DREAMers Turn on Democrats: “We Don’t Owe You Nothing.”

Things took a turn for the worse for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats over the weekend when the very people they’ve been giving preference to over America’s citizens turned on them.

At a rally for San Fransisco area Democrats, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and several other Democrats were treated to a rude welcoming when a group of DREAMers met them there with chants of derision.

“Democrats are not the resistance of Trump. We are!” the DREAMers shouted. “First you said you supported a clean Dream Act. And last week you announced that you had agreed and I quote you, ‘To work out a package of border security.’ Your words. Or were you misquoted? We cannot say, however, that we are surprised.”

When Pelosi begged them to stop the DREAMers simply grew more agitated demanding to know when Democrats would help them.

They followed that up by telling Pelosi and the Democrats that they owed them “nothing.”

“This is our democracy. We did not vote for you, or for any politician. We don’t owe you nothing. This is what democracy looks like.”

Afterward Pelosi was very upset with the DREAMers, whining that they were wrong for treating her and the Democrats so poorly.

“The Democrats are the ones who stopped their assault on sanctuary cities, stopped the wall, the increased deportations in our last bill that was at the end of April, and we are determined to get Republican votes to pass the clean DREAM Act.

Is it possible to pass a bill without some border security? Well, we’ll have to see. We didn’t agree to anything in that regard, except to listen and something that deals with technology or something like that – but nothing like a wall.

I wish they would channel some of that energy into the Republican districts so we can pass the Dream Act.”

https://twitter.com/EvanSernoffsky/status/909837244076236800

Meanwhile, on Sunday’s episode of Meet the Press, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) explained why Pelosi, the Democrats, and any Republicans supporting new DACA legislation were just plain wrong.

If you pass the so-called DREAM Act it will be the single biggest amnesty in the history of the United States.

Even bigger than the 1986 amnesty which Ronald Reagan said was his biggest mistake in office.

The core debate has never been legal status it’s been how are we going to control the side effects.

Which is undercutting jobs and wages — which my legislation the RAISE Act would do — and deterring more illegal immigration…

Put yourself in the shoes of the parent in El Salvador. 

If you have the promise of American citizenship for your child trying to get away from the poverty and violence in that country and we pass a straight amnesty with no effort to increase enforcement or change Green Cards, would you take the very dangerous risk to get your child in America for the next amnesty?

That’s why we can’t simply codify DACA. We also have to deal with the negative side effects.

So, who wins the fight?

Responsible legislators who understand that you simply cannot ignore our laws and be rewarded for it, or those pushing amnesty and the chaos that it could mean for future immigration debates?

America is at a precipice with illegal immigration, and we’ll either fail the test and face collapse (like Europe), or we’ll stand for the rule of law and continue to enforce a legal immigration process that is fair and allows people from all over the planet the opportunity to succeed in America.

Article posted with permission from Constitution.com

Danish Government on Muslim Migrant Crime: “Worst Situation Since 2nd World War”

The rule of law is imploding in Denmark as “low-tech jihad” and migrant gangs take over the streets. The Danish government should not be surprised. But it appears to be.

Thousands of incidents involving loosened wheel bolts on cars, large rocks or cinder blocks thrown from highway overpasses, and thin steel wires strung across bicycle paths meant to decapitate unsuspecting cyclists, is spreading a growing sense of horror among the Danes.

In almost all cases, the perpetrators have turned out to be from MENAP countries (Middle East, North Africa, Pakistan).

In the latest development of what has been characterized as massive low-tech jihad,” gangs of migrants and refugees of Arab or North African descent are now shooting innocent people at random in the capital city of Copenhagen, placing in danger the lives of both locals and visitors to this popular tourist city.

Also read: How Should NATO React to the Threat from Sweden?

Three people already have been shot in what appears to be a savage form of target practice. Since all of the injured were young men — in an attempt to minimize the number of future victims — the Danish police now warns all men between 17 and 25 years of age to avoid public spaces in Copenhagen.

Preben Bang Henriksen, a spokesman for Denmark’s majority government party, the Liberal Venstre, is horrified by such a rapid decline in the safety of public spaces for the previously safe and calm kingdom:

“We have not had such warnings from the police since the 2nd World War. It is totally unacceptable,” said Preben Bang Henriksen.

A spokeswoman for the opposition Social Democrats, Trine Bramsen, concurs with the Liberal government, calling the current security situation “a catastrophe.”

For decades, critics of Islam and Muslim immigration have warned about irresponsible liberal policies that encourage accepting migrants or refugees from Islamic countries. Therefore, Danish politicians should not be surprised about the emergence of this despicable violence. But apparently, they are.

In an attempt to curtail this rapid deterioration in rule of law — and public safety in general — Denmark’s parliament has agreed to domestically deploy the army.

Such deployment will further deplete Denmark’s capability to fulfill its NATO obligations. This, in spite of how the government has promised US president Donald J. Trump that it would increase the country’s resources that are allocated to supporting the military alliance.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

White House Says No Amnesty – Solution Appears Like Potato “Potahtow” Comparison

“You say potato;  I say potahtow.  I say tomato;  you say toemahtow.” No matter how you pronounce it, people know to what you are referring.

So, when White House officials report that President Trump is not contemplating amnesty, but looking for a “responsible path forward” for illegal alien invaders who arrived with their parents as children, it sounds like amnesty.

The Hill reported:

The White House on Thursday said “there will be no amnesty” under President Trump, pushing back against charges he’s become “Amnesty Don” in his push to address young immigrants living illegally in the U.S.

“As we have said in the past, there will be no amnesty,” White House spokesperson Lindsay Walters told reporters aboard Air Force One. “Absolutely by no means will this White House discuss amnesty, and the president has made it clear how he feels about no amnesty.”

Trump has riled his base with his effort to strike a deal with Democrats to address immigrants benefitting from the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which he terminated last week.

Breitbart News used the headline “Amnesty Don” on a story slamming the president for working with Democrats on immigration, and the moniker was trending in Washington, D.C., early Thursday.

Even though Walters said Trump doesn’t seek “amnesty,” her comments sowed confusion over the White House’s definition of the term.

She said Trump is wants “responsible path forward” for DACA recipients that might allow them to obtain U.S. citizenship.

“What the Trump administration will discuss is a responsible path forward in immigration reform,” she said. “That could include legal citizenship over a period of time.”

Well, what is so confusing about this statement?  Nothing.

Trump is willing to discuss “immigration reform” whereby illegal alien invaders who came to this republic as children will possibly be allowed to attain legal citizenship “over a period of time.”

While the children cannot be held responsible for the actions of their parents, these children are now adults and have had the opportunity to abide by the law upon reaching the age of 18.

To allow a pathway to citizenship without any consequences for remaining in the republic after attaining the age of 18 and not seeking legal immigration is rewarding these individuals for committing a crime.

While some politicians on both sides of the aisle claim this is not “amnesty,” following along with immigration-rights activists, it is not holding individuals accountable for their commission of a crime – violating immigration law.

What is it, then, if this is not amnesty?

Despite what some may believe, there is no “right” to immigrate to another nation/country or republic.

Immigration is a function of government and is a privilege.

It is not a “right” someone possesses upon birth that is given by God.

Moreover, this does not address the illegal alien invaders who came as adults that are still residing in the united States.

The Hill continued:

Many on the right say that any path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants constitutes amnesty, even if it involves penalties like paying back taxes and fines. Immigrant-rights activists and many Republicans and Democrats say such a model is not amnesty.

Democratic leaders say they want to model the plan with Trump around the DREAM Act, which would offer a similar path to citizenship.

Such a proposal could further anger the president’s supporters, who want him to stick to his campaign promises to crack down on illegal immigration.

Trump pledged to end DACA at an August 2016 campaign rally, and he followed through last week, saying the program would begin to sunset next March.

But the president has also expressed sympathy for the young immigrants covered by the program and ramped up pressure on Congress to act to address their plight.

Trump, however, appears to realize that a DACA bill could anger his supporters.

“Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!” he tweeted Thursday. “They have been in our country for many years through no fault of their own – brought in by parents at young age. Plus BIG border security.”

There is nothing wrong with having sympathy or empathy for those brought here as children by their illegal alien invader parents.

But, sympathy and empathy cannot be used as excuses to violate the law or provide remedy from the law.

As many of these children, now adults, have indicated to the media and at rallies, they knew from a fairly young age they were in violation of the law.

They knew when they turned 18 they were in violation of the law.

Yet, these individuals did not seek a lawful remedy, choosing instead to remain here illegally.

They made that choice with full knowledge they were in violation of immigration law.

As it stands, they don’t want to suffer the consequences for their bad choice.

If empathy and sympathy is all it takes to receive a “pass” on violation of the law, then individuals currently serving prison sentences for theft to provide for a starving family should get the same consideration.

The same should happen for those who engaged in embezzlement or white collar crimes because they needed money for their family.  Is that going to happen?  Not hardly;  so, why should non-citizens be afforded a “pass” on the law when citizens are not privileged to receive such amnesty based on empathy and sympathy?

Is that going to happen?

Not hardly;  so, why should non-citizens be afforded a “pass” on the law when citizens are not privileged to receive such amnesty based on empathy and sympathy?

And, yes, Mr. Trump, regardless of their good character, education and accomplishments, these individuals are here illegally, in violation of the law, despite their service in the military and having a job, and should be deported.

Once these individuals attained the age of adulthood, he or she became responsible for their own actions, which, in this case, is not reporting to ICE in order to become a legal resident.

In all this deal making, Mr. Trump, where is the funding for the wall or the action to build the wall?  Nowhere.

It’s the same old stuff, just a different day where Democrats and some Republicans get everything they want, leaving the rest of us empty handed, getting nothing in return.

Mr. Trump, you received support based on your campaign platform, particularly the stance on illegal alien invasion and securing the border with a wall.

To now discard this platform in favor of the “swamp mud” is to damage your support base like so many establishment Republicans have done by back pedaling on your campaign platform.

Right, left, center or back row;  allowing individuals to be exempt from punishment for the commission of a crime is amnesty, despite calling it a “pathway to citizenship” or “immigration reform” to pass some ex post facto law making their violation legal when it was illegal.

Democrat and Republican charlatan politicians are looking for nothing more than votes – Democrats particularly, with Republicans looking to keep Big Corporations happy.

Considering that neither party has worked for the betterment of this republic, one can only assume their contemplation of some type of amnesty has an agenda attached to it benefitting those in office.

When the law becomes a Chinese buffet, where one picks and chooses what one likes and ignores the rest, the “rule of men” is instituted whereby the law becomes inequitable, favoring those individuals who are “pets” of the political elite;  the rest be damned.

 

Dennis Michael Lynch on Trump’s Meeting with Pelosi & Schumer: “The President is Out of Control”

One can hardly think of illegal immigration, aka illegal alien invasion, without linking it to the documentary three-part series by Dennis Michael Lynch, “They Come to America.”

It is a must watch for anyone who doesn’t understand the impact of illegal alien invasion upon this republic.

In 2015, articles here at Freedom Outpost covered the three DVD series – “They Come to America – A Must See“; “They Come To America – An Unsecure Border“;  and, “They Come to America – The Disconnect with Political Rhetoric.”

The series remains for sale on the above referenced site.

In response to President Trump’s meeting with Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the president’s subsequent tweets regarding the meeting, Dennis Michael Lynch had plenty to say in response.

Before the video, Mr. Lynch wants viewers to understand a few things.

  1. DACA, or any version of it, is amnesty.
  2. Allowing illegal aliens to remain in the country is amnesty
  3. Not enforcing the law is what Obama did
  4. Although no deal has been cut, Trump is in favor of getting a deal done on DACA.  If you don’t believe this then you don’t believe Trump.  He has said it, has tweeted it,                               several times.

The video can be viewed here either in YouTube or Facebook Live format.

Mr. Lynch is correct in that Trump took a hard-line stance on illegal alien invasion.

He was the only Republican candidate to do so.

In fact, Donald Trump published his “immigration reform” platform on his website, which the direct link was removed receiving a 404 error when trying to access it.

However, web archives are a wonderful thing when Trump’s plan can be accessed through a search.

In that plan, there contained a section entitled, “Defend the Laws And Constitution Of The United States.”

Where does playing “Let’s Make  A Deal” with Pelosi and Schumer on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, where Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog get the shiny new Ferrari and American citizens get a pie plate full of whipped cream in the face, play into this campaign platform posted proudly on the internet for everyone in the world to read?  Nowhere.

And, how does one propose to distinguish these childhood arrivals, who are now adults and have had plenty of time to apply for legal immigration, from those individuals who did not arrive as children, who have committed additional crimes and who were released by the Hussein Soetoro regime – because we know how meticulous immigration records are kept, and those who are terrorists from countries other than those in Mexico, Latin and Central America?

Where is the return on the investment voters who supported Trump made in the 2016 election?

How does empathy and sympathy for illegal alien invader criminals, which is what the children turned adults now are because they have violated the constitutionally passed immigration law, override the empathy and sympathy for the groups of American citizens Mr. Lynch identified in his rebuttal speech to Trump?

Dennis Lynch is correct when stating that Trump indicated Hillary Clinton’s 3 million popular vote edge probably came from illegal alien invader voters.

Now, though, Trump wants to make those illegal alien invaders legal voters through amnesty and citizenship, which will be forthcoming in any immigration reform bill involving establishment Republicans and Democrats.

Trump’s own immigration reform platform touts the wrongly identified number of 11 million illegal alien invader criminals already inside the republic’s borders.

So, where does this fictional 800,000 number originate when immigration records are sorely lacking to accurately determine illegal alien invader criminals much less those brought here as children?

Like many citizens, this issue of continuing to let criminals slide based on being a political elite, a wealthy individual, or illegal alien invader from wherever has about run its course to where there can be no more wiggle room.  As a friend likes to say, very colorfully, in fact, “I have no more ***** to give.”

It’s time to throw Trump’s own campaign immigration reform platform back in his face!

What about it “Mr. President?”  Are you willing to stand on your own platform or was that platform just a pat on the head to the good little American voter whose support you needed to secure the White House?

A better question, Mr. President, is did you even have a hand in developing this platform or have some stooge write it for you then just didn’t bother to read it?

It wouldn’t be out of the ordinary for that to occur since the majority of Washington, DC, elected officials can’t be bothered to read anything, if they can even read at all.

So, while you are busy trying to use tweets to put out a fire you started, why don’t you think about the citizens in this republic who have largely been forgotten by their government as Mr. Lynch identified.

Many put you in the office you now hold.

The others are in tent cities, are homeless, and are veterans who heeded the call of their country and have been treated worse than lepers.

Where is your empathy and sympathy for them?

Nowhere, but you have no difficulty giving empathy and sympathy to those who have given nothing and taken everything.

Man up, Donald.

Be a man of your word or wear the plaque denoting everyone in Washington, DC – charlatan politician.

Ann Coulter Is Exactly Right: Every Time Republicans Compromise On Immigration They Get Nothing In Return

When are Republicans going to learn? In her most recent article, Ann Coulter pointed out that every time Republicans compromise on immigration it turns out to be a total disaster.

If you go back all the way to 1986, the Republicans never got the employer sanctions that they were promised even after the Democrats were given amnesty for four million illegal immigrants.

And every time Republicans have attempted to push amnesty since that time, it has been a disaster for Republican politicians at the polls.

This time around, we are told that we are supposed to compromise on DACA.

Okay, will we get to build a wall in return?

Of course not.

Will our concerns about lightly vetted refugees coming in from hotbeds of Islamic terror be addressed?

Of course not.

In return for compromising on DACA, the Democrats wants to make some nice sounding promises that won’t be too politically damaging that they will be able to easily break in the future.

This has happened time after time, and yet Republicans never seem to get it. But Ann Coulter sure does

Congress has passed laws requiring that immigrants pay back taxes, learn English, not collect welfare and have good moral character.

That’s not too onerous, right? It’s not like we’re requiring them to have any skills or talents that would be valuable to America.

Every single one of these requirements has been scuttled by immigration bureaucrats, federal judges and Democratic presidents.

All of ’em.

Our immigration bureaucracy is so dedicated to destroying America that it’s made citizens of thousands of convicted felons.

Look, I am certainly not against immigrants. In fact, I have a great love for those that have risked everything to come here for a better life.

I have great-grandparents on both my mother’s side and my father’s side that were immigrants to this country.

And it is also important to note that Donald Trump’s wife is an immigrant.

This nation was built by immigrants, and we should never forget that. But the point is that they came in legally.

We need a system that requires that everyone comes in through the front door. There is nothing unreasonable about that. But instead our system of legal immigration is a complete and utter nightmare, and meanwhile, we are leaving the back door completely wide open.

One of the big reasons why Democrats want more illegal immigration is because they believe that in the long-term it will end up producing more Democratic voters.

And of course many Democrats are also big-time globalists, and the globalists want a world where national borders will eventually become essentially meaningless.

That is why they may talk about “border security” during campaign season but they will never, ever agree to build a wall. Here is more from Ann Coulter

Every politician swears up and down that he wants a “secure border.” But then these same politicians go absolutely berserk when Trump says he wants to build a wall.

They say we’ll get enforcement right after the amnesty.

That’s obviously absurd. When the tub is overflowing, water pouring out of the faucet, across the carpets, down the stairs, up the dining room walls, we don’t debate whether we’re going to dry clean the curtains or throw them out. We don’t argue about whether to use a mop or towels.

FIRST: Turn off the water.

It is no longer good enough for politicians to promise us “more border security.”

If someone running for Congress will not specifically commit to building a border walldo not vote for that individual.

Tens of millions of people have come into this country illegally over the decades, and we need a way to make sure that everyone comes in through the front door from now on.

If something other than a border wall can accomplish that, I would love to hear that proposal.

This is not a crisis that we can put off for another day.

Just consider what has been happening down in Texas. The following comes from an article that I published in 2015

Today, the number of people that enter Texas illegally is greater than the number of babies being born to citizens of that state.

And those illegal immigrants commit a lot of crime.

According to Texas state Senator Dan Patrick, illegal immigrants were charged with nearly half a million crimes in his state during one recent four year time period.

And he says that there are “at least 100,000 illegal immigrant gang members” living inside the state of Texas right now…

If I get elected to Congress, I am going to work with President Trump to build a border wall and to greatly secure our borders, and I hope that you will join me in this effort.

As President Trump has said, a nation that doesn’t have borders isn’t really a nation at all.

Either we have a country or we don’t.

Like Trump, I am going to fight the agenda of the globalists every step of the way, and we need to work very hard to vote out all of the globalists that are currently representing us in Congress.

They want to label us as “heartless” for being opposed to illegal immigration, but of course, that is not the case at all.

In the end, we just want all immigration to be done legally, and if we can get that accomplished that will be good for everybody.

