FLORIDA: DeSantis Prohibits Florida Agencies From Assisting Biden Admin In Transporting Migrants

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis issued an executive order Tuesday barring state agencies from providing assistance to President Joe Biden’s administration in transporting illegal migrants.

Executive Order 21-223 makes it unlawful for Florida’s executive agencies to “provide support or resources to, or in any way assist, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, or any other federal department or agency” in their attempt to move illegal migrants apprehended at the Southern Border across the nation.

“This executive order makes it clear that Florida resources will not be used to prop up the failed open border agenda enacted by this administration,” DeSantis said. He also noted that nearly 250,000 illegal migrants have been released in the U.S. in less than a year of Biden’s presidency, according to a press release.

Additionally, the governor announced a lawsuit against the Biden administration over its “catch and release” policy.

He also appointed former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Florida Larry Keefe as the state’s Public Safety Czar on Monday. Keefe is responsible for protecting Floridian taxpayers from “reckless immigration policies,” according to the press release.

Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued a similar executive order in late July, which outlawed non-government entities from providing transportation to migrants.

The Biden administration sued Texas over Abbott’s order and a federal judge issued a temporary halt on the governor’s ban in early August.


Shakhzod Yuldoshboev


RELATED VIDEO: Psaki’s Pathetic Explanations About Illegals and Covid.

RELATED ARTICLE: Migrants Revolt Against Bus Driver, Try To Escape Border Patrol In Texas

EDITORS NOTE: This The Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ is Bunk

Dems’ plans to import tens of millions of immigrant children prove it.

Despite the optimistic campaign slogan “Build Back Better,” in reality, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and their Radical Leftist political cohorts are waging a war against America and Americans because they know that For Dems to Succeed, Americans Must Fail.

Not unlike most politicians, Biden and Harris promise that if they are elected they will create tens of millions of high-paying jobs.

Of course they won’t tell you how they would create those jobs other than to make some vague statements about how the “Green New Deal” would create jobs as buildings, including houses, will have to be retrofitted to meet the new environmental standards that will be imposed on landlords across the U.S.

They never say who would pay for retrofitting those buildings or what would happen if the owners of the properties are unable to come up with the funding to modify their structures. (Would such property owners have the property confiscated by the Biden administration? No one is discussing this disturbing possibility.)

Meanwhile, Biden and Harris state that if elected they would defund the Border Patrol, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and decriminalize nearly every violation of our immigration laws including unlawful entry and re-entry and, presumably, immigration fraud.

Biden and Harris also insist, as did Hillary Clinton during her unsuccessful run for the Presidency inn 2016, that they would immediately create a massive legalization program for what they estimate are 11 million illegal aliens who are already present in the United States and place them on a path to U.S. citizenship.

That 11 million figure has been claimed by supposed journalists for more than a decade.

It has, however, been estimated that the number of illegal aliens who  could be a population of more than 25 millions illegal aliens.  I believe that even that number is much smaller than he actual number of aliens who would participate.  Back in 1985 the Reagan Amnesty that was part and parcel of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was supposed to provide roughly one million illegal aliens with lawful status.  In reality the final number was between 3.5 million and 4 million.

I addressed this issue in my recent article, Comprehensive Immigration Reform Should be Renamed the “Overwhelm America Act” in which I noted that on September 21, 2018 Yale University reported Yale Study Finds Twice as Many Undocumented Immigrants as Previous Estimates.  That report, published just over two years ago noted:

Using mathematical modeling on a range of demographic and immigration operations data, the researchers estimate there are 22.1 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

However, as large as the number of illegal aliens who would be eligible to participate in such an ill-conceived program, the ultimate number of aliens who would be provided with lawful status would, in reality, be a multiple of the number of illegal aliens who are present in the United States.

This is because each and every legalized alien would immediately have the absolute right to immediately petition to have their spouses and all of their minor children to be lawfully admitted to the United States.

Many families in Third World Countries have large numbers of children.  If, for argument sake 25 million illegal aliens were to participate in the Biden/Harris Amnesty and if the average alien has four children, we could witness an immediate influx of 100 million alien children enter the United States!

One of the key issues for the Radical Left is the environment.

Every person in the United States has an ecological and economic footprint.  Each person needs more than a place to sleep.  They all need water, food, electricity, sewerage, transportation and healthcare.

