Marshals should become part of this agency, especially since it has been revealed that the policy is not to apprehend out-of-immigration status aliens when discovered on flights. If the mission of the Department of Homeland Security is to protect the homeland, it cannot effect its mission by compromising or neglecting immigration enforcement for customs enforcement.

The 9/11 terrorists all came to the United States without weapons or contraband—Added customs enforcement would not have stopped 9/11 from happening. What might have foiled al Qaeda’s plan was additional immigration focus, vetting and enforcement. And so what is needed is recognition that, one, immigration is a very important national security issue that cannot take a back seat to customs or agriculture. Two, immigration is a very complex issue, and immigration enforcement agencies need experts in immigration enforcement. And three, the leadership of our immigration agencies should be shielded from political pressures to act in a way which could compromise the Nation’s security.

It was clear that the Bush administration was eager to de-emphasize immigration law enforcement.  What was not noted in the testimony is that most of the management at ICE came from Legacy Customs and not from Legacy INS.

However, as bad as things became when the DHS was created by the Bush administration, the Obama administration, once again, caused ICE agents to become nostalgic about “the good old days” of the Bush administration.

While nature’s laws are immutable, legislated laws are not.  Law enforcement personnel are essential to the enforcement of laws.

The incoming Trump administration must make effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws a key priority if his immigration policies are to be successful.

Additionally, because of the policies of the Obama administration, there is an abject lack of managers and agents who have any actual experience or understanding of effective immigration law enforcement.

Institutional memory about effective immigration law enforcement has been all but expunged from the DHS.

Furthermore, most federal prosecutors lack experience in bringing criminal charges for violations of immigration laws.

I would recommend that the Trump administration make training a key priority for all prosecutors and immigration enforcement programs as well as for the employees of USCIS.

They all need to work cooperatively and collaboratively.

The culture of the adjudications program that is the realm of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) is to not cooperate with the ICE agents.  This culture was created and nurtured by the Obama administration.

The Trump administration must swiftly remove or reassign any USCIS managers who refuse to cooperate fully and collaboratively with ICE enforcement personnel.

Consider a particularly egregious case involving the manager of the San Bernardino office of USCIS obstructed ICE/HSI agents assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force from entering her facility.  They were seeking to locate and arrest a suspected co-conspirator of the San Bernardino terror attack less than 24 hours after that attack.

She was subsequently nominated for the prestigious Secretary’s Award.

My article about this insanity included this excerpt:

On March 16, 2016, Senator Ron Johnson, the Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, requested an investigation by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Homeland Security into the circumstances surrounding this monumental screw-up.  On June 1, 2016 the OIG report of the investigation was made public.

This is how the OIG report described the outrageous confrontation between the USCIS manager and the ICE agents:

The Field Office Director told the agents they were not allowed to arrest, detain, or interview anyone in the building based on USCIS policy, and that she would need to obtain guidance from her superior before allowing them access. During this exchange, the agents also spoke by phone with the Acting Chief, Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS), USCIS, Los Angeles. According to the HSI agents, he told the agents that it was USCIS policy not to arrest, detain, or interview on USCIS property.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) also accused her of lying to their investigators.

President-elect Trump’s has focused on immigration.  He will have the unique opportunity to address the multiple failures of the immigration system, many of which are decades old while some were created by the Obama administration.

Trump’s leadership can undo the madness foisted on America and Americans by the Obama administration and even correct the errors inherent in the way that the DHS was created in response to the terror attacks of 9/11.

What a way to start the new year and a new administration.

EDITORS NOTE: This column first appeared in Frontpage Magazine.

Montana: Latest Mexican Killer of Innocent Americans an ‘Unaccompanied Alien Child’?

That is my guess!  How else would a then 16-year-old Mexican, who entered the country in 2013, be now “legal” in the US.  Only the Office of Refugee Resettlement knows for sure!

Have you seen this dreadful story?  Has Donald Trump seen it?