Article posted with permission from End of the American Dream

Take a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End and then prepare

Donald Trump: We “Really Have No Choice” But to End DACA”

President Donald Trump kept his word to put an end to Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah’s unlawful executive amnesty program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

“I have a great heart for these folks we’re talking about,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. “A great love for them.”

“I have a love for these people and hopefully now Congress will be able to help them and do it properly,” Trump added.

While the usurper Obama decried his decision as “cruel.” Trump hoped that Congress would establish law to deal with the issue, something that is constitutional, unlike Obama ignoring immigration law and thumbing his nose at the branch of government that was given all authority to legislate.

“Really we have no choice, we have to be able to do something, and I think it’s going to work out very well,” Trump said.

Obama willy nilly ignored the Constitution and immigration law, which was written by Congress.

The GOP-led Congress did nothing about it.  In fact, they are just as guilty as Obama because they never put forth one article of impeachment to deal with this or any of his other documented crimes against the people in full violation of his oath of office.

Democrats were losing their minds at Trump’s move.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), another criminally minded Democrat who has sought to protect people from the law, said that Trump and his administration were basically endorsing “white supremacy” by reversing DACA.

“This Administration is on a very dangerous trajectory towards the full-throated endorsement of white supremacy—the likes of which we haven’t seen in the open from a sitting President for a century,” Gutierrez said.

What he doesn’t tell you are the hosts of immigrants of various ethnic backgrounds that are allowed into the US every single year.  This has nothing to do with white supremacy, it has to do with following immigration law.

However, Mr. Gutierrez demonstrated his own racism by blasting Trump’s pardon of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for upholding the law that Gutierrez and Obama wouldn’t uphold while at the same time offering praise to “those who marched at the University of Virginia with torches shouting ‘Jews will not replace us.'”

“But this action on DACA to pull the rug out from under almost 800,000 documented immigrants who have lived here for at least ten years and cast them back into the shadows is the ugliest act of appeasement for the far-right’s white-supremacist goals of them all, so far,” Gutierrez said.

He then took a shot at White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and more accusations of white supremacism.

“General Kelly is a hypocrite who is a disgrace to the uniform he used to wear,” Gutierrez said. “He has no honor and should be drummed out of the White House along with the white supremacists and those enabling the President’s actions by ‘just following orders.’”

Big words from such a little insecure man.

“It just takes the country in the wrong direction and will be devastating to individual immigrants and families,” Gutierrez said of the reversal of DACA. “The disruption, chaos and fear that this action precipitates will also strain state and local governments, educators, and employers. DACA is a program that has been a smashing success, yet the President, purely out of spite and incompetence is smashing DACA.”

A smashing success?  How so Mr. Gutierrez?  By violating the law?  That would be success for Communists like yourself, wouldn’t it?

He declared on Monday that he would attempt to fight Trump in the courts, as well as that streets, to make sure that DACA recipients were not deported.

“Yes, we will be on the streets fighting. Yes, we will go to the courts to fight, and we will also insist that our friends and our allies in the Congress of the United States don’t sign a budget, don’t support a budget, don’t collaborate with Republicans and give us a budget unless there is a safe place legislatively, an avenue legislatively, that secures the future for the 800,000 DACA recipients,” he said. “Let’s be clear. We are going to fight in the courts, we are going to fight in the streets, but also we are going to fight in the Congress of the United States to make sure legislatively we have a solution.”

What else is new?  Gutierrez and his partners in crime from ANTIFA to Black Lives Matter have been on America’s streets causing all sorts of chaos and senseless violence.

Then there were the comments by former attorney general of California turned US Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) who echoed Obama’s comments that Trump is “cruel” and “heartless” and that the president is siding with “division” and “hate.”

“They came out of the shadows and submitted every detail of their personal lives to prove that they were lawful, productive members of our society,” she said in a statement on Tuesday. “By turning his back on our young Dreamers and their families, President Trump has once again sided with division and hate.”

“Now more than ever, it is time we roll up our sleeves and stand with these young people who contribute to our community and our economy,” she said. “Republicans in Congress must immediately allow a vote on the DREAM Act, a bipartisan bill we introduced again this summer. We are better than this.”

Joining her fellow comrade Harris tweeted out, “I will fight tooth and nail to protect . Those young people have only known one home, the U.S. Deporting them would be inhumane.”

Even Tech CEOs stood against Trump, largely because they have illegals working for them.   Take a look at some of these tweets.

From Apple CEO Tim Cook.

Google’s Sundar Pichai tweeted, “Dreamers are our neighbors, our friends and our co-workers. This is their home. Congress needs to act now to #DefendDACA. #WithDreamers.”

Twitter CEO added, “Completely unnecessary and cruel. Ending  is a crushing blow to those who want to contribute to our future.”

No, it will be a crushing blow to your company and your censorship of real Americans speaking the truth to which you so often give approval.  The same could be said of Google.

Then, of course, there’s the new prince of censorship, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

“This is a sad day for our country,” Zuckerberg wrote.  ” The decision to end DACA is not just wrong. It is particularly cruel to offer young people the American Dream, encourage them to come out of the shadows and trust our government, and then punish them for it.”

This is a sad day for our country. The decision to end DACA is not just wrong. It is particularly cruel to offer young…

Posted by Mark Zuckerberg on Tuesday, September 5, 2017

But not as cruel as defending Islam and Islamic jihadis, right Mr. Zuckerberg?  Not as cruel as shutting down Facebook pages of conservatives and helping to undercut their income, right?  No, that’s American in your book.

President Trump tweeted out that he will revisit the issue against in six months if Congress fails to act on it.

“Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do). If they can’t, I will revisit this issue!” Trump tweeted.

“I look forward to working w/ D’s + R’s in Congress to address immigration reform in a way that puts hardworking citizens of our country 1st,” Trump added.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the ending of DACA saying, “The program known as DACA that was effectuated under the Obama administration is being rescinded.”

What I want to see now is President trump actually enforce the law that exists, or at least start dealing with these companies like Google, Apple, Twitter and Facebook and their CEOs who are hiring illegal aliens in violation of immigration law.

Time will tell if any of that will take place.

Here’s the full statement from the White House website:

As President, my highest duty is to defend the American people and the Constitution of the United States of America. At the same time, I do not favor punishing children, most of whom are now adults, for the actions of their parents. But we must also recognize that we are nation of opportunity because we are a nation of laws.

The legislative branch, not the executive branch, writes these laws – this is the bedrock of our Constitutional system, which I took a solemn oath to preserve, protect, and defend.

In June of 2012, President Obama bypassed Congress to give work permits, social security numbers, and federal benefits to approximately 800,000 illegal immigrants currently between the ages of 15 and 36. The typical recipients of this executive amnesty, known as DACA, are in their twenties. Legislation offering these same benefits had been introduced in Congress on numerous occasions and rejected each time.

In referencing the idea of creating new immigration rules unilaterally, President Obama admitted that “I can’t just do these things by myself” – and yet that is exactly what he did, making an end-run around Congress and violating the core tenets that sustain our Republic.

Officials from 10 States are suing over the program, requiring my Administration to make a decision regarding its legality. The Attorney General of the United States, the Attorneys General of many states, and virtually all other top legal experts have advised that the program is unlawful and unconstitutional and cannot be successfully defended in court.

There can be no path to principled immigration reform if the executive branch is able to rewrite or nullify federal laws at will.

The temporary implementation of DACA by the Obama Administration, after Congress repeatedly rejected this amnesty-first approach, also helped spur a humanitarian crisis – the massive surge of unaccompanied minors from Central America including, in some cases, young people who would become members of violent gangs throughout our country, such as MS-13.

Only by the reliable enforcement of immigration law can we produce safe communities, a robust middle class, and economic fairness for all Americans.

Therefore, in the best interests of our country, and in keeping with the obligations of my office, the Department of Homeland Security will begin an orderly transition and wind-down of DACA, one that provides minimum disruption. While new applications for work permits will not be accepted, all existing work permits will be honored until their date of expiration up to two full years from today. Furthermore, applications already in the pipeline will be processed, as will renewal applications for those facing near-term expiration. This is a gradual process, not a sudden phase out. Permits will not begin to expire for another six months, and will remain active for up to 24 months. Thus, in effect, I am not going to just cut DACA off, but rather provide a window of opportunity for Congress to finally act.

Our enforcement priorities remain unchanged. We are focused on criminals, security threats, recent border-crossers, visa overstays, and repeat violators. I have advised the Department of Homeland Security that DACA recipients are not enforcement priorities unless they are criminals, are involved in criminal activity, or are members of a gang.

The decades-long failure of Washington, D.C. to enforce federal immigration law has had both predictable and tragic consequences: lower wages and higher unemployment for American workers, substantial burdens on local schools and hospitals, the illicit entry of dangerous drugs and criminal cartels, and many billions of dollars a year in costs paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Yet few in Washington expressed any compassion for the millions of Americans victimized by this unfair system. Before we ask what is fair to illegal immigrants, we must also ask what is fair to American families, students, taxpayers, and jobseekers.

Congress now has the opportunity to advance responsible immigration reform that puts American jobs and American security first. We are facing the symptom of a larger problem, illegal immigration, along with the many other chronic immigration problems Washington has left unsolved. We must reform our green card system, which now favors low-skilled immigration and puts immense strain on U.S. taxpayers. We must base future immigration on merit – we want those coming into the country to be able to support themselves financially, to contribute to our economy, and to love our country and the values it stands for. Under a merit-based system, citizens will enjoy higher employment, rising wages, and a stronger middle class. Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue have introduced the RAISE Act, which would establish this merit-based system and produce lasting gains for the American People.

I look forward to working with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to finally address all of these issues in a manner that puts the hardworking citizens of our country first.

As I’ve said before, we will resolve the DACA issue with heart and compassion – but through the lawful Democratic process – while at the same time ensuring that any immigration reform we adopt provides enduring benefits for the American citizens we were elected to serve. We must also have heart and compassion for unemployed, struggling, and forgotten Americans.

Above all else, we must remember that young Americans have dreams too. Being in government means setting priorities. Our first and highest priority in advancing immigration reform must be to improve jobs, wages and security for American workers and their families.

It is now time for Congress to act!

ISIS ‘Hit Squads’ Are Using The Refugee Program To Infiltrate Western Nations

I know that the headline sounds over the top, but this has actually been confirmed by German intelligence and by the mainstream media. ISIS terrorists have been using the refugee program to sneak into North America and Europe, and yet very little is being done to stop this from happening. One of the reasons why this hits so close to home for me is because leftists are pushing to bring a lot more Islamic refugees up here to north Idaho. Since our area has a low population density, a significant number of refugees could dramatically alter the character of our community very rapidly. Many moved up here in order to have a safe place to raise their families, but now the left seems determined to bring the danger of Islamic extremism to our local neighborhoods.

Refugees typically have little or no paperwork, and it can be exceedingly difficult to tell a terrorist apart from a non-terrorist. German intelligence has discovered that ISIS has been using this confusion to smuggle “hit squads” and “sleeper cells” into Germany

German intelligence services have evidence that “hit squads” from the Islamic State terror group have infiltrated the country disguised as refugees, the deputy head of Bavaria’s spy agency told the BBC Thursday.

“We have to accept that we have hit squads and sleeper cells in Germany,” Manfred Hauser, the vice president of the Bavaria region’s intelligence gathering agency, BayLfV, told the Today program.

“We have substantial reports that among the refugees there are hit squads. There are hundreds of these reports, some from refugees themselves. We are still following up on these, and we haven’t investigated all of them fully,” said Hauser.

Did you catch that?

German intelligence says that there are literally “hundreds” of reports of ISIS hit squads being among the refugees.

And CNN has reported that two of the Islamic extremists that were involved in the Paris attack last November entered Europe through the refugee program…

In the aftermath of the Paris attack in November, authorities revealed that two of the attackers — who blew themselves up outside the Stade de France — entered Europe through Greece using fake Syrian passports and posing as refugees. They were accompanied by two other alleged ISIS operatives who were held briefly by Greek authorities, released a month later, then re-arrested in the aftermath of the attack, as detailed by CNN.

Cases like this — and the arrests Tuesday in Germany — emphasize what is a difficult reality facing European law enforcement: ISIS has used migrant routes to ferry operatives into Europe, and some of those operatives may still be in hiding.

CNN is about as politically correct as you can get, and even they are admitting that this is a major problem.

In addition, a very large percentage of Islamic refugees hold deeply anti-Semitic views. According to the Jerusalem Post, one study found that more than half of all Muslim refugees have anti-Semitic attitudes…

“More than half of Muslim asylum seekers showed clear tendencies of an antisemitic attitude pattern,” wrote the authors of the 201-page study examined by The Jerusalem Post.

When asked by the investigators if “Jews have too much influence in the world,” 52% of Syrians said yes, while 53% of Iraqis agreed with the statement. Nearly 60% of Afghans said Jews wield too much influence, while a mere 5.4% of those from Eritrea – a Christian-majority country – held antisemitic views. Some Eritreans said they were familiar with Jews from the Bible.

Here in north Idaho, we have many wonderful Jewish people, and there is no place for that kind of hatred in our communities. Do we really want our Jewish neighbors to live in constant fear that they could be attacked?

And law enforcement personnel are often targets as well. For example, a 46-year-old Islamic refugee just tried to decapitate a police officer in Kennewick, Washington just a few days ago

A 46-year-old Somali refugee identified as Hussein Hassan attacked a police officer in Kennewick, Washington, over the weekend with a large sword, striking at the officer’s head before he was shot and killed.

A spokesman for the police said two officers responded to a 9-1-1 call at 6:38 p.m. Sunday about a man walking down Olympia Street near 10th Avenue armed with a sword.

The two officers arrived on the scene at the same time in separate cars at about 6:40 p.m. One officer got out of his car to confront Hassan and police say the man started swinging the sword, striking the officer at least once in the head with the blade.

Both officers opened fire on the suspect and put him down.

And here in Idaho, nobody will be able to ever forget what happened in Twin Falls a while back. Three young Islamic refugees were arrested after they sexually assaulted a five-year-old girl

Three boys, ages 14, 10, and 7, were charged in the case. The older boys, brothers, are from Eritrea, an African country, while the younger boy is from Iraq. The boys are from refugee families, but it is unclear how long they had been in the community.

What is known is that one of the boys touched the girl inappropriately inside the apartment complex’s laundry facilities. Another boy recorded the assault on a phone.

One boy pleaded guilty to felony exploitation of a child and misdemeanor battery. A second boy pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting felony lewd conduct and aiding and abetting misdemeanor battery. The third boy pleaded guilty to accessory to the commission of a felony.

So why would the left want to inflict this kind of pain on our communities?

Well, the real reason is because Muslims are five times more likely to vote for Democrats than they are for Republicans…

When it comes to political and social views, Muslims are far more likely to identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party (66%) than the Republican Party (13%) and to say they prefer a bigger government providing more services (67%) over a smaller government providing fewer services (25%). And about half of U.S. Muslims (52%) now say homosexuality should be accepted by society, up considerably from 2011 (39%) and 2007 (27%).

If I am elected to Congress, I am going to push for legislation that would allow local communities all over the United States to opt out of the refugee program.

In other words, I believe that local communities should have the option to say no to refugees. If you want to help me make this a reality, you can help the campaign right here. We need bold leaders that are going to stand up and do what is right, not spineless jellyfish that will fold at the first sign of opposition.

Our world is becoming a more dangerous place with each passing day, and Islamic terror is on the rise. We need to understand that Islamists have declared war on our way of life, and purposely importing them into our communities is utter insanity.

Article reposted with permission from End of the American Dream

Take a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End and then prepare

The Hidden Costs of Illegals

The Hidden Costs of Illegals

The distinction between legal immigration and illegal migration makes all the difference in the world. At issue is the American impulse to extend freedom, counterbalanced by the undocumented aliens’ desire to usurp it. Thus, to consider what liberty means to us, we must directly reference an inspirational source:

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome …

I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

– From “The New Colossus” (1883) by 19th century American poet Emma Lazarus

Based upon the above description, is it any wonder a more famous part of this sonnet—referring to “huddled masses, yearning to breathe free”—has been inscribed on a bronze plaque in the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty?

Inscribed since 1903 upon that monument, this message conveys a uniquely American spirit.

It’s defined by humanitarianism and economic generosity.

In cultural terms, it has translated into our “melting pot” philosophy: a warm embrace of foreign-born citizens.

Speaking of the statuesque and the great is our own current first lady, Melania Trump, born in Slovenia (formerly Yugoslavia).

For any newcomer, who’s a better symbol of the American Dream than she?

To that end, the U.S. permits more legal immigration than any other country in the world. That accounts for about 20% of the world’s migrants.

For context, based upon available 2015 figures from Pew Research Center, some 43.2 million people living in the U.S. were born in another country.

Add to that 277.7 born on native soil, and we arrive at 320.9 million: America’s populace for that year.

Given that the world’s population then was approximately 7.2 billion, that means there’s a 1 in 26 chance of being born stateside.

Hence, not really good odds for the inhabitants of economically challenged third world countries!

Yet, Liberty’s “golden door” was never intended to be an open border policy.

As a metaphor, that would be like throwing one’s home open, at any time, to perfect strangers—allowing said “guests” to permanently reside—and expecting positive results.

Compounding that disturbing dynamic is the general caliber of these criminal interlopers.

For starters, they have already violated U.S. immigration law.

Also working against them are cultural barriers, usually a lack education and specifically, English language proficiency.

Even worse is an inability to find gainful employment legitimately.

Under these obviously adverse conditions, is it any surprise that so many turn to crime to survive?

A recent government count of incarcerated aliens bears this out.

As of June 24, 22% of the U.S. prison population, or 42,000, are in federal prisons.

Per the Prisons Bureau, the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates (exemplified by Fiscal Year 2015) was $31,977.65. (Per inmate, per day, that’s $87.61—or roughly 1.3 billion dollars per year!)

Recall, per Social Security, the typical employee made $48,098.63 that year.

So, astonishingly, housing a criminal cost 66% of what that average U.S. employee earned! And that is just the tip of the fiscal morass perpetrated by this shadowy underclass of 11 million squatters.

Globally, per the Washington Times, a new study from the Center for Immigration Studies finds they will drain nearly $750 billion from U.S. taxpayers over their lifetimes.

That’s six times the cost of mass deportations.

However, the cost is more than strictly economic.

As these aliens predominantly congregate in failed Democratic-controlled urban centers, like Chicago, San Francisco and Portland, is it any surprise that these sanctuary cities are hotbeds for criminality inflicted against the law-abiding?

Tragically, that’s seen most graphically in a one-man crime wave that is Mexican Sergio Jose Martinez, 31.

Reportedly deported 20 times for progressively more serious offenses ranging from drug possession and burglary to auto theft and hit and run, he’s currently accused of raping a 65-year-old Oregon woman as well as the same-day attempted kidnapping of a 24-year-old female while wielding a knife.

If released again, will he cause the death of some innocent like Kate Steinle?