As roads and transportation and infrastructure become overwhelmed, traffic will grind to a halt while pollution from cars, busses and trucks spew into the atmosphere.  There are parts of the country that experience droughts and electrical brownouts.  How would this massive influx of immigrants impact these struggling systems?

These tens of millions of immigrant children will all need to attend schools in the United States.  In 2007, nearly 14 years ago, the Congressional Budget Office published a paper,  The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments  That report estimated that there were about 12 million illegal aliens present in the United States at the time the report was published.  It also noted that it costs 20% to 40% more to educate children who lack English language proficiency.

How sustainable would this situation be?

Now consider that among the proposals for Biden/Harris is that everyone in the United Stats, regardless of immigration status would be entitled to free health care and free college education.

How would our government cover the huge expenses that this would cost?

How would hospitals be able to treat all of these people?  There are communities today that already lack adequate health care facilities and capabilities.  Imagine how long the waiting lines in emergency rooms would stretch as seriously ill patients from around the world would flood these emergency rooms.

Add to this is Biden and Harris’ stated goal of creating immigration anarchy, with the promise of free health care would turn our entire country into the world’s ER!

America would become a magnate for the world’s sick.  Our immigration laws make no distinction about race, religion or ethnicity.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded. Among these classes of aliens who are to be prevented from entering the United States are aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable, diseases or extreme mental illness.

Additionally, convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies are to be excluded as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment thus displacing American workers or driving down the wages of American workers who are similarly employed and aliens who would likely become public charges.

Without enforcement the concerns about the entry of aliens with dangerous communicable diseases will go unaddressed.  Aliens from around the world who suffer from such dangerous communicable diseases would head for the United States to seek free treatment.

This could and would likely lead to multiple epidemics of dangerous diseases in the United States.

Hasn’t the COVID-19 Pandemic from China taught Biden or Harris anything?

The loss of secure borders that would result from the Biden/Harris immigration policies would leave America vulnerable to narcotics, transnational gangs and terrorists.  The 9/11 Commission. to which I provided testimony, identified multiple failures of the immigration system as being directly responsible for the ability of terrorists, and not only 9/11 hijacker terrorists, to enter the United States and embed themselves as they went about their deadly preparations.

Under the massive Biden/Harris amnesty program, national security would be irreparably undermined.  Because of the huge number of illegal aliens who could apply for lawful status, in-person interviews could not be conducted and field investigation would be out of the question.  Adjudications officers would have to make quick decisions based nearly entirely on the information provided in the applications for legalization.  This program would suffer from massive fraud and the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, identified immigration fraud as the key method of entry and embedding for international terrorists.  This issue was the predication and my focus in my extensive article, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill.

The obvious question that has never been asked of candidates for the President or other significant elected offices since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 is, “Have you read the 9/11 Commission Report and the companion report that was prepared by the 9/11 Commission staff, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel?

Recently we have seen where the weapon of choice for terrorists is not airliners but motor vehicles.  Yet Democrat-run states such as New York State not only provides illegal aliens with driver’s licenses, but New York State Blocks ICE and Border Patrol Access to DMV Database.

Finally, let us go back to the issue of those amazing jobs Mr. Biden claims he would provide for millions of struggling Americans.   In some of his campaign ads Biden speaks so wistfully about his father telling him when he was a boy that jobs not only provide money but dignity and a sense of purpose.

Of course that statement about the significance of jobs is accurate.  Extremely accurate.

However- with no secure borders and a massive influx of tens of millions of immigrant children who will quickly become adults and flood the labor pool, the Biden/Harris immigration policies would drive down wages and force hapless Americans to compete with tens of millions of foreign born workers for those ever so important jobs.

Barack Obama promised “shovel ready jobs” and now Biden has come up with a “shovel ready” job, shoveling the BS that he and Kamala spew when they make promises that are nothing but bald-faced lies that would irrevocably alter America- and not for the better!

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.


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

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

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

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

This is the Fox News video:

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

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

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

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

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

Here is the relevant excerpt from my commentary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That is the real horror show!

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

GOOGLE VS. BORDER SECURITY: How Google employees colluded to undermine Trump’s executive orders.