One of Obama’s new Americans, Jesus Yeizon Deniz Mendoza demanded money and when they said they had none, he shot Jason and Tana Shane and wounded their daughter as she tried to run away.

From the Washington Times:

The man accused of killing two Good Samaritans who tried to help him on a Montana roadside was encountered by immigration authorities earlier this year after a burglary arrest, but was unable to be deported because he had already gotten legal status, federal authorities said this week.

The horrific killing has drawn attention at a time when crimes committed by immigrants are a hot political topic, thanks in part to GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s claim that Mexican society sends bad elements to the U.S.

Jesus Yeizon Deniz Mendoza, an 18-year-old Mexican man, has been charged with the killing of Jason and Tana Shane, who saw him stopped on the side of the road Wednesday and tried to help him. When they showed up on the scene with their daughter, Mr. Deniz pointed a gun at them and demanded money, according to an FBI affidavit filed in the federal court case.

[….]

Mr. Deniz is Mexican, and the Obama administration deems him a legal permanent resident who entered the country legally on May 31, 2013 — though they didn’t say how he earned that status initially.

There is more including a discussion about deporting him when he finishes his sentence.  That is b.s. because he will likely get life in prison (does Montana have the death penalty?) and we will be paying probably millions for his legal proceedings and his incarceration for years to come.  A great benefit this young “dreamer” is to America!

I sure hope we learn more about this evil man’s “legal” status in America!

For new readers we have an entire lengthy archive on so-called ‘unaccompanied minors’ who have been invading our southern border for years.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Good Samaritan Family Gunned Down Trying to Help Stranded Driver in Montana

Crow Indians stopped to help stranded motorist

Mexican accused of killing not deported despite previous burglary

Muslim Immigrant Beats 12-year old Boy For Having Blue Eyes

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Jesus Yeizon Deniz Mendoza is courtesy of the Washington Times.

Immigration: The Ultimate Get-out-the-vote Drive

One reason predictions of a Mitt Romney victory in 2012 were inaccurate, say analysts, is that the turnout among certain Democrat constituencies — in particular blacks and Hispanics — was greater than expected. And what a significant factor this is. Whether we call it getting out the vote, having a great “ground game” or just turnout, it can make or break an election.

But while the phrase “getting out the vote” is well understood, there is a lesser known election strategy: getting in the vote. What’s the difference? While the former involves getting as many as possible of the set number of sympathetic potential voters to the polls, getting in the vote is the process by which you increase that number of sympathetic voters. This process is most effectively exercised by Democrats, and it’s done in two ways. One is by indoctrinating people — especially young people — via academia, the media and entertainment. The second way is through immigration.

Why immigration? Because virtually the whole world is, to use our provisional (and lacking) political terminology, to the “left” of America. In addition, indoctrinating a young person is effective, but it’s an expensive process that must continue throughout his formative and teen years. Far easier is to import ready-made leftists. The results are quicker, too: the targeted babe born today won’t be entering the voting booth for 18 years. An immigrant, however, can perhaps be naturalized in just a few years. And politicians are more interested in the next election than in a future election involving the next person to hold their seat.

Moreover, you have to add to this the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965’s creation of a status quo in which 85 percent of our immigrants now hail from the Third World and Asia. This is significant because, like it or not and whatever the causes, there is an ironclad correlation between racial/ethnic identification and voting patterns. The GOP derives 90 percent of its votes from approximately 63 percent of the population: whites. In contrast, there is no major non-white group (note that I’m including Hispanics in this even though most are anthropologically classified as Caucasian) that doesn’t break Democrat by wide margins. Blacks cast approximately 94 percent of their votes for Democrats, while Hispanics and Asians come in at about 75 percent.

So if you’re a Machiavellian leftist who values power above all else, what do you do?

You increase the non-white segment of the population while decreasing the white segment percentagewise — as much and as fast as possible.