Meanwhile, House Bill 3464—a bill to expand Oregon’s sanctuary status with no Republican support—sits on beleaguered Governor Kate Brown’s desk.

Specifically, the measure prohibits state and local agencies from sharing information with federal authorities or inquiring about a person’s immigration status except as required by state and federal law.

The high profile brutalization of one, and the threat of bodily harm to another has galvanized state Republicans.

Senate Minority Whip Dennis Linthicum said:

“[Sanctuary states] excuse lawless behavior and perpetuate criminal, rape and gang cultures. Every Oregonian should be outraged to see criminals let loose into the streets. Career Democrats shouldn’t sacrifice Oregonians’ safety on the altar of their extreme political agenda.”

Unfortunately, as state Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and Governor Brown spearheaded this harebrained effort, it seems highly unlikely that mounting political pressure will suddenly compel a veto.

Therefore, how are these Democratic leaders not indirectly complicit in Martinez’s crimes?

In any case, shouldn’t public safety always trump their politically correct social engineering?

Indeed, to be effective, our democracy requires acclimation to agreed upon laws, a common language, and basic standards of civilized conduct.

At every level of community—from the local to the state to the national—the United States is individually and collectively owned, and financed, by her citizens.

Would progressive politicians host and subsidize the uninvited and the violent in their personal dwellings?

Therefore, how is it not insanity for them to advocate free rein for the unvetted and the lawbreaking within America’s homeland?

In any case, the waste of U.S. resources to mitigate the fallout from Democrats’ dystopian schemes is appalling.

Still, at least that exorbitant expense is measurable.

What isn’t is the domino effect of illegals’ criminality: the invisible human cost exacted by victims’ anguish and suffering. That price—which liberals completely ignore—is incalculable.

Trump Administration Cracks Down and Cuts Funding to “Sanctuary Cities”

The Trump administration has just announced that they’ll be making some drastic changes to the way that the federal government hands out money.

The administration has announced that it will block Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, which is a HUGE pool of money that goes to helping cities and states with their law enforcement issues.

However, many so-called “Sanctuary Cities” refuse to obey federal laws or to even work with federal law enforcement agencies when it  comes to dealing with illegal alien criminals. This reticence to abide by federal law has led the Trump administration to remove millions in federal funds from these lawless sanctuary cities.

From the Center for Immigration Studies:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Tuesday that sanctuary jurisdictions will lose access to certain federal law enforcement grants in 2017 if they prohibit officials from communicating with ICE, if they block ICE from interviewing jail inmates, or if they fail to notify ICE of the pending release of criminal aliens ICE is seeking to deport.

These particular grants, known as the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, are the largest source of federal criminal justice funds for state, local, and tribal authorities.

This move is helping fulfill one early promise of the Trump administration: to impose consequences on the most egregious of the more than 300 sanctuary jurisdictions.

It is significant because a large share of the funds awarded in this program go to sanctuary jurisdictions.

For example, according to DOJ records, the four largest grants, and seven out of the top 10 recipients of the Byrne/JAG grants are sanctuaries. Under the new rules announced by Sessions, these four top grant-getters (New York City, Cook County, Ill., the City of Los Angeles, and Philadelphia) are likely to be disqualified from these grants in the future if they maintain their current policies toward ICE.

These cities received more than $10 million in grants in 2016.

You can see the list of Sanctuary Cities and the money they’ll be losing below.

Sanctuary Jurisdictions Receiving Byrne/JAG Grants in 2016

Awardee Award Amount Location
New York City Major’s Office of Criminal Justice $4,298,245 N.Y.
City of Chicago $2,333,428 Ill.
City of Los Angeles $1,870,503 Calif.
City of Philadelphia $1,677,937 Pa.
Clark County $975,604 Nev.
Milwaukee County $937,932 Wisc.
County of Alameda, CA $876,345 Calif.
City of Baltimore $743,842 Md.
City of Seattle $673,166 Wash.
County of San Bernandino $626,025 Calif.
Hennepin County $564,510 Minn.
City of San Diego $546,793 Calif.
City of Newark Police Department $525,446 N.J.
City and County of San Francisco $522,943 Calif.
City of Albuquerque $479,125 N.M.
City of Portland $465,810 Ore.
City of Boston $447,390 Mass.
City of Riverside $429,942 Calif.
City and County of Denver $426,590 Colo.
City of Stockton $383,843 Calif.
City of Orange $377,708 Calif.
Baltimore, County of $336,110 Md.
County of Sedwick $331,032 Kan.
Prince Georges County $312,667 Md.
Dekalb County $306,768 Ga.
City of Tacoma $287,469 Wash.
City of Fresno $269,208 Calif.
City of New Orleans $265,832 La.
City of Saint Paul $260,540 Minn.
City of Sacramento $256,776 Calif.
City of Colorado Springs $255,100 Colo.
Sacramento County $241,650 Calif.
City of Providence $225,539 R.I.
City of New Haven $217,907 Conn.
City of Hartford $196,347 Conn.
City of Long Beach $196,217 Calif.
City of Bridgeport $195,781 Conn.
Contra Costa County $194,562 Calif.
City of Aurora $175,123 Colo.
County of Kern $168,552 Calif.
County of Union $167,034 N.J.
County of Stanislaus $165,937 Calif.
Spokane County $154,903 Wash.
County of Delaware $154,093 Pa.
Montgomery County $147,560 Md.
City of Bakersfield $145,769 Calif.
City of North Las Vegas PD $143,777 Nev.
City of Vallejo $136,511 Calif.
City of Reno $130,850 Nev.
City of Syracuse $117,888 N.Y.
City of Oxnard $112,635 Calif.
Santa Barbara County $108,100 Calif.
Clayton County $107,853 Ga.
City of Salinas $98,308 Calif.
City of Pueblo $95,787 Colo.
City of Compton $95,747 Calif.
Clark County $91,717 Wash.
City of New Brunswick $90,341 N.J.
City of Lakewood $87,988 Colo.
City of Topeka $85,769 Kan.
Lane County $84,217 Ore.
County of Jackson $76,389 Calif.
City of Council Bluffs $73,440 Iowa
City of Salem $69,968 Ore.
City of Pomona Police Dept $69,550 Calif.
City of Lancaster $68,883 Calif.
City of Greeley $65,164 Colo.
City of Palmdale $64,321 Calif.
City of Gainesville $63,771 Fla.
City of Yakima $63,434 Wash.
City of Allentown $62,429 Pa.
Inglewood City $61,413 Calif.
City of Santa Cruz $59,519 Calif.
Chesterfield County $55,163 Va.
City of Pawtucket $54,601 R.I.
City of Oceanside $53,730 Calif.
City of Merced $51,649 Calif.
City of Fort Collins $51,561 Colo.
City of Redding $50,688 Calif.
Linn County $50,045 Iowa
City of Hawthorne $50,021 Calif.
City of Waterbury $49,914 Conn.
City of Boulder $49,602 Colo.
City of Santa Rosa $48,367 Calif.
Sonoma County $48,287 Calif.
City of Woonsocket $47,961 R.I.
Chula Vista City $47,700 Calif.
Adams County $46,754 Colo.
City of Escondido $46,313 Calif.
Municipality of Norristown $46,294 Pa.
County of Tulare $46,020 Calif.
City of Everett $45,593 Wash.
Arlington County $44,203 Va.
City of Erie $43,588 Pa.
City of Stamford $43,468 Conn.
City of Elk Grove $42,765 Calif.
City of Gallup $42,240 N.M.
Shasta County $42,045 Calif.
City of South Gate $41,484 Calif.
County of Merced $41,458 Calif.
City of Visalia $40,764 Calif.
County of Washington $39,976 Ore.
City of Bellingham $39,398 Wash.
City of New Britain $39,287 Conn.
Town of Hamden $38,895 Conn.
Kitsap County $38,053 Wash.
Incorporated Village of Hempstead $37,982 N.Y.
City of Hanford $37,643 Calif.
Yolo County $37,455 Calif.
City of New London $36,107 Conn.
City of Thornton $34,968 Colo.
Henderson Police Department $34,400 Nev.
City of Concord $33,988 Calif.
Hernando County $33,767 Fla.
Deschutes. County of $33,730 Ore.
City of Norwalk $33,712 Conn.
Tulare City $33,694 Calif.
Snohomish County $33,664 Wash.
City of Vista $33,348 Calif.
City of Farmington New Mexico $33,277 N.M.
West Haven City $32,841 Conn.
City of Cambridge $32,576 Mass.
City of Las Cruces $31,665 N.M.
City of Norwalk $30,840 Calif.
City of Roswell $30,672 N.M.
City of Huntington Park $30,440 Calif.
City of Turlock $30,066 Calif.
Madera County $29,426 Calif.
City of Central Falls $28,961 R.I.
City of El Cajon $28,759 Calif.
City of El Monte $28,492 Calif.
City of Grand Junction $28,487 Colo.
City of Iowa City $28,453 Iowa
City of Santa Monica $28,199 Calif.
City of Rancho Cordova $28,012 Calif.
City of Citrus Heights $27,692 Calif.
City of Cranston $27,195 R.I.
City of Westminster $27,169 Colo.
Valencia County $26,889 N.M.
City of Downey $26,358 Calif.
San Juan County $26,237 N.M.
Thurston County $25,982 Wash.
Clackamas County Juvenile Department $25,771 Ore.
City of Spokane Valley $25,628 Wash.
City of National City $25,397 Calif.
City of Meriden $25,175 Conn.
Dona Asta County $24,904 N.M.
City of Santa Clarita $24,677 Calif.
City of Chico $24,570 Calif.
City of Bremerton $23,752 Wash.
City of Bellflower $23,370 Calif.
County of San Mateo $23,317 Calif.
City of Lodi $22,863 Calif.
City of Hillsboro $22,297 Ore.
Town of East Hartford $22,213 Conn.
Placer County $22,116 Calif.
City of West Hollywood $21,903 Calif.
City of Gardena $21,556 Calif.
City of Delano $21,289 Calif.
San Luis Obispo County $20,862 Calif.
City of Bethlehem $20,854 Pa.
Mesa County $20,546 Colo.
County of Mendocino $20,222 Calif.
City of Watsonville $20,115 Calif.
City of Somerville $20,004 Mass.
City of Roseville $19,928 Calif.
City of Pico Rivera $19,822 Calif.
City of West Covina $19,662 Calif.
City of Santa Fe $19,631 N.M.
City of San Mateo $19,475 Calif.
City of Napa $19,208 Calif.
City of Whittier $18,915 Calif.
City of Paramount $18,808 Calif.
City of Commerce City $18,766 Colo.
City of Baldwin Park $18,675 Calif.
El Dorado County $18,435 Calif.
City of Carlsbad $18,408 Calif.
City of Clovis $17,616 N.M.
City of Grants Pass $17,547 Ore.
City of Arvada $17,484 Colo.
City of Lakewood $17,447 Calif.
City of Manteca $17,421 Calif.
City of Bell $17,341 Calif.
City of Beaverton $17,239 Ore.
City of Yuba City $17,181 Calif.
City of Olympia $17,168 Wash.
City of Daly City $16,887 Calif.
City of Rio Rancho $16,871 N.M.
City of Azusa $16,834 Calif.
Norwich City $16,638 Conn.
City of Loveland $16,451 Colo.
City of Clovis $16,434 Calif.
City of Longview $16,389 Wash.
City of La Mesa $16,354 Calif.
City of Everett $16,288 Mass.
City of DeKalb $16,225 Ill.
City of Glendale $16,007 Calif.
City of Danbury $15,985 Conn.
County of Lake $15,980 Calif.
City of Centennial Colorado $15,668 Colo.
County of Yuba $15,553 Calif.
City of Dinuba $15,527 Calif.
City of Burbank $15,046 Calif.
County of Nevada $15,020 Calif.
Douglas County Government $14,813 Colo.
City of Santa Clara $14,806 Calif.
City of Selma $14,753 Calif.
Imperial County $14,726 Calif.
City of Porterville $14,726 Calif.
City of Petaluma $14,566 Calif.
City of Atwater $14,513 Calif.
City of Gilroy $14,299 Calif.
City of Torrance $14,193 Calif.
Village of Freeport $14,140 N.Y.
Reedley Police Department $14,113 Calif.
Town of Manchester $14,068 Conn.
City of San Luis Obispo $13,873 Calif.
City of Pittsburg $13,659 Calif.
City of Sanger $13,659 Calif.
City of Culver City $13,579 Calif.
City of Redondo Beach $13,552 Calif.
City of Newton $13,458 Kan.
Tehama County District Attorney $13,419 Calif.
Eureka Police Department $13,232 Calif.
City of Arvin $13,206 Calif.
City of Hollister $13,152 Calif.
Township of Lakewood $13,149 N.J.
City of Lawndale $12,966 Calif.
City of Marysville $12,956 Wash.
City of Sunnyvale $12,832 Calif.
City of Alhambra $12,805 Calif.
City of East Providence $12,785 R.I.
City of El Centro $12,725 Calif.
City of Mountain View $12,485 Calif.
City of Ceres $12,299 Calif.
Brighton Police Department $12,036 Colo.
City of Redmond $11,874 Ore.
City of Coalinga $11,738 Calif.
City of Santee $11,738 Calif.
City of Rosemead $11,712 Calif.
Village of Los Lunas $11,692 N.M.
City of Pearland $11,670 Texas
City of Las Vegas $11,537 N.M.
City of Tracy $11,365 Calif.
City of Wheat Ridge $11,288 Colo.
City of Northglenn $11,217 Colo.
City of Puyallup $11,115 Wash.
City of Walla Walla $11,115 Wash.
City of Lemon Grove $10,858 Calif.
Town of Stratford $10,715 Conn.
City of Belen $10,700 N.M.
City of La Puente $10,671 Calif.
Covina Police Department $10,645 Calif.
City of Moses Lake $10,619 Wash.
City of Monterey $10,351 Calif.
City of Red Bluff $10,324 Calif.
City of Los Banos $10,244 Calif.
City of Encinitas $10,164 Calif.
City of Ridgecrest $10,138 Calif.
City of South Lake Tahoe $10,031 Calif.
Total $32,737,204

Article reposted with permission from Constitution.com

LA Mayor Warns Immigration Crackdown Could Spark Riots: “That’s A Very Dangerous Situation”

It’s been 25 years the since the Rodney King riots, and it seems like another wave of civil unrest in Los Angeles has never been more likely. Even LA Mayor Eric Garcetti thinks that his city could be a “tinderbox,” ready to blow. During a recent interview with Latino USA, he admitted that he thinks President Trump’s tough immigration policies could spark LA’s next riot.

On Friday’s NPR’s “Latino USA” podcast, Garcetti said it is dangerous when “ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] calls themselves police,” adding that “it’s bad for ICE and it’s bad for LAPD” because “people open that door expecting to see LAPD.” He said “if something goes wrong” when ICE agents try to deport illegal immigrants, “I fear a tinderbox out there, where people will suddenly say no and try to defend… keep that person from being taken. That’s a very dangerous situation.”

“We just commemorated 25 years since the urban unrest and we know how quickly things can explode,” Garcetti said, referring to the 1992 L.A. riots.

Obviously, Garcetti is seriously biased here. He’s a liberal mayor who is highly sympathetic to illegal immigration, and he wants to preserve his city’s sanctuary status. But I don’t think we should take this statement as a shallow attempt to scare voters away from Trump’s immigration policies. Regardless of how you feel about Garcetti’s politics, it’s still very likely that we could see riots stemming from Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Garcetti painted a scenario for how this riot could be sparked, based on an incident that happened in March when an illegal immigrant parent was taken by ICE after dropping his daughter off at school.

“Imagine a parent who’s dropping off their child. As we’ve seen, ICE officers, ICE agents take that parent away, and it’s videotaped. Imagine if that’s on the sidewalk and students start swarming, and they’re teenagers. It’s dangerous for those agents. It’s dangerous for our city.”

Of course, there’s one fact that Garcetti is leaving out. Because he’s so sympathetic to the sanctuary city status of Los Angeles, he doesn’t want to admit that the vast majority of illegal immigrants who are being detained by ICE under Trump, are dangerous criminals.

Garcetti’s criticism of ICE comes after the agency recently announced more than 41,000 arrests during President Donald Trump’s first 100 days in office – a 37.6% increase from that same period last year. According to ICE, nearly 75 percent of those detained “are convicted criminals, with offenses ranging from homicide and assault to sexual abuse and drug-related charges.” ICE agents were also part of a recent operation in Los Angeles targeting MS-13 gang members – some of whom have links to the Mexican Mafia. 50 predawn raids on May 17 resulted in 44 arrests. More than half of those detained were in the country illegally.

So we have to ask ourselves, will Trump’s immigration crackdown cause riots in LA, even if most of the immigrants being deported are violent criminals?

The unfortunate answer to that question is yes. Even if 99% of the illegal immigrants being deported were violent criminals, we could still see a riot in LA. When people are emotional about a subject they tend to ignore statistics, and LA is a very liberal city that hates Trump and his policies. All it will take is one controversial ICE operation, caught on film, and the people in that city will jump on it, statistics be damned.

And that’s the sad reality of our current situation. We now live in a country where the president can work toward enforcing the law and deporting criminals who came here illegally, and his lawful actions will result in riots.

Article posted with permission from SHTFPlan

Illegal Immigration Grew in 2016 by More Than The Population of Alaska!

On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security said that nearly 740,000 people overstayed their US visas in 2016, which amounts to more than the population of the state of Alaska.

The Associated Press reports:

A large percent of those were students and foreign exchange visitors — 79,818 — who were supposed to leave in 2016 but didn’t.

China had the largest number of student overstays, followed by Saudi Arabia, South Korea, India and Brazil, the department said.

Homeland Security last year published the number of overstays for the first time in at least two decades, saying 527,127 people who came by air or ship stayed past their visas from October 2014 to September 2015.

An estimated 40 percent of the roughly 11 million people currently in the country illegally stayed past their visas.

This year’s report added student and foreign exchange visitors and many visa categories for temporary workers, while last year’s only counted business travelers and tourists. Homeland Security said it will make additional improvements in future reports, including more data on people who cross by land.

According to 2016 estimations by Borough, Census Area, and Economic Region, the population of the state of Alaska is 739, 828.

That was under Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.

President Donald Trump has pledged to be tough on illegal immigration.  In the first few weeks of his presidency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)  has increased arrests of illegal aliens by 32%.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that due to the new crackdown, ICE had even arrested 367 illegal aliens in one week, and ICE agents busted 82 illegals from 26 different countries in a Washington, DC operation.

According to Homeland Security, they have even been authorized to arrest and deport illegal aliens who are victims of crime while they are at a courthouse.

Trump has failed so far to live up to his promise to fund and begin building the wall on the US southern border, that was largely due to failing to fight for that funding in a spending bill earlier this year.  While ridiculous spending of $18 million funded a Marine Corps nude photo scandal, and other unconstitutional spending went into the bill, no funding was provided for the promised wall.