On September 21, 2018 Newsweek published a disturbing article that contained infuriating revelations titled Google Brainstormed Ways To Combat Trump’s Travel Ban By Leveraging Search Results For Pro-Immigration Causes.

The Newsweek report stated that Google and their hi-tech colluders took legal action to block the Trump administration from enforcing standing immigration law.

Google, along with Apple, Facebook and other technology companies, filed a joint amicus brief challenging the travel ban, stating that it “inflicts significant harm on American business, innovation and growth.”

It is clear that to the employees and the executives of Google (and other hi-tech companies), America’s borders and immigration laws are impediments to their wealth and to the goals of their companies, rather than what they truly are, our first and last line of defense.

This set the stage for Google’s efforts days after the Trump administration first issued an executive order on immigration in January 2017, which would temporarily prevent the entry of citizens of seven countries from entering the United States, not because of their religion but because they could not be effectively vetted.

The media has repeatedly noted that the countries on the list were “Muslim Majority” countries yet many other “Muslim Majority” countries were not on that list including Indonesia, the most populist ‘Muslim Majority” country on the planet.

Google is determined to obstruct the Trump administration from enforcing long-standing immigration laws to protect America from international terrorists.

Here is how this Newsweek report began:

Google employees brainstormed ways to mitigate the effects of Donald Trump’s travel ban in 2017 by altering search functions to show pro-immigration organizations, new emails showed.

The company’s internal email chain, obtained and reported on by The Wall Street Journal, shows employees at the multibillion-dollar technology company discussing how to combat Trump’s travel ban against seven Muslim-majority countries, including Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

Google workers talked about how they could alter their search functions to show their users how to contribute to pro-immigration causes. They also discussed how to alter the search engine so that people could easily contact their lawmakers and government agencies to ask questions about the ban, the emails showed.

Employees also suggested ways to “leverage” Google searches so that they could counter “islamophobic” search results from people looking up terms like “Islam,” “Muslim” and “Iran.”

The article subsequently claimed that the e-mails sent around by Google employees were merely a part of a “brainstorm of ideas.”

There is no comfort to be taken Google’s statement that “[o]ur processes and policies would not have allowed for any manipulation of search results to promote political ideologies,” or

from the supposed assurances that Google had never manipulated or modified its search results to promote a particular political ideology or that no such manipulations or modifications were ever employed during the last presidential campaign or after the election when President Trump issued executive orders on immigration.

If members of Google’s management were not in agreement with their subordinates attempts to manipulate or modify search results, why didn’t they stop them?

The Newsweek article noted that a Google employee opined how difficult it would be to implement such changes in the search results, but was quoted as saying, “But I think this is the sort of super timely and imperative information that we need, as we know that this country and Google would not exist without immigration.”

No one in the Trump administration has suggested stopping immigration, yet the quoted Google employee implies as much.

President Trump was only attempting to make certain that our screening process is equal to the task of preventing the entry of international terrorists.  Hardly a radical or unreasonable goal!

I am certain that Google maintains strict control over the people who enter their campuses and other facilities, yet Google management and their employees oppose efforts by the Trump administration to similarly control the entry of aliens into the United States.

We must not lose sight of the fact that, no matter how the media and the immigration anarchists may attempt to spin the purpose to the Trump administration’s executive orders, in reality they were issued to protect national security and public safety by enforcing a long-standing provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The administration’s actions were, in fact, consistent with the findings, recommendations and warnings of the 9/11 Commission.

The first paragraph of the preface of the official report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel stated:

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.

We must start by unraveling the lies and falsehoods about the supposed “Travel Ban” which was never a travel ban at all, but actually an entry restriction that was intended to protect the United States from the entry of aliens who could not be screened, thereby preventing our CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors from halting entry of terrorists into the United States.

What was almost never noted in the media was that the official title of those executive orders was, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States.”

That title unambiguously established the purpose of the supposedly “controversial” executive order.

My July 23, 2017 article, Courting Disaster: Supreme Court Decides Against Homeland Security included two versions of the executive order that the Trump administration issued to act as the proclamation required in the section of law, provided below.  The administration made it abundantly clear that the actions were being taken to protect America and to prevent the entry of aliens who may have connections with terrorism.

Furthermore, Trump’s blocking the entry of aliens from countries associated with terrorism (and where vetting was problematic) did not emerge by executive fiat the way that Mr. Obama created DACA out of thin air.