Call this demographic warfare. The idea is that if the people won’t change the government to your liking, you change the people.

This places our current border crisis in perspective. It explains why Barack Obama will not enforce immigration law. It explains why we’ve had seven amnesties during the last few decades, all accompanied by unfulfilled promises to secure the border. And it explains why a promoter of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was hard-core leftist Ted Kennedy. Expecting power-hungry Democrats to seal the border and not facilitate the invasion of our nation is like supposing they will cancel their get-out-the-vote drives. Migration — illegal and legal — is one of the main ways in which they grow their constituencies.

Yet while we, again, face a largely statist world, Democrats would still prefer non-white migrants. There could be many reasons for this, but I will mention three. First, many such migrants are especially socialist, which is why south-of-the-border peoples have elected demagogues such as Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales. Second, they’re poor. This means that, unlike some European immigrants, they have no reason to be concerned about higher income tax rates. It also means that in a prosperous land in which they see wealth surrounding them, their socialist tendencies will be stoked all the more. Envy is a dangerous and easily exploited sin, and why shouldn’t they get a piece of that American pie?

Lastly there is the divide-and-conquer factor. Even if European immigrants are left-leaning, they will nonetheless associate with and more quickly assimilate into the more conservative white majority. In contrast, consider Hispanic immigrants. They generally will circulate within a left-leaning group — the wider Hispanic community — which places them in an echo chamber in which their socialist tendencies are reinforced, nurtured and where deviation from them could make one a pariah. It also makes them ripe for racial/ethnic demagoguery. You don’t want to vote like the gringos, do you? And I think here about how Obama told Hispanics in the run-up to the 2010 mid-term elections to “punish” their “enemies.” To whom do you think he was referring?

In fact, assimilation of many of these newcomers isn’t just unlikely, it’s impossible. This is because we have in our midst more than just an ethnic echo chamber — we have a burgeoning nation within our nation.

Consider: approximately 50 percent of our legal immigrants come from Mexico, and 67 percent of American Hispanics have origins in that nation. This translates into a legal and illegal Mexican-heritage population of 20 to 30 million — perhaps 20 percent of Mexico’s population. The consequences of such an unbalanced and suicidal immigration policy are severe, and they were explained well by University of Edinburgh professor Stephen Tierney in his book Multiculturalism and the Canadian Constitution:

In a situation in which immigrants are divided into many different groups originating in distant countries, there is no feasible prospect of any particular immigrant group’s challenging the hegemony of the national language [press one for English, folks?] and institutions. These groups may form an alliance among themselves to fight for better treatment and accommodations, but such an alliance can only be developed within the language and institutions of the host society and, hence, is integrative. In situations in which a single dominant immigrant group originates in a neighbouring country, the dynamics may be very different. The Arabs in Spain, and Mexicans in the United States, do not need allies among other immigrant groups. One could imagine claims for Arabic or Spanish to be declared a second official language, at least in regions where they are concentrated, and these immigrants could seek support from their neighbouring home country for such claims — in effect, establishing a kind of transnational extension of their original homeland in their new neighbouring country of residence.

So liberals are seeking to overwhelm what they call white America through demographic change. In the name of power, of a get-in-the-vote drive, they happily commit cultural genocide, the fear of which, Professor Tierney goes on to write, “is often compounded in situations where the immigrant group has historic claims against the receiving country. … For example, in the Mexican-United States case….”

This is why our handwringing over the current border crisis is a little ironic. Yes, the situation is outrageous, but taking exception to illegal migration while blithely accepting our legal-immigration regime is like thinking that government death squads are preferable to roving gangs of murderous miscreants. Demographically, politically and culturally the two types of migration have precisely the same effect. All the illegal variety does is accelerate the process, giving the left more votes now and authentic Americanism a quicker, and perhaps more merciful, death.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is of President Johnson signing the Hart-Celler Immigration and Nationalization Act of 1965 bill taken by Yoichi Okamoto, White House Photo Office.