Still, if you wanted to see a crackdown on illegal immigrants, then Trump seems to be delivering on that promise.

ICE Nabs Illegals Working Construction On Travis Air Force Base

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have arrested illegal aliens working construction at the Travis Air Force Base and are looking to deport them as soon as possible.

ICE quickly arrived on the scene after a military official realized that two illegals, Hugo Mejia and Rodrigo Nuñez, did not have valid social security numbers and reported the pair of construction workers at the base, The Mercury News reports.

After arresting Mejia and Nuñez, ICE has placed the men in expedited deportation proceedings, as both men have removal orders stemming from when they entered the country illegally over a decade ago.

Mejia is naturally upset. He told The Mercury News in Spanish, while detained at the Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center, that he has a good track record.

“I’ve been here for 17 years and my record is excellent,” he said. “I’ve never done anything to anyone. My bills are paid on time, I have a clean record, we’ve never asked the government for help.”

ICE told The Mercury News that the two men “will remain in ICE custody pending court proceedings and it will be up to a judge with the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review to determine whether they will be subject to removal from the U.S.”

The immigration attorney for the two men has submitted an asylum request, but in order for that request to go through, the men will have to prove they are likely to face severe persecution upon their return to Mexico.

Under President Donald Trump, ICE’s activities have surged, with arrests up 35 percent in the first several months of the new administration compared to the same period of time in 2016.

Instead of limiting themselves to gang members or illegals with an extensive criminal record, ICE agents have now received the go-ahead from officials to potentially arrest anyone in the country who is here illegally.

And yet, Niels Frenzen, a law professor and director of the Immigration Clinic at USC, said that Trump still has not hired additional ICE or Border Patrol agents, meaning that although there’s been an uptick in arrests, that activity is inherently capped due to a limited number of agents.

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

High School Seizes Yearbooks Because Of “Build That Wall” Student Quotes And Other “Controversial” Comments

The Richmond Early College High School near Rockingham, North Carolina has seized this year’s yearbooks after school administrators received complaints about controversial quotes included by some students.

The yearbooks, like most others, featured photos of graduating seniors and included personal quotes from each student. According to reports, numerous students included inappropriate comments, one of which was apparently a reference to President Trump with the quote, “build that wall.”

All of the yearbooks that had been distributed at the Richmond Early College High School near Rockingham have been taken back by the school after some senior quotes were deemed controversial, the school system says.

Graduating students at the 10-year-old school, which has 259 students, were allowed to share a quote under their picture in the yearbook. After the book was published, officials in the school and district administration found several of the quotes inappropriate, including one credited to President Trump, said district spokeswoman Ashley-Michelle Thublin.

None of the students were disciplined for the quotes, Thublin said. The school and district administration felt several of the quotes submitted by students were inappropriate, Thublin said.

Specific examples were not provided.

“As a district, we do not and will not tolerate inappropriate conduct toward any of our students,” the school district’s post said. “In each situation, our goal is to provide for the well-being of all of our students and prevent recurrences of inappropriate conduct.”

Source: Sac Bee

The school responded to the incident on Facebook:


No additional “inappropriate” quotes and comments have been shared.

Users on social media immediately highlighted the fact that a high school was censoring the free speech of students simply because it was deemed offensive to some students:

To be clear, no threats of violence have been reported by the quotes. No “bad” language was used. It was simply students with political opinions.

In previous reports we’ve noted that it is now inappropriate to engage in a variety of traditionally American activities, such as wearing red, white and blue, demanding that teachers know how to read, and even showing up to class on time.

This is tolerance in 2017 America.

Article reposted with permission from SHTF Plan

Sweden NOW has much more negative view of Muslim migration following spate of sex attacks

It turns out that many Swedes don’t like their daughters being raped after all: attitudes toward migrants are hardening. But it is already too late. The Muslim migrants who are already in Sweden will be causing upheaval and strife in that nation for generations to come.

“Sweden falls out of love with migrants: Report finds the liberal nation now has a much more negative view of immigration following a spate of sex attacks,” by Ekin Karasin, Mailonline, May 10, 2017:

Sweden has a much more negative view of immigration following a spate of horrifying sex attacks, a new reports finds.

Researchers found that far-right Swedish groups are encouraging the country’s increasing lack of tolerance when it comes to migration.

The European Network Against Racism (ENAR) carried out research on racism and discrimination towards migrants across 26 EU countries.

They stated that the ‘tide was turning’ after a series of sexual assaults – including the attack on dozens of teenage girls by a mob of ‘foreign youths’ at a music festival in 2016.

Sweden appears to be more progressive than other EU nations on immigration, but is becoming less tolerant, the report concluded.

It said that the media was ‘conflating the Muslim community with issues of terrorism and security’.

‘In terms of immigration and integration policies it appears that Sweden is more progressive than other countries, but the tide is also turning,’ ENAR spokesperson Georgina Siklossy told The Local.

‘A number of restrictions to existing migration and integration policies have been introduced, and the media discourse has shifted from positive welcoming of refugees and asylum seekers to portraying migration, and by extension, migrants, as a problem.’

‘This also has an impact on people who have lived in Sweden for two or three generations and continue to be regarded as “alien elements”,’ she added.

There were 43 arson attacks against asylum seeker housing in Sweden in 2015 – while a group of masked men assaulted people who looked ‘foreign’ in Stockholm, the Kantor Center recorded.

Sweden is one of several EU member states where ‘the narrative purports that ‘white’ European women must be protected from predatory migrant Muslim men,’ the ENAR’s study added.

The Swedish Democrats launched Anti-Roma adverts in the Stockholm subway in 2015.

The study alleged that this made it ‘as obvious as possible that certain migrants are not welcome’ and normalize racism against Roma people’.

The adverts prompted public outcry however, and ‘individuals as well as organizations’ condemned them, ENAR added.

According to The Local, the number of reported rapes has gone up from 4,208 in 2006 to 6,560 in 2016.

It comes after a mob of ‘foreign youths’ sexually assaulted dozens of females at a Swedish music festival in July 2016.

At least 35 aged between 12 and 17 reported being attacked during the ‘Party in the Park’ festival in Karlstad, 250 miles from Stockholm in Sweden’s Varmland County.

Some of the alleged victims reported being ‘kissed and groped’ in scenes similar to the Cologne New Year attacks, in which dozens of women reported being assaulted.

Later that month, stickers threatening women with rape if they don’t wear headscarves have been posted in the streets of a small town in Sweden.

The sick messages appeared on objects in the streets of Nybro, Smaland, along with stickers calling for democracy to be replaced with Islam.

Pictures of them circulated on social media – but it’s not clear who put them up.

In April this year, three men – including two Afghan migrants – were sentenced to prison in Sweden for participating in a gang rape that was live streamed in a closed Facebook group.

The three men, aged 18 to 24, were arrested in January in Uppsala, north of Stockholm, after police received tips about the rape streaming in the group of 60,000 members and interrupted the broadcast.

Two of the men are Afghan citizens and the third is a Swedish citizen of Afghan descent.

Swedish media have published excerpts of the footage, showing at least one of the suspects holding a revolver.

It comes as the Prime Minister of Sweden vowed his country will ‘never go back’ to recent levels of mass immigration after it emerged the terrorist who killed four people in a truck attack was a failed asylum seeker….

Article reposted with permission from PamelaGeller.com

Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books

Sanctuary Cities or Sanctuaries for Criminals?

While there is no official legal definition of “sanctuary city,” the term refers to towns, cities, or counties that protect undocumented immigrants by refusing to cooperate completely with federal detention requests.

Advocates of these “safe havens” for individuals who survive outside of American law believe sanctuary cities are safer because they encourage good relationships between undocumented immigrants and law enforcement.  This rationale comes from politicians like Zoe Lofgren, U.S. Representative (D-CA), who stated, “When people are afraid the police might ask about immigration status, they are less likely to report crimes and cooperate with investigations. As a result, criminals thrive, and the general public suffers.”

However compelling to some, the truth is that sanctuary policies defy federal laws, to which state and local governments are bound. U.S. Code § 1373 states that “a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.”

In light of the Trump administration saying it will appeal a ruling  by a federal judge in California that blocked part of the President’s executive order on so-called “sanctuary cities,” I thought it was time to chime in on this hot topic.

In the past, I have regularly, if not frequently, raised objections to what I have considered to be overreaching by the federal government.  It seems to be the rule rather than the exception that federal lawmakers and agencies take actions that are beyond the limited and enumerated powers granted to them by the terms of the U.S. Constitution.

In fact, some years ago the conservative CATO Institute estimated that upwards of 90% of the activities of the federal government were not authorized by the Constitution.

So, it must seem strange for you to hear me raise my voice to favor the authority of the federal government.  But that is what I find myself doing today.  And the reason is really rather straight forward.

You see, in this case, it is the federal government which is acting within the jurisdiction granted by the Constitution and it is these so-called sanctuary cities that constitute an interference with the proper and valid duty that is delegated to the United States pursuant to Article IV, Section 4, of the Constitution.

Let me be clear that the reason I would side with the federal government, or why I would not do so, lies with the fact that it is the Constitution which is controlling. 

In this regard, it may be helpful to recall that the oath of office, which our local and state officials took when elected, was NOT an oath made to the Congress, or to the president, or to a judge or a court.  It was an oath to obey AND DEFEND the CONSTITUTION; and that oath was made before God, meaning that they invoke His wrath, should they violate it.

So, the Constitution is the test.  The Constitution is the standard to look to.  I agree with George Washington, who, in an address to a group in Boston in July 1795, affirmed, “…the Constitution is the guide, which I will never abandon.”

Learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

ICE Files Detainer Against El Salvadorian Student Who Brought Stolen AR-15 To Maryland High School

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has filed an immigration detainer against high school junior Mario G. Alvarado after he brought a stolen AR-15 to his Maryland high school.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement lodged an immigration detainer against Mario G. Alvarado, an 18-year-old citizen of El Salvador, on May 2, 2017, with the Montgomery County Detention Center after he was arrested on criminal charges,” read an ICE statement posted by ABC7 News.

Montgomery County police in Maryland arrested 18-year-old Albert Einstein High School student Alvarado on Monday after he allegedly was caught driving a stolen car, which had a stolen AR-15 in the trunk. The rifle itself had been lifted from a police cruiser on Saturday.

“ICE places detainers on individuals who have been arrested on local criminal charges and who are suspected of being deportable, so that ICE can take custody of those individuals when they are released from local custody,” the statement continued.

After a school resource officer spotted the strange Mazda 3 sitting in the school parking lot, the officer followed the car and attempted to pull it over as part of a traffic stop. Alvarado stopped the car and fled on foot.

He then returned shortly after to the scene, at which point police officers arrested him.

Alvarado has been charged with possessing a deadly weapon on school property, possession of an assault weapon and possession of a stolen vehicle, among other charges.

“On Monday, May 1, a student at Albert Einstein High School committed a serious offense by bringing a gun onto school property,” Montgomery County Public Schools said in a statement. “While the gun never entered the school building and remained in a car parked on a remote part of the campus, this is inexcusable. As Principal James Fernandez described in his letter to the community on Monday, this incident was resolved thanks to the vigilance and proactive actions of the school’s dedicated School Resource Officer. I thank our partners in law enforcement and our MCPS security teams for their commitment to keeping schools safe every day.”

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

Mexican Foreign Minister: Construction Of Border Wall Is A ‘Hostile’ Act

The Mexican Foreign Minister said Tuesday that construction of a border wall separating the U.S. and Mexico is a “hostile” act.

Luis Videgaray Caso, the foreign minister, not only labeled construction as hostile, but stated that Mexico will refuse to contribute in any way to the border wall, Reuters reports.

And yet, President Donald Trump said as recently as Sunday that Mexico will in fact pay for the border wall, which would fulfill a promise he made during his campaign.

“Eventually, but at a later date so we can get started early, Mexico will be paying, in some form, for the badly needed border wall,” Trump said on Twitter.

While at the time a spokesman for the Mexican foreign ministry had no comment on Trump’s tweet about wall payments, Caso has come out Tuesday with an aggressive statement about border wall construction.

Some estimates put the cost of the wall around $20 billion, and it’s part of Trump’s promise to decrease illegal immigration into the country pouring in from Mexico.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said he doesn’t believe that Mexico will pay for the wall in a lump sum transfer, but thinks the amount can be exacted from Mexico using trade tools.

“I don’t expect the Mexican government to appropriate money for it but there are ways that we can deal with our trade situation to create the revenue to pay for it, no doubt about it,” Sessions said on ABC’s “This Week” program Sunday.

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

The Democrats Get Trump And The Republicans To Fold, And That Means There NEVER Will Be A Border Wall

Well, that didn’t take long.  Yesterday I reported that the Democrats were threatening to force a government shutdown if money for a border wall was included in the bill to fund the government, and one day later Donald Trump has unconditionally surrendered.  Despite all of Trump’s promises, a border wall isn’t going to happen at this time, but of course he is pledging to “try again” in September.  But will anything change for the Democrats between now and September?  Of course not.  The Democrats will continue to use these same tactics whenever funding for a border wall comes up, and because Republicans always end up backing down on the most controversial issues that means that there never will be a border wall.

Do you know why the Democrats always get virtually everything that they want?

It is because they have a backbone.

They would have been willing to force a government shutdown that could have lasted for many months just to make sure not a single penny of taxpayer money was allocated for a border wall.

I certainly don’t agree with their principles, but at least the Democrats are willing to stand up for them.

On the other hand, Trump is showing that he is willing to flip flop on just about anything once he meets the least bit of resistance.

And if Trump is willing to give up on his number one campaign promise so easily, what else will he be willing to give up on?  The Huffington Post has compiled an excellent timeline of Trump’s border wall promises right here.  As you can see, he was very bold while he was campaigning, but now according to NBC News he has essentially thrown in the towel on a border wall less than 100 days into his presidency…

President Donald Trump has indicated that he’s willing to back away from his demand that a government funding bill include money to build a wall on the Southern border, a move that could help clear the way for Congress to avoid a shutdown.

A senior administration official tells NBC News that the president is open to obtaining funding for the border wall in the regular appropriations process for 2018 later this year instead of insisting it be included as part of the large spending bill to keep the government’s lights on past this week.

Of course we are being told that building the wall is still “an important priority” for Trump and that the administration will try again in September.  The following comes from Bloomberg

“Building that wall and having it funded remains an important priority to him but we also know that that can happen later this year and into next year, and in the interim you see other smart technology and other resources and tools being used toward border security,” Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway said on Fox News on Tuesday.

But why in the world would the Democrats change their minds and give him funding for a border wall in a few months when they are so vehemently against it right now?

I have to say that I agree with Rush Limbaugh on this one…

“The Democrats seem to have successfully used this stupid, silly threat of a government shutdown to get their way,” Limbaugh said Tuesday, in one of his first major rebukes of the president. “What Trump is saying is if we need to get this done, then I’ll delay the spending on the wall until September. And it’s just a measly billion dollars.”

He continued: “Trump, I’m sure, does not ever think he caves on anything. But outward appearances are what they are. And the bottom line is that if he is willing to withdraw a demand of his for a measly billion dollars for the wall because the Democrats are threatening a shutdown, then the Democrats will have just learned that this threat works on Trump, too, not just all the other Republicans.”

Of course Trump and the Republicans have caved in on defunding Planned Parenthood too.

Actually I don’t think that they ever intended to put up much of a fight.

This is another battle that the Democrats would have been willing to shut down the government indefinitely to win.  They are completely united in their support for Planned Parenthood, and they would have been willing to risk the greatest governmental crisis in U.S. history to get their way.

So even though the Republicans control the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, the Democrats are winning on big issue after big issue because they back up their convictions with courage.

Yes, there are potentially other ways that the Republicans could sneak the defunding of Planned Parenthood into various pieces of legislation, but because enough Republican members of Congress are “squishy” on this issue it isn’t likely to ever actually happen.

I have said it before, and I will say it again.  If Planned Parenthood was going to ever be defunded, now was the time.

Since the Republicans have chosen not to even put up a fight, that is a very, very ominous sign for our nation.

Just like every single one of the Democrats, any Republican that votes for any bill that includes funding for Planned Parenthood or that signs such a bill is going to be partially responsible for the blood of the countless number of babies that Planned Parenthood slaughters each year.

Unfortunately, most of these gutless Republican politicians seem unwilling to stand up for much of anything these days.  In fact, one Republican member of Congress has openly stated that she is “not going to risk a shutdown over anything”

Republicans will also be content: many members of the GOP had indicated they would be satisfied with a spending bill that included money for means of strengthening security along the border other than a wall. “Border security’s the main issue—whether that includes a wall or technology, drones, or repairing what we have,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.) said Monday evening. Ms. Capito said she wasn’t interested in risking a shutdown over the border wall.

“I’m not going to risk a shutdown over anything,” she said.

So the Democrats are going to use the threat of a government shutdown to get their way on these big issues year after year until Republicans finally grow some spines and decide to stand up for themselves.

Article reposted with permission from The Economic Collapse Blog

Take a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End and then prepare

Nearly 5,000 Somalis to Be Deported

According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Brendan Raedy, an estimated 4,801 Somali nationals are facing final orders of removal from the country.

Many of them have committed crimes.

Voice of America reports:

“‘As of April 1, 2017, there were 4,801 Somali nationals with final orders of removal,’ U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spokesman Brendan Raedy said Tuesday. ‘As of that same date, 237 Somali nationals have been removed to Somalia in fiscal year 2017.’

“The statement confirmed information VOA obtained from Somalia’s U.S. ambassador 10 days ago.

“Ambassador Ahmed Isse Awad told VOA’s Somali service his embassy had learned that U.S. immigration agents were planning to deport about 4,000 Somali nationals now living in the United States.

“Most of them have committed crimes. ‘ICE continues to focus its limited enforcement resources toward individuals who pose a threat to national security, public safety and border security,’ Raedy said.

“He added, however, that any immigrant who is in the U.S. illegally is subject to deportation. ‘All of those in violation of immigration laws may be subject to immigration arrest, detention and, if found removable by final order, removal from the United States.’”

Article posted with permission from Pamela Geller.

Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books

U.N. Planned International Flood of Migrants

In case you were wondering about the planned invasion of Europe and other developed nations, including the United States, wonder no more. Today, The International Organization for Migration, a United Nations Migration Agency, funded partially and generously with your taxpayer dollars for 65 years, is holding an International Dialogue on Migration in New York, on April 18-19, with the theme, “Strengthening International Cooperation on and Governance of Migration towards the Adoption of a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration in 2018.”

I highlighted the words “regular, governance, Global Compact” to illustrate that this vaunted meeting of third world tin pot dictatorships aims to establish and control the global no-borders policy through an on-going flood of migrants to the west, destroying sovereignty and diluting nationality and citizenship. It is not about protecting migrants temporarily from tribal wars and conflict, it is about resettlement of huge populations and forcing multi-culturalism on those countries that resist and wish to maintain their “borders, language, and culture.”