In point of irrefutable fact, the authority for the President of the United States to block the entry of aliens is a part of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), specifically 8 U.S. Code § 1182(f) which states:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

An overview of the INA is provided on the official USCIS website, making clear that the current immigration laws have their foundation in the The McCarran-Walter bill of 1952.

That section of law gives the President of the United States sole authority with wide-ranging  discretion to exclude any and all aliens whose presence “…would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”  That standard sets as low a bar as could be imagined.

This was certainly not a “Travel Ban” but was a form of entry restriction that was solidly grounded in law.  Incidentally, prior administrations, such as the administration of Jimmy Carter, invoked that very same section of law when the U.S. Embassy at Tehran was seized by Iranian radicals and American officials were taken hostage.  In that instance, the aliens were citizens of Iran.

On the other hand, Google, as was reported by CNN on August 2, 2018, has no problem helping China maintain a strangle-hold on it citizens:

The Intercept reported Wednesday that Google plans to launch a search app in China that would block sensitive websites and search terms to comply with Chinese government censorship.

Perhaps Google’s management was planning to employ censorship strategies in the United States that are not unlike strategies Google is willing to employ to censor the internet in China.

In any event, the “Tech Giants” have found in the radical leftists of the United States kindred spirits who are determined to undermine national security and to extinguish freedom of speech, and with it, all other freedoms we cherish so dearly.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. The featured image that appeared in the original column is courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

Skewed Immigration Polls May Skewer Americans

Figures don’t lie but liars can figure.

The 24 hour news cycle has driven the demand for more “talking heads” that can appear on news programs to provide information, perspectives and, all too often (unfortunately), utter nonsense.

Computer programmers have an acronym, GIGO (Garbage-In, Garbage-Out), that essentially says, ‘if you begin with wrong information the results will be no less flawed’: This is the problem with polls.

Surveys and polls are not new, but today nearly every industry depends on polls, surveys and focus groups to make decisions about how to conduct business to maximize the potential for success.

Consequently, our political leaders often stake out or modify their positions on issues to parallel what pollsters claimrepresents the concerns of likely voters.

When the pollsters get it wrong, the people who make decisions based on those polls will also–of necessity–get it wrong.

A person running from a mob is not leading that mob. He is simply running for his life. This is, all too often, what passes for “leadership” in America today. This is why so many candidates are said to “waffle,” going back and forth on their stated positions on critical issues. They are guiding their positions on the results of polls that may not even be providing accurate information.

Politicians often assume positions out of a fear of losing votes and, hence, an election. Instead of being true leaders who have a clear vision and, through demonstration of their leadership, convince people to vote for their vision, they chase voters―pandering to what they think voters want.

I have come to refer such political “leaders” as “human metronomes” or “human weathervanes.” Not unlike tumbleweeds, they go in the direction that perceived public opinion takes them.

All too often, the polls, upon which so many decisions are made, are fatally flawed.

Generally, polling surveys include a list of issues and the respondent is supposed to either select the one issue of greatest concern or to arrange the issues according to the degree to which they are of greatest concern.

The problem with multiple choice questions is that they prevent those responding to the questions consideration for all of the real-world possibilities.

I recently received a questionnaire that asked me to pick the number one concern I have. It included the threat of terrorism, the economic crisis, healthcare concerns and immigration.

The survey only permitted me to make one selection. The problem is that immigration is actually a major component in all of the other issues.

However, since the survey does not permit the participant to check off more than one item on the list of issues of greatest concern, anyone who was most concerned about terrorism would likely select the threat of terrorism as his/her most serious concern. Similarly, participants in the survey who may be concerned about losing their jobs might select the economic crisis as being their greatest concern. However, many Americans have lost their jobs to foreign workers and this fact may be an important issue for respondents, but the way that the survey is structured, immigration would not be selected.

When all of the results are tallied by the polling company, immigration may well be on the bottom of a list of issues, notwithstanding the fact that immigration is actually the most important issue on that list because it is a major factor in nearly every other issue that concerns Americans.

Today, understandably, we are told the majority of Americans are most concerned about the threat of a terror attack. Indeed, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, and other high-ranking members of the U.S. intelligence community have publicly stated that ISIS plans to carry out deadly terror attacks inside the United States this year. Consider the February 9, 2016 CNN report, “Top intelligence official: ISIS to attempt U.S. attacks this year.”

That troubling report included this excerpt:

Clapper warned that ISIS and its eight branches were the No. 1 terrorist threat, and that it was using the refugee exodus from violence in Iraq and Syria to hide among innocent civilians in order to reach other countries.

Clapper said ISIS was “taking advantage of the torrent of migrants to insert operatives into that flow,” adding that they were “pretty skilled at phony passports so they can travel ostensibly as legitimate travelers.”

ISIS fighters have reportedly seized Syrian passport facilities with machines capable of manufacturing passports.

The testimony follows the director of National Intelligence’s release of the “Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community.”

The assessment notes that “approximately five dozen” ISIS-linked people were arrested in the U.S. during 2015.

Entry of terrorists into the United States is indisputably the domain of immigration.

Additionally, the FBI has reported that it has multiple terror investigations ongoing in all 50 states.

The 9/11 Commission determined that multitudes of failures of the immigration system enabled not only the 19 terrorists who carried out the hijackings and attacks of September 11, 2001, but other terrorists as well to enter the United States and embed themselves. Indeed, since the 9/11 Commission Report was published, a series of additional terror attacks were carried out in the United States by aliens who gamed the visa process and/or the immigration system to acquire political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even United States citizenship.

The bottom line is that successfully combating terrorism absolutely requires that our immigration system operates effectively to prevent terrorists from entering the United States in the first place. Effective immigration enforcement can also thwart the efforts of terrorists who seek to embed themselves in our country as they go about their deadly preparations. However, this nexus between immigration and national security is not a component of the polls.

The economy is always a key issue for American voters. In fact, when Bill Clinton first ran for President, it was reported that his campaign offices had posted a simple sign in the walls of those offices that stated simply, “It’s the economy, stupid!”

Consider how many Americans have lost their jobs to foreign workers, including within high-tech industries who have been welcomed into the United States with H-1B visas and other such visas.

Again, immigration is a critical component.

All too often, because most people are conformists and eager to “go along to get along,” they form their opinions on the basis of polls. Few people have the guts to swim against the tide of public opinion. If there is “safety in numbers,” then it is far safer to engage in “group think” and jump on the “bandwagon” rather than to go against popular opinion.

National Geographic has been airing a series known as “Brain Games” that explores how the human mind functions. Recently, an episode aired that is well worth watching, “Peer Pressure.” In this program, people actually decided to follow the majority even when their own instincts told them that the majority was getting it wrong.

Another episode of Brain Games, “Power of Persuasion,” provided insight into how easy it is to manipulate decisions people make, convincing them to modify their positions to coincide with what they believe the majority accepted.

However, when the findings of polls are at odds with the demands of major campaign contributors, all too many politicians seek to create illusions that they are meeting the demands of the majority of constituents while making certain that their contributors are getting what they are paying for.

Even when immigration is seen as a major factor in the polls, politicians create illusions by spending huge sums of taxpayer money on worthless programs such as deploying unmanned drones along the border rather than manned Border Patrol helicopters. Government studies have shown that drones are very costly but virtually worthless. Manned helicopters can be extremely effective and are generally far less expensive.

Duplicitous politicians also propose additional “solutions” that are ineffective and posit explanations that, when carefully scrutinized, reveal just how outrageous they are.

Such a false claim is the argument that, since we cannot deport all of the millions of illegal aliens already present in the United States, we must deal with them–however, not before we “secure the U.S./Mexican border.” No laws are enforced all of the time. Indeed, it could be successfully argued that motor vehicle laws are less enforced and less enforceable than our immigration laws. Yet no one would argue to do away with drunk driving laws, texting while driving laws or speed laws.

Yet where immigration is concerned, the fact that we cannot enforce the laws 100% of the time provides fatuous justification for not enforcing our immigration laws against millions of illegal aliens present in the United States.

America has 50 border states, yet we are constantly told that we simply need to secure the U.S./Mexican border, while ignoring that aliens enter the United States by running the northern border, stowing away on ships or by entering legally as non-immigrant (temporary) visitors who then go on to violate the terms of their admission.

The obvious solution is to effectively enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States – but this would conflict with the demands of the campaign contributors.