There are millions of refugees around the world who are fleeing conflict in their nations and they must be helped in order to return them safely when the conflict is over. But the European invasion of mostly military age men from the Middle East contains only about 10 percent Syrians who are fleeing the seven-year civil war in Syria, the rest are economic opportunists on a “Hijrah” conquest in the senescent Europe, fast replaced by a fertile Muslim population.

U.N. plans to govern migration through a global compact, a sort of constitution for the rights of everyone to move across national borders unimpeded in another step towards spreading the wealth of a globalist commonwealth ruled by the few billionaire elites and their well-funded “civil society” lapdogs.

They are not shy or hiding the fact that their conference and efforts are part of U.N.’s Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, the very Agenda the MSM keeps telling us that does not exist and those reporting on it are conspiracy theorists:

“It is an opportunity for States and all relevant migration actors to frame the core objectives for the global compact, and ground it in the existing normative structures and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”

Seeing this global migration as a human right, “the IOM Director General William Lacy Swing said in opening remarks today, “The Global Compact presents a historical opportunity to achieve a world in which migrants move as a matter of genuine choice rather than a necessity; a world of opportunity to migrate through safe, orderly, and regular channels; and a world in which migration is well governed and is able to act as a positive force for individuals, societies, and the States.”

If you want to keep your country and borders safe from unvetted invasion, you want to limit the number of economic refugees and illegals flooding your country, causing violence, rapes, and murders, too bad; the United Nations will override your President who has promised a check on unvetted refugees and a wall on the southern border. The almighty United Nations bureaucrats from New York will override him and the American people’s wishes.

The “needs, capacities, and contributions of migrants” will supersede your national needs because their safety, dignity, and human rights are more important than yours.

The four core elements of this compact, as presented by Ambassador Swing are:

  1. Protecting the rights of migrants
  2. Facilitating safe, orderly, and regular migration
  3. Reducing the incidence and impacts of forced and irregular migration
  4. Addressing mobility consequences of natural and human-induced disasters

Louise Arbour, the Secretary General’s Special Representative for International Migration, pointed out that “It is up to all of us to embrace human mobility, and recognize that good migration governance requires a commitment to genuine cooperation. People in transit and destination countries should not be made to look at migrants as burdens, or even worse as threats to themselves or their way of life.”

Perhaps Louise Arbour should pay close attention to the mayhem and violence caused by Angela Merkel’s flood of “rapefugees” in Europe who have destroyed cities and entire areas, raping, threatening, destroying property, harming the local population, and altering their way of life forever, while politicians and the main stream media are ignoring reality and covering up the often savage violence.

Arbour said, “Instead, we need collectively to strengthen the narrative – one which has the virtue of truth – that recognizes human mobility and diversity as a contribution to evolving societies and strong economies.”

The U.N. bureaucrats are not explaining why the male refugees cannot stay in their own countries, fight their tribal wars, end them with a lasting peace, and make their societies evolve and economies strong?

I am not sure on what virtual reality realm Louise Arbour’s version of truth resides, but the lying narrative keeps pushing diversity as a contributing factor of society and strong economies when in reality these migrants become wards of welfare as soon as they enter any country they plan to occupy and they never intend to work. Diversity and multiculturalism in Europe have proven to be utter failures; society has devolved into basket cases of areas that the police avoid at all costs.

As listed by IOM, the conference will be addressed by representatives of “governments, civil society, academia, and the private sector.” Among the speakers are:

  • Amina J. Mohammed, U.N. Deputy Secretary General
  • Peter Thomson, President of the U.N. General Assembly
  • Louise Arbour,  Secretary General ‘s Special Representative for International Migration
  • Ahmed Hussein, Refugees and Citizenship of Canada
  • Permanent Representatives of Switzerland and Mexico

This conference will be followed by the second Global Compact on Migration which will take place on July 18-19 in Geneva, “culminating in the stocktaking preparatory meeting in Mexico in December.” 

The United Nations Agenda 2030 of Sustainable Development is not going away and its goals are relatively close to completion, now to include the forced flood of international migrants around the globe and the obliteration of national borders and sovereignty.

Will A “Merit Based System” For Immigrants Swell Into A CITIZENSHIP Litmus Test For All Americans?

How do you catch a domestic terrorist without monitoring every person in the United States? Will the search for “bad” people be the catalyst for collecting psychological dossiers on every person in the USA?

There has been a flurry of articles swirling around China’s NEW “social credit” system that is being implemented to monitor its 1.3 billion citizens. [See documentation forthcoming in Part 3, ed.] But has the USA beaten them to the punch? Are we already using a secretly legislated and finagled system of surveillance with interventions looking for “bad” people? Of course, there is one main difference comparing the systems in both countries. China already has a known universal dossier on their citizens. They have announced they are expanding their system to “create a sincerity culture” based on an experimental scoring model utilizing rewards and punishments for “good” or “bad” behavior.

Uniquely different from Red China, but similarly sinister and unbeknown to its citizens, the United States is secretly implementing an oppressive, digital, dossier-like system on individuals. It is currently utilizing technical, psychological intervention systems in school classrooms across America. Both countries desire to create a passive, docile, compliant worker—starting with babies. [See Part 2 documentation]

I don’t think you are going to like to hear this. We already know that the IES (Institute For Educational Sciences) is collecting psychological dossiers on our children through the Common Core non-academic standards. This data-driven effort could turn out to be a more cost-effective and comprehensive monitoring system if it uses an immigration “crisis” as the rationale to collect private information – not just on immigrants, not just on children, but on ALL AMERICANS.

President Trump’s tweet about Nick Adam’s Green Card Warrior, that said Canada and Australia’s “merit based system is the way to go,” struck me like a lightning bolt. I had warned Pennsylvania parents about the dossiers that the government was collecting when I wrote a memorandum in 2014 called the “Moratorium on Data” to former Governor Corbett. [See] At that time I also shared the IES contracts for every state so that citizens could find out just how far the data collection system had been developed in their state, circa 2014. [See]

The social, emotional, and behavioral intervention and monitoring system being put in place through the Department of Education and the Department of Defense’s Intelligent Tutoring System should have parents screaming. Be sure to click on these links to see the ominous scope of this program. [Source. (Emphasis added to graphic exhibit)] [See also the “Emotionally-Sensitive Intelligent Tutoring System” at the University of Memphis’s Office of Technology Transfer]

Not only is the United States government collecting private sensitive psychological data on your children and your family, the government is also funding research to use computers to “correct” human personalities, and to adapt your children toward government-preferred attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions. Free data is being shifted to robber barons intent on destroying the minds and souls of our children. Their profit motive drives them to use unethical and illegal privacy-invading tactics. Former President Obama’s previous Executive Order unlocked data to be shared.

Meanwhile teachers are being trained to target your kids looking for “bad” behavior, and they are initiating techniques conditioning children to a collectivist mindset, inputting personal data entries daily into state computer systems. Restricted file use was expanded to 3rd party vendors, which ties data to the federal government’s freebie data warehouse. Unique national ID’s are the key to nationalizing an individual dossier on every citizen.

This is being implemented under the guise of “citizenship.” Many of you reading this will ask the question, what’s wrong with teaching children how to be “good” citizens? We don’t want our children to be “bad”! Stop! You are thinking “old school”. Your government has changed the definition of what CITIZENSHIP is. This tactic of using false and deceptive words—even giving them a new opposite meaning in order to mislead—is nudging parents to agree to principles surrounding good-sounding terms like character, grit, ethical judgment, and CITIZENSHIP when, in effect, the new meanings are based on collectivism and group thought.

Children are the guinea pigs. This agenda is all coming in through education. Our nation’s youngest are most vulnerable for exploitation. What goes on in the classroom? Do parents even know? Do you parents and citizens know how the government tests, scores, and changes your child’s attitudes and values?

According to NAEP, the National Assessment for Educational Progress overseen by the IES/National Center for Education Statistics, the research on defining standards and evaluating CITIZENSHIP is profoundly different from a parent’s definition of being a “good” citizen. When NAEP was testing attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions in the model state of Pennsylvania, via the Educational Quality Assessment (EQA) test, the contracted test maker, ETS, and behavioral scientists DECIDED what the standard criteria would be for measuring values, attitudes, beliefs, and dispositions, using a “minimum positive attitude”. The following was their definition of CITIZENSHIP—the exact opposite of what parents would be thinking:

“To assess citizenship, a behavior-referenced model incorporating elements related to the psychological notion of threshold is used. In reference to citizenship, threshold refers to that set of conditions necessary to bring about the desired responses. Thus by varying the situation and introducing conditions of reward and punishment, we are able to determine the cutoff levels at which the student will display positive behavior. In this way it is possible to assess not only the students’ predisposition to behave in a manner consistent with responsible citizenship but also to provide some measure of intensity of that predisposition across a wide spectrum of situations.” [Emphasis added]

What are the behavioral objectives for “positive behavior” according to the government? (I have the scoring.) At what point will your child’s behavior be pressured enough to change? Will your child adhere to the “conditions” of “punishment”? What is the punishment? What is the government’s desired response in settings where your child’s best friend wants him/her to do something illegal? What loyalty does your child have to their best friend? His peer group? Will she go so far as to break the law? These tests are scored to “group goals, group efforts, and group action;” their words not mine. How does your child answer? What are the repercussions if your child does NOT score a “desired” attitude? Was it deemed a behavioral weakness? Reread the definition. What business does the government have in knowing your child’s “predisposition to behave”? And how is “responsible citizenship” being defined and assessed? These tests are nothing more than a “strip search” of your child’s inner mind.

So what are the test makers testing when they say they are testing GRIT or MIND SETS?

YOU DON’T KNOW!

Many parents and teachers in Pennsylvania never saw the true meanings of what was being measured in the EQA until I filed my federal complaint against the Pennsylvania Department of Education for violating Federal law, although NAEP and big-wig behaviorists were the initiators.  Twenty-five years later the new research from the Department of Defense uses behavioral psychologist BF Skinner’s oppressive reward and punishment “teaching machines” (computers) to produce “good” little conditioned robots—exactly as Skinner conditioned pigeons in his laboratory. (He “conditioned” his own daughter, too, by the way, using horrific abuse.)

So, parents, do NOT accept whatever you are told without concrete parameters. Ask questions about the definitions and scoring of non-academic Common Core standards for nice-sounding terms like ethical judgment, self efficacy, responsibility, interpersonal skills, citizenship and GRIT. Things aren’t what they seem. Parents must insist that this madness stop. The lying and manipulation must be stopped.

Unprecedented Government Surveillance and Data Collection

Looking at the total data picture, it isn’t too far of a stretch to combine the seamless system of the processes already in place for children to create a complete dossier on every American citizen. This is in addition to the psychometric personality profile that we already know is being collected at school. This is exactly how a Merit Based System for immigration could work, too, using both education and census data. The foundation for this system is already in place:

  • Common Core data elements are exactly the same in 50 states.
  • Data is collected “womb to workplace.”
  • Common Core mandates that every child meet every standard… exactly the same proficiency.
  • Every child and teacher are given a national unique ID.

The state longitudinal data system (SLDS) starts with pre-natal to age 21. P-20 includes universal day care (Common Core for tots) into college (school to work aligned to workforce industry clusters). The system follows the individual into the workforce and aligns their wages to the cost benefit or loss, determining the worth (“human capital”) of that individual to the economy.

Subjectively scored social, emotional, and behavioral Common Core non-academic data is collected on children, tracked, and trafficked to 3rd party vendors, to research and develop perfected curricula and software to be used as interventions. FERPA, Family Education Rights in Privacy Act, was weakened with an OBAMA Executive Order 12866 that allowed Data Sharing agreements to align curricula with Common Core standards.

Local data collected by your teachers are digitized and automatically sent into the state student longitudinal data system that connects to the federal Common Core of Data lodged in the federal data warehouse and funded by the IES.

Teachers are coached in CHILD FIND, which are tactics carried out by Special Education teams looking for “BAD” children dubbed “emotionally disturbed”—the new definition identifying normal children with having a disability for not meeting government-prescribed social, emotional, and behavioral standards. Your children are being diagnosed free from clinical disorder, yet they are being targeted for personality change. Why is this?

Computer Adaptive Tutoring is validated software used to change personalities. It guides your child through a network of linear and circular labyrinths that end with inculcating the government-approved values, beliefs, and dispositions.

Recycling (remediating) children through these feedback loops in the system is constant. There are continual 3-tier psychological interventions performed in the classroom by teachers coached through training, called fidelity (Special Ed cadres). This means teachers are forced to perform perfectly, using teaching techniques from a SCRIPT, to be sure these “disabled” normal children meet government Common Core psychological standards. This is an onerous behavioral system of control. Teachers receive IMMEDIATE feedback on where the child has weaknesses. CONTROLLING the teachers is a must—the non-compliant teachers are weeded out. The IES develops algorithms to cross reference and diagnose the teacher or the child that needs remediated.

Validated “model” curriculum and tests assessing the worth of “human property”, measured in individual cost effectiveness to the economy, are used by teachers, who immediately use a feedback control loop to correct deficiencies in student whole-child make-up. (Example: head, heart, hand… beliefs, feelings/emotions, behavior… think, feel, act… robot compliant child… but very well-behaved).

ESSA expands mandates called “direct student services” carried out by IDEA (special education services definition in ESSA) to identify all “disabled” children and direct those services to children in any public, charter, private or religious school. (New mental health behavioral definitions allow schools to bill for mental health. MEDICAID is set up at school for Common Core psychological services which will expand into home and family case management.) Medicaid is FREE money from the federal government for schools to identify MORE and MORE “disabled” normal children who need government intervention.

“Meaningful public school choice” (legislated in ESSA and further being expanded by President Trump and Secretary DeVos’s agenda) is Title I CHOICE funding. The new definition of “poor” is all children under the watchful eye of federal financial assistance that “follows the child.” Choice stipends identify the child and direct interventions towards the government Common Core standards of attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions—mandating that ANY AND EVERY school use these federal guidelines. Everyone is a number.

NAEP combines demographic and “psychological IES education data” into the new national census, no more door to door.  All citizens in the United Sates are identified, tracked, and trafficked in data mining escapades from school to workforce into retirement. This progressive system will have every persons’ psychometric dossier in 15 years or much less. No Child Will Be Left Behind and Every Student Will Succeed… into adulthood with this government blueprint.

Everything is moving toward the government monitoring each and every individual citizen… and implementing individual continuous brain cleansing. And eventually that means you and your family.

Part 2

The Trip Down TSA Memory Lane—Looking For “BAD” People

Ahhhh… The Patriot Act… Yes. Let’s connect the links.

After 9/11, finding terrorists coming into the United States had become a top priority. Finding the terrorist amongst us has made Americans leery about exactly WHO were our neighbors living American lives yet sworn to killing American lives. The search had turned from looking for bad things to looking for BAD people. What began as TSA searching of what airline passengers could carry onto planes changed to searching for how airline passengers would behave OR ACT.

“The incorporation of the ‘human factor’ in U.S. airport security is overdue,” Ron said. “In other terms, instead of just looking for bad items, we need to look for BAD people.” [Source. Emphasis added.]

Tomorrow, what would “bad” mean? The more headlines of bad actions that people have done, the criticism of BAD begins to be developed into more specific parameters, including involving moving into a person’s mental health state.

For example, the pilot who deliberately flew a Lufthansa plane into the mountains in France left CEO’s speechless. Was it deliberate? Was the man bad, evil, or mentally unstable?

“A recovery crew works among debris of Germanwings Flight 9525 at the crash site near Seyne-les-Alpes, France, on Friday, April 3. The crash killed all 150 people aboard and has raised questions about the co-pilot’s mental state.” [Source]

The term “bad” people would eventually have to be defined. Who would determine what was going to be bad. Today, it is a terrorist. Tomorrow, when your child is born, a DNA test will identify an “aggressive” gene. This is food for thought when the government does brain research and develops “interventions and strategies,” digging deep into genetic markers that can be used in the future against its citizens. This is the danger of personal data in the hands of government—when decisions are being made about you, which you have NO control over. When FERPA was weakened, biometric markers were included in the definition of what data could be shared. Is your child predisposed to a criminal or aggressive gene? Researchers are already predicting 3 year olds future problems. Ask: who has access to this data? [Source]

Could killing sprees like the Pulse gay nightclub or the Colorado movie theater killer be used to prompt the government to identify “bad” individuals with an “aggressive” gene? Remember that Adam Lanza, who allegedly killed the 22 people in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, has had his DNA researched by the CDC looking for an “evil gene”. So what happens if science can detect an “evil gene”? Will the National Security Agency be looking for “bad people” from blood types in personal records? In Obamacare records? A blood test is always done at birth. What happens next? Minority Report the movie comes to mind… determined at birth, fixed for life. Due process also comes to mind. Can you be prosecuted for something that you have not done? Do we have a Constitution, or not?

A Patriot Act of 2001 Linking Data To Education

The USA Patriot Act of 2001 amended the 1994 NESA (National Electronic Security Alliance) by permitting the Attorney General to petition a judge for an ex parte order requiring the Secretary of the Department of Education to provide NCES (National Center on Education Statistics) data that are identified as relevant to an authorized investigation or prosecution of an offense concerning national or international terrorism to the Attorney General. Any data obtained by the Attorney General for these purposes must be treated as confidential information “consistent with such guidelines as the Attorney General, after consultation with the Secretary, shall issue to protect confidentiality.” This amendment was incorporated into the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA) authorizing the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to collect and disseminate information about education in the United States.

You do remember the IES—that data-hungry beast that all of the educational state longitudinal data systems are linked to in every state. Remember: “confidential” does not mean “anonymous”. They have it and they share it.

Will President Trump Issue Citizenship Tests For All Citizens?

A couple weeks ago President Trump praised a new book out called Green Card Warrior that explains the Canadian and Australian merit based immigration system.

President Trump’s tweet:

Nick Adams new book, Green Card Warrior, is a must read. The merit-based system is the way to go. Canada, Australia!” [Source]

According to Adams, the merit-based system is a common sense approach that emphasizes patriotism and traditional values.

“We are basically saying that this is our country. We are going to determine who comes to this country and the circumstances under which they come. We want to make it really, really easy for good people to come and impossible for bad people to come,” he said.

Well, okay. How do you determine who already is in the United States that might be a BAD person? Defining patriotism, traditional values, or a good citizen now becomes a real challenge.

But the clear indication is that the National Counterterrorism Center already has the individual data monitoring system underway for quite some time.