It has been said that the only polls that counts are the polls that are open on Election Day.


Sanctuary Cities Endanger – National Security and Public Safety

How DHS Ineptitude Facilitates Terrorist Operations

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Front Page Magazine.

Going to Europe and Coming to America

Flying from the United States to any destination in Germany is not much different from what it was in years past.  My wife, Joyce, and I arrived in Munich on the morning of September 24 following an overnight flight from Houston.

During the long tedious flight from Houston I could have watched at least six full-length movies, but I watched just two.  I saw my old friend and former Malibu neighbor, Tatum O’Neal, in her Oscar-winning performance in “Paper Moon,” a movie she made when she was just ten years old, and I saw Orson Welles in “Citizen Kane,” one of Hollywood’s greatest movies of all time.

As I watched Welles’ performance as a crass, overbearing, egomaniacal newspaper publisher, I couldn’t help but feel as if Donald Trump is a perfect reincarnation of Welles’ character, Charles Foster Kane.  Trump and Kane are mirror images of each other.  Anyone wishing to understand the political appeal of “Citizen Trump” should simply rent a video copy of “Citizen Kane.”

After standing in a short line in Munich to show our passports, we were directed to the baggage claim area where our checked bags arrived in a matter of minutes.  We then proceeded to two pairs of swinging doors, one marked “passengers with nothing to declare.”  We passed through the doors with a welcoming smile from a lone customs official and minutes later we were aboard a bus bound for a ski resort in Soell, Austria, just 54 miles south of Munich.

On Friday, we spent a full day in old-town Innsbruck, enjoying a sandwich and a glass of wine in a sunny sidewalk café across the street from the Hofburg Palace where Marie Antoinette grew up.  Although there is no real evidence that she ever uttered the words, “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche” (“Let them eat cake”), Marie Antoinette eventually became a very unpopular figure in France and was sent to the guillotine on October 16, 1793, during the French Revolution.

The following day, Saturday, September 26, I experienced the joy of driving a 5-speed Ford stick-shift rental car over some 120 miles of high-speed autobahns and just over 100 miles of winding two-lane alpine roads to visit the famed Neuschwanstein castle of Bavaria’s King Ludwig II.  With heavy traffic in both directions, the local farmers pulling their wagonloads of silage made passing a frightening experience… more so for my three passengers than for me.

After riding horse-drawn carts up the mountain to the castle… I can still recall the days when I walked up the long road to Neuschwanstein faster than the horse-drawn carts… we shared lunch with friends before descending the mountain and returning to our ski resort.  On the way back we came across several thousand very frustrated drivers who were stuck in a 10-mile long traffic jam on a two-lane mountain road.  A big Mercedes sedan, pulling a camper trailer, was stalled at the base of an incline with no possibility of getting off the road, turning around, or backing     down.  And since traffic was heavy in both directions there was no opportunity for those stuck in the traffic jam to turn around and find another route.  They may still be there a week later.

In our remaining days we drove to Salzburg, Mozart’s birthplace, where we strolled through the same palace gardens where Julie Andrews sang and danced with the Von Trapp children in “The Sound of Music.”  And we traveled to Berchtesgaden uber Salzburg, where we enjoyed a cold beer in what was once Adolph Hitler’s mountain retreat, the Eagle’s Nest.  We also spent a day driving over the Brenner Pass into northern Italy where we were treated to the most “generous” wine-tasting party I’ve ever experienced in the vineyards of the Merano-Bolzano region.

Although a principal reason for our trip to Austria and Germany at this time of year was to attend Munich’s Oktoberfest, we decided that, with hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees flooding into Germany from Austria and Hungary, it might be a good idea to avoid Munich and other major German cities.  With widespread reports of women dragged from buses and automobiles and gang-raped in broad daylight, it simply wasn’t worth the gamble.

What was most surprising was that, in a week of watching news broadcasts on the BBC, CNN International, and an English-language French network, we saw almost no news coverage of the millions of Muslim refugees fleeing war and brutality in their home countries.  To judge by the amount of coverage of the crisis on European TV, there was no reason to believe that refugees were flooding across European frontiers, that boatloads of refugees were dying at sea, or that hordes of refugees were trudging overland from Greece and Turkey to Western Europe.

For the first time it was possible to believe that perhaps the Germans who lived in close proximity to Dachau, Buchenwald, and other concentration camps during the Nazi holocaust really didn’t know what was going on behind the barbed-wire fences and the iron gates that proclaimed, “Arbeit Macht Frei.”  If leftist regimes during the 1930s and ‘40s could keep their people ignorant of the horrors of the concentration camps by merely managing the news, why couldn’t they keep them ignorant of the invasion of African and Middle Eastern refugees in 2015 when leftist control of the media is just as pervasive and even more sophisticated?

But what was most important for me was to see the joy in Joyce’s eyes as she experienced Austria and Germany, my favorite places on Earth, for the first time.  On first sight, a newcomer to the German and Austrian Alps might feel as if they are looking at a few miles of Potemkin Villages, where every home, every window box, every lawn, every meadow, every mountain stream, and every highland pasture are manicured to absolute perfection.  But it doesn’t take long for the first-time visitor to realize that the perfection in the Alpine region of Germany, Austria, and Switzerland goes on for hundreds of miles, in all directions, apparently without flaw.

In eight days of travel throughout Bavaria, Austria, and the Italian Tyrol, there was not a piece of litter to be seen… no discarded beer cans, plastic bottles, or hamburger wrappers.  There were no automobile junk yards, no garish fast-food restaurants, no highway billboards, no graffiti-sprayed walls, and no dilapidated automobiles.  In a word, that entire region of Planet Earth is “pristine.”  The roads and highways are completely devoid of potholes and the trains and buses run on time.

But, as in everything else, all good things must come to an end.  On Thursday morning, October 1st, we packed our bags and returned by bus to the Munich International Airport.  Arriving at the airport with time to spare, we had plenty of time to stand in a long baggage-check line and a much shorter and faster-moving security check line where all we had to do was place our carry-on bags, our wallets, and our pocket-change into baskets for x-ray examination.  However, while the return flight from Munich to Washington (Dulles) was some three hours shorter than our long flight from Houston to Munich, what awaited us at Dulles was a most unpleasant end to a spectacular European vacation.

Upon entering the Dulles terminal, we found ourselves inching forward in a seemingly endless maze of retractable crowd-control barriers, at the end of which were three or four surly customs agents checking passports.  Passing that obstacle, we were directed to a baggage claim area to retrieve our checked luggage.

After waiting for nearly a half hour to reclaim our bags, we were directed to a second crowd-control maze which appeared to be nothing more than a people-storage facility because there was no discernible movement in the line.  After an hour or more, moving just inches at a time, we learned why the line moved so slowly.  The line we’d been standing in emptied into a room with some 20 or 30 unattended electronic kiosks which required thousands of kiosk-illiterate travelers to study glowing touch-screens, trying to figure out what was required of them.

Once passengers figured out that they were first required to scan their passports, they were then required to position themselves so that the kiosk could produce a photograph of the passenger, along with a form to be completed affirming that the passenger carried no fruits, vegetables, plants, or seeds; no meats, animals, or animal products; no disease agents or cell cultures; no soil from a foreign farm or ranch; that the passenger had not been in close proximity to livestock; that the passenger was not carrying in excess of $10,000 in U.S. currency; etc… the very same questions we’d responded to on the customs declaration form completed prior to landing.

Once we’d completed the kiosk interrogation and had our kiosk-generated customs declaration forms in hand, we were directed to yet another waiting area filled with crowd-control barriers.  After moving through that maze at a snail’s pace we found three or four bored customs officers sitting behind desks, doing nothing but collecting the kiosk-generated customs declarations.  Then, after unburdening ourselves of our customs declarations we were directed to a baggage collection area where we were able to return our checked baggage to United Airlines for the final leg of our journey to Tulsa.

From there, we found ourselves in a fourth passenger collection room with a seemingly endless maze of retractable crowd-control barriers, at the end of which we were required to empty our pockets into trays, along with our carry-on-bags, remove our shoes and belts, and submit to a full-body scan and a full-body pat-down.

To say that the process of reentering the United States was a maddening ordeal would be an understatement, but it’s the sort of thing that happens when the inmates are allowed to run the asylum.  As I stood in those endless lines, the most painful and humiliating punishment devised by the fiendish bureaucrats of the Transportation Security Administration, I couldn’t help but think of the millions of illegal aliens streaming unimpeded across our southern border.