In December of 2012 there was a clash between counterterrorism with the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice for the government dragnet sweeping up millions of records about U.S. Citizens. Chief Privacy Officer Mary Ellen Callahan stated that the National CounterTerrorism Center was examining US citizens for possible criminal behavior even if there was no reason to suspect them. [Source: “US Terror Agency to Tap Citizens Files,” Julia Anglin, 12-13-2012]

John Brennan, the former President’s chief counterterrorism advisor, recommended that Attorney General Holder sign the new guidelines even though the issues surrounding the “sea of change” that Callahan and others had addressed as being illegal. One of the biggest concerns was that innocent people could inadvertently be targeted.

Well, who knew. President Trump has unearthed some of these nefarious detections. Ms. Callahan resigned from her position, as well as the Department of Justice member who was outright against this move by the former Attorney General and the Obama administration expansion.

We can thank whistleblower, Edward Snowden, for unleashing the government’s mass surveillance system which turned out to be a treasure trove of personal data that explained how telecommunication entities had backdoors spying on American citizens.

So, in merging the counterterrorism data with IES social, emotional, and behavioral data, it appears that the United States has gone way beyond just a little data collection. A complete dossier of not only census, demographic, and financial data, but data on where you shop, what books you read or movies you watch, what you eat, where you play or work, who you call on the phone, what you post on Facebook, Google, Twitter, AND… also the social, emotional, and behavioral data from educational records… looks like a psychometric dossier to me. When the USA looks in the mirror, does it see Red China in its future?

Part 3

Red China ‘Takes Names and Keeps Score’ On Citizen Dossiers

Peering into the not-so-distant future we can look at the blatantly advertised Social Credit/Merit Based System which began in China in 2014. The question that must be asked, “Will American profiles be analyzed as a ‘character score, reputation score, or known traveler’ based on someone else’s opinion about their personalities, using immigration as a basis for surveillance?”  Is terrorism being used as a ploy to get personal psychological information to control ALL of its citizens? Are both immigration and education the mechanisms (manufactured crises?) to identify every person with a unique national ID living in the United States?

China Publicly Stating What The United States Has Been Producing On Every Child. Your action is needed.

I have listed the past 2-3 years of articles* about China’s new Character Score/Merit Based System. Their “citizenship” test very much resembles the direction of the United States data collection. After reading through the following descriptions of China’s new/old monitoring/punishment data collection on its citizens, you should reflect on our new education data system under the Every Student Succeeds Act, ESSA, FERPA, and the IES.

Please bombard your legislators for an immediate investigation on the US Department of Education and the illegal maneuvering of the ESSA legislation. The following issues must be addressed:

  • STOP the collection of personally identifiable information including data collected on your children  in your local school district; STOP the interventions carried out by IDEA (special education) in personalities including the areas of attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions:
  • Revamp the Family Education Rights In Privacy Act, FERPA, that was weakened by an Executive Order 12866 under former President Obama, that now allows personally identifiable information to be released to outside contractors;
  • Dissolve the state longitudinal data systems that collects individual, personal information in all 50 states; eliminate all unique national ID’s;
  • Legislate privacy protections and initiate due process to children for profound violations under the 1st Amendment protections and rights, which  guarantees  “right of conscience” and the 4th Amendment, “to be secure in their persons.”
  • De-fund the IES/NCES database which collects complete psychometric dossiers on our citizens.

If we do not STOP the invasion of privacy, the data collection, and the purging of the American mind, the RED CHINA system explained below could be your future and the future of your children.

NOTES: CHINA’S MERIT BASED CITIZENSHIP SYSTEM

On June 14, 2014, Communist China’s “State Council” issued a “Planning Outline for the Construction of a Social Credit System (2014-2020)” which states in part:

“A social credit system is an important component part of the Socialist market economy system and the social governance system.… its inherent requirements are establishing the idea of an sincerity culture…, it uses encouragement to keep trust and constraints against breaking trust as incentive mechanisms, and its objective is raising the honest mentality and credit levels of the entire society.

“Accelerating the construction of a social credit system is an important basis for comprehensively implementing the scientific development view and building a harmonious Socialist society, it is an important method to perfect the Socialist market economy system, accelerating and innovating social governance, and it has an important significance for strengthening the sincerity consciousness of the members of society, forging a desirable credit environment, raising the overall competitiveness of the country and stimulating the development of society and the progress of civilization.” [From a translation by Rogier Creemers, who studies Chinese media policy and political change at the University of Oxford, of Planning Outline for the Construction of a Social Credit System (2014-2020). Emphasis added.]

“Inside China’s plan to give every citizen a character score”

[Source: 10/9/15]

Where you go, what you buy, who you know, how many points are on your driving license, how your pupils rate you. These are just a few of the measures which the Chinese government plans to use to give scores to all its citizens.

“China’s Social Credit System (SCS) will come up with these ratings by linking up personal data held by banks, e-commerce sites and social media. The scores will serve not just to indicate an individual’s credit risk, but could be used by potential landlords, employers and even romantic partners to gauge an individual’s character.

“It isn’t just about financial creditworthiness,” says Rogier Creemers, who studies Chinese media policy and political change at the University of Oxford. “All that behaviour will be integrated into one comprehensive assessment of you as a person, which will then be used to make you eligible or ineligible for certain jobs, or social services.”

“Construction of the SCS is already well under way. In June this year, the government announced that every organisation in China – companies, NGOs and government bodies – would be given a unique identification number to facilitate the monitoring of their activities.” [Emphasis added]

On November 22, 2015 the LA Times changed its headline that read,

Taking Names, Keeping Score,” by Julie Makinen. It was changed to,

China Prepares To Rank Citizens on ‘social credit’” Notice that the original title “Taking Names, Keeping Score” is now back, and the subtitle reads “China plans to rank its 1.3 billion citizens in a Social Credit System” [Source] Read the retitled article “China prepares to rank its citizens on ‘social credit’.” [Source]

“Although many details remain unclear, the Social Credit System will essentially be a 21st century update of China’s long-standing secret personnel file system.

“For decades, the government kept these files, called dang’an, on hundreds of millions of urban residents, logging their performance at school and work, but also at times recording information that might raise questions about their political leanings, such as whether they had “foreign friends” or read certain books. Cadres could consult these files when hiring new workers and granting benefits, but no one was supposed to see his or her own file, which was typically housed in one’s state-assigned work unit.

“Chen may avoid many modern conveniences, but hundreds of millions of other Chinese have happily adapted. That’s allowed companies like Alibaba to harness copious amounts of personal data to develop credit scores, which Chinese authorities envision incorporating into a Social Credit Score.

“Using data on its customers’ payment history, net worth, network of friends and associates, educational and professional history and consumption habits, Alibaba now assigns customers credit scores ranging from 350 to 950, with a rating above 700 considered excellent.

Alibaba encourages customers to share those scores; users can even add them to their online dating profiles to boost their appeal to potential mates. And the company has started to offer customers with scores above 750 perks such as rental car or hotel room bookings without a cash deposit. The company’s cooperation with the government is clear from offers such as a recent promotion that allowed top scorers access to an express security screening lane at Beijing’s main airport.” [Emphasis added]

“China To Use Big Data To Rate Citizens In New ‘Social Credit System’” [Source: 4/28/15]

“But, How good a citizen are you? China hopes to answer that question for every one of its citizens with a numerical rating system based on their financial standing, criminal record and social media behavior. A new translation of the government’s plans for a so-called social credit system sheds light on how China aims to utilize “Big Data” to hold all citizens accountable for financial decisions as well as moral choices.”

“China To Use Big Data To Rate Citizens In New “‘Social Credit System’”

[Source]

“China Is Building The Mother Of All Reputation Systems To Monitor Citizen Behavior:

China’s proposal is like a credit score that could encompass your entire life, from work performance to Internet activity.” [Source]

“The problem is such systems can quickly become coercive or directive—a way for the government to introduce norms of behavior and then punish people who don’t follow along. The document discusses the possibility of punishing bad behavior, for example, by restricting access to social housing.”

“On the one hand, this credit system is the institution of commonsensical rules for market behavior. On the other hand, it’s a control tool,” says Creemers. “The Party sets out a way of behaving, then it makes that way of behavior rational. You take away the ability for people to decide on what they think is good and you take away their choice of living a different lifestyle.”

“In China, Your Credit Score Is Now Affected By Your Political Opinions – And Your Friends’ Political Opinions” [Source]

“China introduced a universal credit score, where everybody is measured as a number between 350 and 950. But this credit score isn’t just affected by how well you manage credit – it also reflects how well your political opinions are in line with Chinese official opinions, and whether your friends’ are, too.

“This Chinese credit score, which seemed innocent at first, was introduced this summer. More precisely, it was introduced by Alibaba and Tencent, China’s IT giants who run the Chinese equivalents of all social networks, and who therefore have any and all data about you. People can download an app named “Sesame Credit” from the Alibaba network, and the score has become something of a bragging contest, being interpreted as a kind of “citizen status” – and not entirely falsely so. Almost 100,000 people have posted their “status” online on Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter.

“In theory, Sesame Credit (and its benefits) is optional. So far. For the time being. But China has already announced that it, or something very like it, will become mandatory from 2020. It has also announced that while there are benefits today for obedient people, it intends to add various sanctions for people who don’t behave, like limited Internet connectivity. Such people will also be barred from serving in certain high-status and influential positions, like government official, reporter, CEO, statistician, and similar.

“Things that will make your score deteriorate include posting political opinions without prior permission, talking about or describing a different history than the official one, or even publishing accurate up-to-date news from the Shanghai stock market collapse (which was and is embarrassing to the Chinese regime).

“The KGB and the Stasi’s method of preventing dissent from taking hold was to plant so-called agents provocateurs in the general population, people who tried to make people agree with dissent, but who actually were after arresting them as soon as they agreed with such dissent. As a result, nobody would dare agree that the government did anything bad, and this was very effective in preventing any large-scale resistance from taking hold. The Chinese way here is much more subtle, but probably more effective still.” [Emphasis added]

Summary:

The results are in. What type of scenario can you think of that the United States government could be building with the collection of psychological data? You will have to make a decision of what you want this country to look like in a few years. We did not vote for a unique national ID. WE did not vote for the illegal data collection on our children. We did not vote for our American children to be conditioned and recycled to a government correct attitude or value. We didn’t ask for any of this. Yet, the world is spinning round and the American people continue to smile as this oppressive system moves forward.

(*A special thanks to Debbie Niwa for researching several reports on the China merit system.)

Sanctuary Cities, or Goldilocks and The Three Bears

This past Monday, I had the privilege of testifying before the County Council regarding the move to make Maryland a sanctuary State – a place where those who have illegally broken into our country are protected from enforcement of the U.S. immigration laws. The repeated refrain of those who advocated for the law breakers is that we must be a welcoming community. In my testimony, I used the analogy of someone breaking into my house.

Afterwards, I thought a better analogy would be Goldilocks and the Three Bears. You remember the story. Momma bear prepares breakfast – three steaming hot bowls of porridge. Because it was too hot to eat right away, the three bears went out for a walk in the forest.

While they were gone, Goldilocks comes to their house hungry. She sees that no one is home, so she breaks the little window beside the front door, reaches in, and unlocks the door and enters the home. That’s breaking and entering (my embellishment on the original story).

Goldilocks sees the food on the table and now she is very, very hungry. Papa’s porridge is too hot, Mamma’s too cold, but baby bears is just right, so she consumes the whole bowl. That is stealing from the three bears. Then she sits in all three bear’s chairs and breaks baby bear’s chair to smithereens. That’s destruction of property and vandalism. Then, being tired, she goes up stairs and trying each bed, settles down for a nap on baby bear’s bed.

The three bears come home to find that a criminal has broken into their home stolen their food, destroyed their furniture and is now sleeping in baby bear’s bed. They respond with a powerful roar as only a bear can roar, which awakens, startles and terrifies Goldilocks.

Now there is two ways this bedtime story could end. In one, Goldilocks sits up in baby bear’s bed, wipes some porridge from her chin with baby bear’s pillow and proceeds to castigate the three bears for not being more welcoming of strangers. She wags her finger at them, scolding them scornfully on why they are morally deficient, they have no compassion for the tired, the poor and the hungry. They have all this wealth and are very selfish to keep it all to themselves. If they were good, upright, and moral people they would gladly give it all away. In fact, she continues, she has a mind to go to those who make laws in this forest and demand they pass legislation which will force the three bears to do exactly that.

Now you remember how the original story ends. The three bears roar with a powerful roar as only a bear can roar, which awakens, startles and terrifies Goldilocks. She leaps out of bed, runs down the stair case, and out the open front door and off into the forest, never to come back to the home of the three bears ever again, never to break in, steal, destroy, and abuse the property of the three bears.

And we know the moral of this children’s story; a moral, by the way, it appears three years olds do better at comprehending than many adults today. The moral is, even if you are in need, even if you are very, very hungry, it doesn’t justify breaking and entering someone’s home, it doesn’t make stealing their food permissible, nor destroying and abusing their property acceptable. If you do such wicked things, those whose property rights you have violated by breaking and entering, those from whom you have stolen, those whose property you have vandalized and destroyed, will rightly be very angry with you. They will terrify you with their roaring against you. And deeply frightened, you will flee from them, never to return, never to violate their property rights ever again. So children learn from the sins of Goldilocks that they must not steal from others, and must never violate other people’s property rights.

But it seems this simple lesson, clearly understood by children, is lost on adults, whose brains have been besotted with the lie of socialism. They some how believe it is a good thing, if Goldilocks is hungry, to break into a country where they do not belong, to steal food from those people, to destroy their property, and sleep in their beds. Here in Maryland alone, our State government, by gunpoint, takes two billion dollars annually from the hard working citizen taxpayers and gives it over as freebies to the illegals who have broken into our country; free education, free health care, free food stamps, free housing, free transportation. In reality, none of it is free, the government has nothing of its own to give anyone, instead the government has become the transfer agent for stolen goods. In the socialist rewrite of the story, the government follows Goldilocks after she breaks in and steals; it is there when the three bears wake up Goldilocks and at gun point the government stops the three bears from terrifying Goldilocks and stops them from driving her out of their house. This is not a pleasant bed time story, and it does not have a happy ending. And this is what the attempt to make Maryland a Sanctuary State actually does.

One of the astonishing things about the testimony Monday night of those defending Goldilocks’ crimes of breaking and entering, of theft and property destruction, not to even mention rape and murder, is that the defenders were claiming the high moral ground. They threw out challenges like “What would Jesus do?” As if that was a slam dunk that settled the argument once and for all. They were implying that, of course, Jesus would be on the side of sanctuary cities and sanctuary States, that Jesus would fully endorse the actions of a government which materially supports and fully participates in the crimes committed by illegals entering our country. This is an astonishing claim! Where did it come from? I have heard it stated before; it is claimed that God’s law in the Bible provides for and even commands God’s people to create sanctuary cities.

That come from Numbers 35:15 “These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the stranger, and for the sojourner among them:” (most readers stop right there and say, see it says there will be cities of refuge for the non-citizen in Israel in which they are safe from removal; but look at what the rest of the verse says) “that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.” If you read the whole context of chapter 35 you will see the legal structure God established for the Hebrew Republic. and it does not protect illegals in the way that it is claimed by today’s sanctuary cities. Rather, this law applied to everyone, citizen of Israel or not. If anyone killed another human being, he had to flee to one of the six cities of refuge. The rest of the chapter spells out what would happen at that city of refuge. A trial would be held, the evidence presented, witnesses testify, and finally, the jury deliberates and comes back with a verdict. If it was a verdict of guilty, guilty of intentionally and purposefully taking a human life with malice aforethought, in other words, murder, the condemned would then be executed by stoning, the witnesses who testified that it was murder would be the one’s who cast the first stone. But what if the verdict came back not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter – “the unlawful killing of a man without malice, express or implied?” What then?

The whole chapter Numbers 35 commands that the one guilty of manslaughter would be confined to remain within the boundary walls of that city of refuge for the remainder of the life of the current High Priest. If he set foot outside the walls of the city of refuge any time before the death of the High Priest, then he would be liable to be executed by the avenger of blood. So basically, the man slayer was under city arrest. He could go anywhere within the city, do business there, but could not leave. So these cities of refuge had nothing to do with harboring illegal aliens in Israel. That idea is a complete misinterpretation and misapplication of the Word of God. The Scripture tells us that in the Hebrew Republic, the stranger or sojourner was completely subject to the laws of the land. And when you study the Word of God carefully, you will find that God set certain restrictions against certain nations.  For example in Deuteronomy 23:3 “An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:” So these two nationalities were restricted from citizen for ten generations. If a generation is 40 years that means, that prohibition would stand for 400 years. Consider that in contrast to a temporary ban on travel from certain countries. The rest of the chapter gives the reasons why.

Clearly someone is being deceived about what the Word of God actually says. Those who accept this false teaching are responsible themselves for falling into the trap, but the greater guilt rests upon those who perpetuate these lies – the false pulpits in our land today. Turn to Titus 2:7, where Paul deals with the Problem Pastors of his day and offers a clear solution.

Learn more about your Constitution with Pastor David Whitney and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.

The Border Wall – A Government Project That Will Actually Pay for Itself

What if I were to offer you a sure-fire investment that would, if implemented properly, guarantee to at least double or triple your money in 3-4 years? The investment is so simple and straightforward – you could be completely hands off. You would not have to do a thing. It would require no monitoring of a fund or stocks – not even a yearly review, such as a mutual fund or IRA.

It would require nothing but an initial investment. Then just sit back and let others do the work. In a few years, reap the reward.

Okay – you may be saying – where do I sign? And by the way – what’s the investment? Well – the investment is a pipe dream. It’s not real. There is no real investment which is that easy and simultaneously sure fire. Or is there?

Actually, yes there is, and we conservatives have been promoting it for years. It’s called building the Southern Border Wall and deporting the illegals already here. It’s been well established that the cost of illegal immigration to this country is north of $100 billion per year. And that’s just the normal governmental outlays. The $100 billion doesn’t include the cost of fraud being perpetrated on American citizens in the form of stolen identities or increased insurance costs and citizen job losses to illegals.

In January of this year, CNBC did a piece on the cost of Trump’s proposed wall. They estimated the cost per mile of the wall to be between $2.8 million and $3.9 million. Okay – now let’s do the math.

First, we’ll split the difference. This gives us a cost of $3.35 million per mile. We know the length is about 2000 miles – so 3.35 x 2,000 = $6.7 billion. That, my friends, is extremely reasonable, although quite unrealistic. This is government we’re talking about. If we double it, that will still be only $13.4 billion.

Senator McConnell estimates the cost at between $12 billion and $15 billion. This sounds more realistic. So knowing it’s still a government-run operation, we’ll double that.

This gives us a total of around $30 billion for 2000 miles of wall. Now go back and juxtapose this with the annual cost of keeping illegals here and voila, there’s your magic investment. 

Those opposed to the wall throw out these various billion dollar figures in an effort to scare us away – like it’s some huge amount of money; yet, individual federal government departments waste and/or lose that much in a year.