George Orwell warned us about this.  Nineteen eight-four has finally arrived!

Florida Senator Bill Nelson was against illegal immigration before he was for it

I was sent an interesting email with an attached letter from Florida Senator Bill Nelson sent to Don O’Nesky, one of his constituents, in in May 2006. The subject of the original letter from Senator Nelson was his stand on illegal immigration.

In the letter Senator Nelson states, “I believe the U.S. needs a smart, realistic plan to address illegal immigration – one that protects our borders and insures all immigrants play by the rules.” Nelson in his 2006 letter wanted to “deport” those who don’t “play by the rules.” Sounds somewhat like what Donald Trump is saying today.

In an email to Senator Nelson, reminding him of what he said, O’Nesky notes:

Senator Bill Nelson

FAX: 202-228-2183

Dear Senator Nelson:

Re: Illegal Alien/Immigration Issues

On May 23, 2006 we received the attached letter [below] from you agreeing that we have an illegal alien/immigration problem.  You indicated “we need to enforce our existing laws.”  Plus you pointed out additional things that needed to be done to protect the border.  You implied these items would be on the table when ‘the Senate considers this issue.’

Well, next spring will complete a decade since that letter was sent out and not only has the situation not been fixed, it is much, much worse.

At this rate, in another decade we will not have a border.  And as a reminder a country that does not enforce its border is no longer a free and independent nation.

This is a serious issue that has needed fixing for a very long time and it must be fixed now!


Don O’Nesky

It seems politicians in general, and Democrats like Senator Nelson in particular, are willing to change their policy positions like the weather in the Sunshine State. With President Obama opening the U.S. borders and allowing increasing numbers of refugees from Muslim countries into local communities, Senator Nelson has reconsidered his position?

Here is the original letter sent to Senator Nelson:letter from fl senator nelson on immigration

Black outrage over Obama’s actions spreads to Chicago [VIDEO]

Last week we shared the video of the black woman in Houston who was infuriated by the potential resettlement of illegal immigrant children in her neighborhood. The outrage is spreading to Obama’s hometown of Chicago, where gang violence is effectively turning the black community into a genocidal combat zone — but cries and concerns have fallen upon deaf ears, at least where the first black president is concerned.

Hat tip to our conservative warrior in the ‘Hood, Rebel Pundit, who writes, “On Friday evening residents from Chicago’s Southside held a protest in front of the Chicago Police Department against the intolerable violence plaguing their communities and sounded off on President Obama for paying favor to illegal aliens crossing the southern border.”

“Residents also called for the resignation of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy for their failure to effectively handle the city’s violence epidemic. The president’s handling of the illegal invasion in Texas prompted residents to call him out for ignoring the current state of Chicago, where 120 people have been shot and at least 26 killed so far this July.”

As we just reported today, 748 illegal immigrants have been secretly dropped off in Chicago. Hundreds have already been dispersed to families — illegals or not — and sponsors.

Rebel Pundit writes, “The recent shooting of Jasmine Curry, a pregnant mother of five on Chicago’s Dan Ryan Expressway, prompted the residents to organize the demonstration. Curry’s father, Pierre Curry, attended the event and addressed and spoke of the pain he has endured after losing his first-born daughter after losing a son as well, less than one year ago. Curry said, “I’d like to tell the young peoples [sic] out here, especially young African-Americans, I’d like to tell the world, Mr. President, congress, senate, aldermen, governor, the mayor–losing a child is something else, losing something that God gave to you, and some fool in the street took it, he didn’t have a right to take my son or my daughter from her five kids. And if anybody knows something, anything, man up,” he then asked for prayers before breaking into tears.”

“Barack will go down as the worst president ever elected, Bill Clinton was the African-American President,” one resident said, in response to the president’s performance on the job, “President Barack needs to pay attention to Chicago, if he can not pay attention to Chicago and the African-American community, he needs to resign.”

Another compared the current state of Black-American life to that during slavery, saying, “Today, if you look at the time that we were brought here as slaves 400 years ago, we got the same results today.”

And so again I ask those faux leaders in the black community, especially Rep. Marcia Fudge Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus — the “conscience of the Congress” — just whose side is your self-declared messiah Obama on?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on