Put another way – President Trump is said to be in favor of a trillion dollar infrastructure bill. No one seems to bat an eye at this staggering sum, but a 2,000 mile security wall at a mere 3% of the infrastructure proposal is just too insurmountable.

And last I checked, wouldn’t building a wall be considered infrastructure? Why not then just earmark 3-5% of the “infrastructure proposal” for the wall? Like it will be missed or anything.

So all that being said, why then are politicians and pundits so concerned with Trump’s claim that Mexico will pay for the wall? Who Cares! 

On ABC’s “This Week” with George Snufulufigus, Marco Rubio was quick to point out that Mexico had no intention of footing the bill. He told George that he met with the Mexican Foreign Minister. “We met with the Foreign Minister,” and the topic of the wall came up, “and uh, let me just say – Mexico’s not going to pay for the wall,” Rubio said.

Again – so what – who cares! The American people want to see that wall built and they/we don’t care if Mexico contributes a single dime – now or ever. It’s the one government project which will actually pay for itself – and then some.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions Announces Illegal Immigration Crack Down, ICE Arrests 367 in One Week!

Attorney General Jeff Sessions put the illegal immigrant community on notice Tuesday morning when he delivered a major policy speech while in Arizona.

The Attorney General assured our law enforcement agencies that the Trump administration would be a far different ally in the fight against crime than the Obama administration was. Unlike the previous administration, the Trump White House would fully support and engage with law enforcement to enforce the laws of our land. He also spoke directly to the criminal and illegal alien communities, telling them all that a new sheriff was in town and that the lawlessness of the Obama years… was over. Along with his speech the Attorney General also released a memorandum to the nation’s U.S. Attorney’s offices instructing them on the new and far more strict guidelines for prosecuting illegal immigrant crime.

Here is some of what he had to say:

For those that continue to seek improper and illegal entry into this country, be forewarned: This is a new era. This is the Trump era. The lawlessness, the abdication of the duty to enforce our immigration laws and the catch and release practices of old are over.

In that vein, I am also pleased to announce a series of reforms regarding immigration judges to reduce the significant backlogs in our immigration courts.

Pursuant to the President’s executive order, we will now be detaining all adults who are apprehended at the border. To support this mission, we have already surged 25 immigration judges to detention centers along the border. I want to thank personally the judges who answered the call to help us with this new initiative.

In addition, we will put 50 more immigration judges on the bench this year and 75 next year. We can no longer afford to wait 18 to 24 months to get these new judges on the bench. So today, I have implemented a new, streamlined hiring plan. It requires just as much vetting as before, but reduces the timeline, reflecting the dire need to reduce the backlogs in our immigration courts.

With the President’s Executive Orders on Border Security, Transnational Criminal Organizations and Public Safety as our guideposts, we will execute a strategy that once again secures the border; apprehends and prosecutes those criminal aliens that threaten our public safety; takes the fight to gangs like MS-13 and Los Zetas; and makes dismantlement and destruction of the cartels a top priority. We will deploy a multifaceted approach in these efforts: we are going to interdict your drugs on the way in, your money on the way out, and investigate and prosecute your trafficking networks to the fullest extent of the law.

Why are we doing this? Because it is what the duly enacted laws of the United States require. I took an oath to protect this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. How else can we look the parents and loved ones of Kate Steinle, Grant Ronnebeck and so many others in eye and say we are doing everything possible to prevent such tragedies from ever occurring again.

The AG’s speech comes on the heels of the government confirming that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers had arrested nearly 400 criminal illegal immigrants in a series of raids over the last week.

Immigration officials announced last week they detained at least 367 individuals in a series of raid operations—nearly one a day—across the country.

The arrests were announced throughout the week starting last Monday when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials said they arrested 153 individuals in South Texas during a 12-day operation that ended last month.

On Tuesday, ICE said 75 individuals were arrested in a three-day operation in North Texas. Then, on Wednesday, ICE said 82 individuals were arrested over the course of five days in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. In the New York City area, there were 31 individuals picked up in three days. And finally, on Thursday, ICE said 26 individuals were detained in Colorado and Wyoming over four days…

The agency said the operations focused on arresting “criminal aliens, illegal re-entrants and immigration fugitives.” These talking points are similar to the ones ICE used during the Obama administration to justify deportations, except now we know that was misleading: people without records were also detained and deported. And now the Trump administration is using that same line to conduct what appears to be more raids more often. Indeed, in at least one region of the country where raids were conducted last week, a majority of immigrants detained were charged with non-violent offenses.

Each press release sent out last week highlighted the violent and horrific crimes carried about by some of the people arrested. There were individuals convicted of rape, sex trafficking, and child abuse, ICE said.

The Trump administration persists in doing exactly what they told voters they would do, which correspondingly, continues to anger liberals and the media. They simply aren’t used to politicians actually following through on their promises.

Article reposted with permission from Constitution.com

Democrat Group Plans $25 MILLION Ad Campaign To Fight Concealed Carry

The Democrats are determined to keep Americans defenseless in the face of rising Muslim migrant crime and jihad. Party of Treason indeed.

“Democrat Group Plans $25 Million Ad Campaign To Fight Concealed Carry,” by Phillip Stucky, Daily Caller, April 10, 2017:

A democratic pro-gun control group plans to spend up to $25 million in ads during the 2018 midterms against concealed carry legislation.

Everytown for Gun Safety was founded by former Republican mayor of New York City Mike Bloomberg. The group also announced several key hires ahead of the election, and plans to focus the majority of its attention in state legislature races, Politico reports. Michael Bloomberg, former Republican mayor of New York City, founded the group.

“This is a line in the sand on this issue, there’s no question about it,” Everytown president John Feinblatt told Politico. “The NRA wants to normalize carrying guns in public. It’s not where the American public is. We’re putting people on notice today that we’re watching … and that we expect to hold people accountable.”…

Article reposted with permission from PamelaGeller.com

Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books

Vladimir and His Escape to the West

“The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” – Albert Einstein

My friend Vladimir came to the United States legally in 1979. It was almost impossible to come illegally from the former Soviet communist state, USSR. It was the first and last time in his life when being Jewish helped him a lot, he said. If he would have been a member of the communist party, Vladimir would not have been allowed to immigrate to the United States at that time or to become an American citizen.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s agents of the immigration office loved America and did their best to protect it from invasion by flotsam and jetsam from third world dictatorships, especially communist ones.

Being a member of a communist party today is a badge of foolish smugness since academia and the Obama administration have advanced the global communist platform continuously. Who would have thought that, after escaping communism in the late 1970s, Vladimir would eventually have to live again under communism in the 21st century America, where it is worshipped by a large percentage of the American people. Did America not fight a war in Vietnam to prevent the spread of communism? How many millions died in the fight against communism and as a result of the oppressive exploitation of the utopian ideas of a professorial bum called Karl Marx?

Vladimir’s escape from Kiev was immigration based on religious beliefs. One could argue today that the mostly male, young, and military age “refugees” from Syria and the Middle East are refugees from tribal wars and religious beliefs.

The fundamental difference between Jewish immigrants then from the Soviet Union and other communist satellite countries and today’s “Syrian refugees” is that Judaism is a religion while Islam is a theocracy and a legal system of governance based on Sharia Law. These “refugees” are economic refugees who are not interested in assimilating and contributing to make America great as Jews did. These Muslims want to take over our country and change our Constitution to Sharia Law.  As statistics show, a large percentage of these immigrants become immediate welfare dependents and remain so in perpetuity.

The Communist bloc nations severely restricted freedom and human rights to their populations. Vladimir would not have been able to immigrate to the U.S. had it not been for the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Act of 1974. Two Democrats, Sen. Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson of Washington, and Rep. Charles Vanik of Ohio, sponsored the bill which passed both houses unanimously. President Gerald Ford signed the bill into law on January 3, 1975. Vladimir and his family were beneficiaries of the Jackson-Vanik amendment which allowed Jewish people to immigrate to the West.

When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the Jewish immigration loophole closed. Vladimir was lucky and escaped with his wife and son two months before the border closed. Immigration resumed in the late 1980s, generally for economic reasons, hence it was called the “sausage expatriation.” This was descriptive of the lone sausage or salami hanging in the windows of grocery stores during the communist era when shortages of food plagued every centrally planned economy. Socialist Venezuela is going through severe shortages of food, diapers, and toilet paper, in a country with huge oil reserves. Cuba is a classic example of a country exploited for 59 years by the communist junta of Fidel Castro.

In December 2012, President Obama signed the Magnitsky Act, repealing the Jackson-Vanik Amendment that gave freedom from the communist oppression to so many Jewish people.

The Soviets and even the former dictator Ceausescu took advantage of this Jackson-Vanik Amendment. The Soviets imposed a “diploma” tax on immigration.  The tax was so high that, after the outcry from the West, it was removed after being in effect for over a year. Ceausescu allegedly charged Jewish émigrés $1,000 per head. His regime charged me for my education before I was allowed to leave.

Vladimir’s family paid $500 per person to renounce their Soviet citizenship. Consequently, instead of a passport, they received a piece of paper with a handwritten note under citizenship, “stateless.” They were “stateless” but free.

Although this amendment only applied to Jews and Germans under the “family reunification” egis, the Russians used this opportunity to also expel quite a few dissidents, Soviet writers and other top intelligentsia, who were too much in the public eye to make them disappear, and were thorns in the side of the Soviet regime.

Vladimir remembered that there was no synagogue in Kiev when he grew up, they worshipped underground. A few Christian cathedrals were left for baptisms, weddings, and burials. If people attended church, special agents from each factory were sent to spy on their employees who would pray on Christmas, Easter, or other special holidays. They wrote names down and made sure that such worshippers were given a really hard time in society. They oppressed everybody.

No entrepreneurs were allowed in the former Soviet Union. Those who tried were caught and severely punished. It was easy to go to Siberia for 15 years for a small infraction. His best friend’s parents tried to make candy at home and sell it to friends and neighbors. Because the father was found to have extra cash in the home, over and above his allowed salary, he was arrested by police and later summarily shot. If the commies really wanted to catch someone and make them disappear, it was easy to set them up, to put something incriminating in their homes, and then arrest them for the set-up crime.

Living on the edge of fear was something people got used to. People worried about families, friends, and children. “Soft pressure” was exerted often instead of jail or execution. “Soft pressure” meant that, if you were not in line with the communists, you and your children were not allowed to find jobs, or decent jobs, housing, attend good schools, or universities. And you were constantly watched by the neighborhood informer.

It was a psychological game to keep you suppressed and oppressed at the hands of the state. It was a faceless type of oppression; you never knew who ordered it or exactly why. “They might let you know somehow but you never knew to whom to apologize for your infraction. In Vladimir’s estimation, at least 25 percent of the population was treated this way and they had no recourse.

Vladimir described how getting permission to immigrate took from six months to seven years for some people. Anybody attempting to leave was considered a traitor to the state.  In order to protect your boss from punishment for keeping a traitor employed, you had to leave your job; it was shameful and unpatriotic to keep such a person employed, such a “quisling.”

Wondering how the Soviets knew he was Jewish, Vladimir explained that everything had to be disclosed on the employment forms and it became part of the employment record that followed workers everywhere. Most places, once they found out that the applicants were Jewish, they were told they were wasting their time, they would not be hired.

Vladimir’s case was different because he was an exceptional professional. He was a geophysical engineer in the oil and gas field, working in a Soviet institute of 550 people, with many geologists, engineers, researchers, oil and gas explorers, specialists who knew how to put out oil fires through geological drilling and detonation, and many involved in research and development.

Once he was part of a small group that came up with a plan to put out a difficult oil well fire which they were able to extinguish in six days, a spectacular result, devising a plan to drill sideways in hard rock. For his part, Vladimir was given a bonus of 60 rubles, and a personal visit from the minister of energy. But Vladimir was happy with the personal satisfaction of a job well-done.

Forty-year old Vladimir, his younger wife, and eight-year old son left USSR on the anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, November 7. The customs officers, armed to their teeth, reminded them that everybody was celebrating the Soviet Revolution and “you traitors are leaving the country.”

They were allowed to take 72 pounds per person and, not knowing where they would end up, they took forks, pillows, a frying pan, winter shoes, and other implements for survival. I remember when I left legally in 1978 with two sets of sheets that never fit any bed in America.

They were allowed to exchange from rubles the equivalent of $100 per person, $300 for his family, and he still has the money in an envelope. “This was our life-line. We did not have much family to leave our personal property with since most perished in WWII. We gave friends our books, we could not give away photographs older than ten years, and everything was strictly catalogued.” A person was only allowed a wedding band, a pair of earrings, nothing more expensive than 50 rubles, no paintings, and no art objects, nothing that was not on the approved list. Anything extra had to be given to the state. “My friend had given me some paintings, I had to give them back; if I hadn’t, the state would have confiscated them.”

It took six months to a year to get paperwork to prove that they did not owe anything to the state. It was a terrible life to extricate from the clutches of communism and to gain freedom in the west. They would get the run around from every office. They had to prove so many things, they had to go to archives to prove everything and run the gauntlet of the Soviet red tape. “That was my life for six months.” Vladimir cannot understand why ignorant Americans are so eager to become communist!

A church in New York help them start their new life in America, got jobs, and eventually built a professional career that took him to Virginia where I met him a few years ago.

Since they left, Vladimir never went back to Kiev, now part of Ukraine. Many others, who left like him, did go back. He would like an apology from the state for what they have put them through. The chance of getting such an apology is zero. The country is no longer the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine, it is now Ukraine.

Illegals: Don’t Mess With Texas

Obviously, green card holders aren’t American citizens. Why then did Rosa Ortega of Grand Prairie, TX, 37, assume she was entitled to vote? Further, why did she foolishly sign government forms attesting to U.S. citizenship? Unfortunately for this Mexican-born, Texas-raised mother of four, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Perhaps taking a page from D.C.’s “new sheriff” President Trump, the Lone Star State’s penalty—imposed by Ms. Ortega’s jury—shows startling backbone: eight years in the pokey and a $5000 fine for voter fraud. Beyond her stiff sentence, she also defies the expectations of a political stereotype: reportedly, she voted for pro-law enforcement Republicans. There’s some delicious irony in that.

Given this nightmarish scenario, Ms. Ortega’s understandable reaction is very human one:

“Why me, God? Eight years for signing a piece of paper wrong. I didn’t know what I was doing. I don’t have any criminal record. Why am I the example?”

Notice how her words denote false victimization. An almost lawyerly evasiveness to diminish her illegal acts, perpetrated since 2004. Specifically, Ortega had voted in five elections in Dallas County before her voter registration was nixed in April of 2015. Per Fox 4 News, her identity was scrutinized after she tried to register to vote twice in Tarrant County. Those applications were both denied.

Doesn’t this pattern of wrongdoing indicate willful ignorance? Hers is a total denial of personal responsibility for her choices—and their unexpected consequences. Indeed, Ortega is swiftly discovering a new paradigm, like so many others in the shadows. Unlike Obama’s lackadaisical regime, in Trump’s America, laws and legal status matter—again.

Despite Ms. Ortega’s sympathetic protestations, voting by non-citizens is not a meaningless crime. It’s stealthy practice is actually an insidious assault upon our country’s soul. After all, what’s more fundamental than diluting the all-important voice of We the People?

In most cases (not Ortega’s: she’s a permanent resident), this “thievery” is perpetrated by an unknown segment of an invisible, squatting underclass of foreign invaders with no legal standing. Perhaps assisting matters, per Pew Center statistics, voter inaccuracies are rampant. They include: dead people still registered and/or voting, the same person registered in two or more locations, and largely faulty or completely invalid registrations. How many of those permit illegals to vote?

Moreover, do they yet exert enough influence to tilt an election? What of a 2015 survey that indicates that 13% of illegals confess to fraudulent voting in California, with its treasure trove of 55 electoral votes? Election results there show that since 1992, the nation’s most populist state has voted solidly Democrat. Is it just coincidence that the outspokenly pro-illegal Democratic Party dominates there? These are the pressing, unanswered political questions of our age.

Elections aside, it’s beyond naive to believe that the bushels of bad apples among the undocumented don’t have a harmful impact upon our society. What of the tragic murders of Kate Steinle and Jamiel “Jas” Shaw II at the violent hands of illegals? Their premature deaths would not have occurred otherwise. More recently, neither would the bathroom gang rape of a 14-year old ninth-grader by two older illegal teens in Maryland’s Rockville High School in March of 2017. Based on 2014 government data, the Pew Research Center estimates approximately 3.9 million kindergarten through 12th-grade students in U.S. schools—or 7.3% of the total—are children of illegal aliens. At minimum, how is that not a cultural disruption and a logistical nightmare? Likewise, how is a suspected 11 (or is it 30?) million strangers freely adrift within our borders—with no incentive to assimilate—never anything to be concerned about?

Insulated from danger, the powerful and moneyed families of Washington’s elected officials are safe. As the establishment of both parties remains unaffected, their nonchalance on these related issues is easy to understand. For decades, why not act like metaphorical ostriches with heads buried in sand while an abetting MSM happily plays along? Yet, ignoring these glaring problems doesn’t change their reality. For context, contrast that high school child’s brutal sexual assault—or the killing of innocents—to Rosa Ortega’s temporary loss of freedom (and potential deportation). To borrow the catchphrase from the 1970’s TV show Baretta: “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.” Her unlucky fate broadcasts an important social and political message: lawbreakers, big and small, beware.

ICE Agents Arrest 82 Illegals From 26 Different Countries In DC Operation

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have arrested 82 illegal immigrants in a five-day operation spanning Washington, D.C., and Virginia.

The operation, which resulted in the arrests of 82 people hailing from 26 different countries, took place from March 26 to March 30, WUSA9 reports. One arrest also occurred in Maryland.

Of the total swept up by ICE agents, 68 had criminal convictions such as armed robbery, drug distribution and larceny.

The other 14 had other issues. Two had close connections to the dangerous MS-13 gang. Two had ignored deportation orders. Three overstayed their visas.

One of the arrests was of a second lieutenant in command of the Somalian National Security Service, which is widely regarded as a perpetrator of human rights abuses.

The illegals came from 26 different countries, including: Algeria, Bolivia, China, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Honduras, Iran, Jamaica, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Peru, Philippines, Somalia, South Korea, Sudan, Trinidad, Vietnam and Sierra Leone.

“This is the first targeted enforcement operation in Virginia on this scale under the new administration,” Carissa Cutrell, spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a statement.

Cutrell had no information on the details of the arrests, but speculated that they could have taken place at any number of locations, from residence to place of employment.

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe and Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine have been up in arms already about an ICE operation in February after agents nabbed two men leaving a shelter in Alexandria.

To protect illegals, Kaine has co-sponsored a new bill to establish shelters where ICE agents cannot arrest illegals — unless the agents have both prior approval and urgent circumstances.

“Federal officials trampling on decency and common sense so they can barrel into churches, hospitals and other sensitive places to hunt for people does nothing to make America safer,” said Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, who introduced the bill. “This legislation is urgent business because it would prevent the administration’s misguided and malicious approach to law enforcement and ensure that people are not afraid to go to the doctor, to send their children to school or attend a place of worship.”

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

DHS Spokesman: We’re Allowed To Arrest, Deport Illegal Alien Crime Victims At Courthouses

State court officials are panicking about federal enforcement agents arresting illegal aliens at courthouses, but a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official said Tuesday that merely being present at a courthouse won’t save an illegal from deportation.

“Just because they’re a victim in a certain case does not mean there’s not something in their background that could cause them to be a removable alien,’” DHS spokesman David Lapan said, according to The Washington Post. “Just because they’re a witness doesn’t mean they might not pose a security threat for other reasons.”

“I can’t give a blanket statement that says every witness and victim is somehow untouchable, because they may have circumstances in their own case that would make them again subject to arrest,” he added, saying that cause of arrest “could be any number of things — again, the categories that we’ve talked about that make them subject to arrest or potential removal still apply to somebody who might him or herself be a victim.’”

Although in March California Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye bitterly complained about the practice, DHS Secretary John F. Kelly and Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in response that the courthouse is actually one of the best places to arrest illegals, as they’ve usually been scanned for possession of weapons before they’re allowed entrance into most areas of courthouses.

Unfortunately, Kelly and Sessions noted, there’s been a clash with local jurisdictions blocking Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from entering prisons to arrest illegals, which then forces agents to shift to courthouses, instead.

In February, an ICE agent arrested a transgender illegal at a courthouse in El Paso, Texas, who was in court trying to seek a protective order against an ex-boyfriend.

“I did not think this situation would be possible,” Irvin Gonzalez said.

Gonzalez has already served time in prison on larceny and assault, in addition to being deported numerous times in the past.

In prison, Gonzalez was denied access to hormones, meaning that he was starting to grow facial hair again.

The ability of ICE and other border enforcement agents to carry out their jobs without the strictures placed upon them by the Obama administration has resulted in a surge of morale.

“For the first time in my nineteen years, I feel like I can do the job I was hired to do, the job they tell you you’ll be doing when you leave the academy,” a border patrol agent from San Diego, California, told The New York Times in February.

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

Borders Do Matter

Political elites have used social engineering to control masses of people and territories over the millennia. They have redrawn borders and moved tribes and herded people into harsher environments, not ideally suitable for human habitation and agriculture; they have sent humans to occupy already heavily populated areas through invasion, conquering them, destroying the local inhabitants’ religion in the process, and forcing them to accept the conquering religion of Islam. Christians organized their own crusades in response, to regain the territories occupied by Muslims.

Many borders have been erased or redrawn as the result of greed, war, war reparations, communism, colonialism, Nazism, Islamic conquests, tribal wars, and other politically and economically driven search for land, natural resources, drinking and irrigation water, navigable water, oil, diamonds, and precious metals.

In the 21st century, the technocracy and the global elitists have pushed the social engineering much further, by planning to erase all national borders and destroying sovereignty in order to allow free massive migration of peoples around the globe, and by redistributing wealth from the haves to the have nots, regardless of effort.

The British found out that borders are important and chose to vote for Brexit, the exit from the mammoth technocratic experiment called European Union, a state-like federation controlled by Germany.

Angela Merkel invaded her own people with Islamist “refugees,” men of military age who have left their wives, mothers, elderly, and children behind to fight their tribal wars in Syria, while they slashed and burned across Europe, in order to eventually conquer thousands of years of Christian civilization through demographics and the politics of multiculturalism.

Nations want borders, people want to identify with their ancestors, their history, their families, their language, and their native ancestral lands where their heroes lay buried, where archeological remnants of their glorious past can be found, catalogued, and displayed in museums, a collective shrine to our human civilization.  

People are drawn to those with a common bond that establishes where they came from and exemplifies the long and arduous history of survival against all odds. Most people are fascinated by their own genealogical roots and spend time and resources to find out where they came from. Others hyphenate their names to identify with the continent where their ancestors came from.

The desire to belong to your own kind is exemplified by the tragedy that took place 76 years ago at the border between today’s Russia and Romania. On April 1, 1941, on the day of the Holy Easter, a large column of villagers, who were fed up with the Soviet utopian exploitation, attempted to cross into Romania. They were massacred not far from the Romanian border, men, women, children, and grandparents, by machine guns and swords of the Soviet cavalry at Fintina Alba.

On a snowy day, Petru Grigor, Director of Historical and Cultural Research of Cernauti, talked about Romania’s martyrs and their bloody massacre. In the background is the memorial erected to remember those innocents who died in their quest for freedom, away from Soviet-imposed border that destroyed and separated Romanian villages and families of Bucovina.

The Soviets had installed a new border in June 1940 between USSR and Romania, cutting large chunks of Romanian territory and annexing it to the Soviet Union.

The Red Army had occupied Basarabia, northern Bucovina, and Hertza in the military campaign of June 28-July 4, 1940, an area of almost 20,000 square miles with a population of 3.8 million people. Ready to occupy it with a full-scale invasion, the Soviets gave Romania an ultimatum on June 26 but the Romanian Army, in order to avoid military conflict, agreed to withdraw from the territories. Germany knew of the Soviet interest and remained silent. France, guarantor of Romania’s borders, fell. This emboldened the Soviets to issue the ultimatum of surrender.

Thus a large part of Moldova became, on August 2, 1940, part of the Moldova Soviet Socialist Republic, encompassing most of Basarabia, and part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, now the breakaway Transnistrian state.

The Hertza region and other regions inhabited by Slavic majorities in northern Bucovina, northern and southern Basarabia, became part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

Those who objected to the Soviet occupation were politically persecuted, arrested, deported to labor camps where few survived, and executed.

In January and February 1941 massacres took place at Lunca in the region Cernauti, and in spring 1941 at Fintina Alba, in Poiana Varnitei (Varnita canton). About two km from the border, Romanians, who wanted to return to their motherland and their ancestral lands, were murdered by Soviet soldiers.

Villagers had written letters, asking the new Cernauti authorities to allow them to return to their country. In March 1941, the villagers of Storojinet also petitioned to return to Romania, but the requests were denied, and the villagers returned home.

They made the fateful decision to leave on the rumor that the Soviet authorities would allow them to cross the border unharmed, and they would be able to rejoin the Romanian families left behind.

The villagers of Patrautii de Jos, Patrautii de Sus, and Suceveni went to church, prayed for a while, raised a white flag to show that their intentions were peaceful, and over 1,500 people joined a long procession, marching to turn in their requests to be allowed to return to their motherland, Romania.

Many others joined this column in the center of Hilbocia, more than 5,000 souls. A Soviet policeman urged them to return to their homes as their applications were not even accepted, much less considered. Deciding that they would rather die free than live under the Soviet boot, the group resolved to cross the border illegally. As Petru Grigor told the story, the villagers were met by Soviet border guards with machine guns, who mowed the column down in an inferno of bullets and death. “God cried that day.”

An investigation made in 1943 Bucovina, with the help of eye witnesses, discovered the names of 26 martyrs who died on that fateful day, April 1, 1941, in Fintina Alba. A monument called “troita” was erected on the site by Ukraine in 1991, following its installation to power after the dissolution of USSR.

The journalist Ion Dominte, writing in the newspaper “Bucovina” about the massacre at Fintina Alba, left a historical record of the events. The mass deportations of Romanians that took place in the first year of installation of the Soviet regime in this area came to light. Petru Grigor suggested that archeological digs should take place today, to find out the true number of those who were killed.

Orthodox Church pilgrimages with prayers and wreath-placing ceremonies take place every year “in memoriam” of those who sought freedom at all costs and did not wish to live under the Soviet boot across the border from their national roots.

How Much Money Do Sanctuary Cities Stand to Lose for Harboring Illegals?

On Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a warning to sanctuary cities that are harboring illegal aliens.  He said that the central government would withhold funding from the cities if they failed to comply with immigration agencies in the enforcement of immigration law.  So, just how much money do sanctuary cities stand to lose by failing to comply with the law?  It’s a lot, nearly $27 billion!

Keep in mind that President Donald Trump issued an executive order on January 25, 2017 to deny federal funds to sanctuary cities who would not comply with immigration law.  We have a pretty good idea on the amount of money that would be withheld if the Trump administration would make good on it’s threat.

According to OpenTheBooks.com, in FY2016, nearly $27 billion went to 106 sanctuary cities in the united States.  The total was $26.741 billion.

Federal Funding of America’s Sanctuary Cites” details ten takeaways from the assessment report:

  1. $26.741 billion in annual federal grants and direct payments flowed into America’s 106 sanctuary cities (FY2016).
  2. On average, the cost of lost federal funding for a family of four residing in one of the 106 sanctuary cities is $1,810 – or $454 per person. A total population of 46.2 million residents live in the 106 sanctuary cities according to census data.
  3. Washington, D.C., and Chicago, Illinois governments received the highest amount of federal funding per resident and, therefore, have the most to lose by maintaining their sanctuary status.Washington, D.C. municipal government received the highest amount of federal funding on a per capita basis: $3,228 per person; $12,912 per family of four; or $2.09 billion total. The City of Chicago, IL received the second highest amount of federal funding on a per capita basis: $1,942 per person; $7,768 per family of four; or $5.3 billion total.
  4. In cities with populations of 100,000 and above, the communities with the least per capita federal dollars ‘at risk’ are St. Paul, Minnesota ($47 per person, $14.2 million total); Downey, California ($36 per person, $4.2 million total) and Miami, Florida ($67 per person, $29.7 million total).
  5. $15.983 billion in federal funds flowed into just twelve major American cities where 1 in 5 illegal entrants reside (FY2016).
  6. Department of Justice grants to law enforcement – i.e. city police departments – totaled $543.97 million (FY2016). Typically, this funding was only a small percentage of the local law enforcement budgets.
  7. $4.23 billion in federal funding of the 106 sanctuary cities flowed via the ‘direct payment’ type. These payments funded municipal services such as housing, education, community development, and schools.
  8. $21.5 billion in federal funding of the 106 sanctuary cities flowed via the ‘grant’ payment mechanism. These payments funded local police and fire departments, schools, housing, and city services.
  9. In Los Angeles, fully 1 in 5 city residents (22-percent) are illegal entrants. However, the amount of federal funding amounts to only $126 per resident; $504 per family of four; or $502.5 million total.
  10. In Newark, New Jersey, 19-percent of city residents are undocumented entrants. However, the amount of federal funding amounts to $733 per resident; $2,932 per family of four; or $206.7 million.

Here is a map of the sanctuary cities throughout the US.

Adam Andrzejewski, CEO of OpenTheBooks.com said, “Mayors defending their sanctuary city status by refusing to comply with federal law are essentially imposing a defiance tax on local residents. On average, this tax amounts to $500 per man, woman and child. Major cities like Washington, D.C., New York and Chicago have the most to lose, and nearly $27 billion is at stake across the country.”

We have seen some cities reverse their sanctuary cities policies.  For instance, Miami-Dade formally dropped its status as a sanctuary for illegal immigrants in February.  County commissioners voted 9-3 to uphold an order from Mayor Carlos Gimenez that local authorities cooperate with federal immigration officials, in accordance with the law, and refuse to provide arrested illegal immigrants sanctuary.

However, there are still some cities that remain defiant.  Following Sessions warnings, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman released a statement in which he said, “Despite what Attorney General Sessions implied this afternoon, state and local governments and law enforcement have broad authority under the Constitution to not participate in federal immigration enforcement.”

“As my office’s legal guidance makes clear, President Trump lacks the constitutional authority to broadly cut off funding to states and cities just because they have lawfully acted to protect immigrant families,” Schneiderman added. “Public safety depends on trust between law enforcement and those they bravely serve; yet, again and again, President Trump’s draconian policies only serve to undercut that trust.

“My office will continue to ensure local governments have the tools they need to legally protect their immigrant communities – and we won’t stop fighting to beat back President Trump’s un-American immigration policies,” Schneiderman continued.

Un-American immigration policies?  Congress was given authority concerning legislation regarding immigration.  Isn’t Trump just seeking to follow the law, unlike Communist run cities like New York City?

Victim of Illegal Alien Rapist Testifies Against Sanctuary State Bill: “Stop Trying to Blur the Difference between Illegal & Legal”

This week, California heard from citizens on a bill that would restrict local and state police from helping central government agencies to enforce immigration laws.

Lupe Moreno of Redding, California spoke out against SB-54, which is currently moving through the California state senate, and claimed it would endanger people in the Golden State, especially its children.

“I’m also representing the angel mothers whose children have been slaughtered in our communities, especially cities like Salinas, Cali., and Santa Ana, Cali,” Moreno began.

“Article VI, Section 4 of the United States shall guarantee to every state in the nation a republican form [of government] and shall protect each against invasion and domestic violence,” Moreno stated.

This is true, but it is the citizen militia who are “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 15).

“Our beautiful children have been sacrificed at the altar of elected officials and non-profits as we can see how many non-profits are making money off of our dead children,” she continued.  “I have it on good authority, our side wins! Even with all that that you have, our side wins, because you have weeping mothers not only in California but throughout the United States now. It’s not here, it’s everywhere now.”

“Stop trying to blur the difference between illegal and legal,” she thundered.  “There’s a big difference. We’re Americans – we live the American culture and we have the American spirit. We don’t steal, we don’t lie and we don’t take other people’s things.”

Moreno also spoke of the traumatic effects of illegal alien violence against the citizens of California that last long after the illegal is deported.  Then she testified that she had been a victim of an illegal immigrant.

“I am a victim of illegal immigration. I was molested as a child – as I know that you were Richard,” she said, speaking to one of the board members. “How dare you side with the other side, how dare you. I was pregnant by 14. I had five children by the time I was 22 – by an illegal alien. And I married him. So my city is a ‘Sanctuary city.’ I live in fear, horror and terror.”

“We’re going to plaster our dead children’s pictures all over the state and we’re gonna let them know what government elected officials have let the slaughter of our children happen in California and all these cities,” she added.  “It’s a disgrace, a total disgrace. I ask you to vote ‘no’ on 54.”

More Than 60 DC Congregations Join Network To Fight Deportation Of Illegals

More than 60 congregations in Washington, D.C., are banding together to fight President Donald Trump’s plan to deport illegal immigrants.

Foundry United Methodist Church pastor Ginger Gaines-Cirelli announced the creation of the DMV Sanctuary Congregation Network Tuesday, which has the goal of stemming the tide of deportations by providing physical sanctuary to illegals and educating them on their rights, Washington City Paper reports.

“We have seen this administration’s demonizing and fear-driven rhetoric become concrete in ways that deny the humanity and dignity of our immigrant neighbors, friends, co-workers, and family members,” said Gaines-Cirelli.

Numerous Christian denominations joined together for Tuesday’s press conference, in addition to representatives of other faiths.

After the press conference concluded, supporters marched to the White House to loudly signal opposition to Trump’s plan to enforce immigration law.

Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde, who heads the Washington National Cathedral, participated in the march.

Although the congregations plan to provide physical sanctuary for illegals, the Trump administration is not hampering itself the same way the Obama administration did. In other words, schools and churches are not off-limits to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Additionally, ICE agents no longer have to abide by the Obama administration’s self-imposed restriction that only illegals convicted of violent crimes should be deported.

The website for the DMV Sanctuary Congregation Network lists multiple ways churches can assist illegals, from accompanying them to ICE check-ins and legal hearings, to hosting families who could face deportation.

“We are a network of congregations in the DC/MD/VA region that are providing support and solidarity to neighbors, friends, and family who fear being detained, deported or profiled,” the group’s Facebook page states. “Our faith will not allow us to permit the criminalization and scapegoating of immigrants and people of color. In the face of hate and discrimination we are committed to showing love, compassion and hospitality.”

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

Rockville Considers Declaring Itself A Sanctuary City Amid Immigrant Rape Scandal

Rockville, Maryland, the city home to the recent immigrant high school rape scandal, is considering declaring itself a sanctuary city to hide illegals.

Although Rockville police have had a long-standing policy neither to question suspected illegals about their immigration status, or to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, the city is now considering the process of formalizing that informal standard by becoming a sanctuary city.

Rockville City Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr introduced an ordinance in early March in response to President Donald Trump’s pledge to beat back illegal immigration.

Carr forwarded the ordinance at a hearing March 6 overflowing with local residents, including those in favor of turning Rockville into an official sanctuary city, and those vehemently against.

But the discussion has now become much more complicated, as recently, two immigrants, Henry E. Sanchez from Guatemala, and Jose O. Montano, from El Salvador, were charged Thursday for allegedly raping a 14-year-old girl at Rockville High School.

The charges include first-degree rape and first-degree sexual offense.

The girl told police that Montano pushed her into the boys’ bathroom and into a stall, at which point Sanchez joined him and the two took turns sexually assaulting her.

It’s unclear why Sanchez and Montano, 18 and 17 respectively, are allowed in the ninth grade at the high school and a spokeswoman for the school refused to explain the situation to The Washington Post.

What is clear, however, is that Sanchez has an “alien removal” case against him currently pending.

Montano is being charged as an adult, despite being a juvenile, because of the gravity of the allegations.

And according to Montgomery County Assistant States Attorney Rebecca MacVittie, Sanchez is a “substantial flight risk.”

That both are a flight risk is precisely why the judge in the case said they must be held in custody without bond until their next court hearing. Montano’s hearing is set for March 31 and Sanchez’s is set for April 14.

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

Must-See: Shockingly Blatant Propaganda As Washington Post Changes Immigration Headline: “Doesn’t Want You To Know Illegals Are On Benefits Paid By… You”

They’re not even trying to hide their bias anymore.

Despite efforts by the mainstream media to convince an ever disinterested public that they are still relevant and non-partisan, a last minute headline change by the Washington Post proves just how desperate they are to maintain their big government narrative.

After running an immigration article entitled “Immigrants are now cancelling their food stamps for fear that Trump will deport them,” someone at the Post decided it just wasn’t impactful enough. That illegal immigrants were cancelling food stamp benefits seemed to suggest the Trump administration was acting in the interest of overworked and underpaid American taxpayers.

And we definitely don’t want to give anyone the idea that undocumented immigrants entering the country illegally are somehow putting a burden on the system. Thus, the only solution is to flip-flop the story so that it looks like President Trump and Americans who support common-sense immigration policies are putting a horrific burden on the people collecting government benefits illegally.

In response to this disastrous mistake to their own narrative, the Washington Post modified their title to ensure all of the blame was put directly at the feet of Donald Trump:

“Immigrants are going hungry so Trump won’t deport them”

And boom, just like that they are able to mold the minds of their millions of myrmidon followers.

https://twitter.com/juliangwan/status/842456829938548736

There’s no doubt that this report will immediately be dismissed as fake news with claims that we and others have completely made this up since a record of this no longer exists at the Washington Post.

Not to worry, there’s another screen shot that confirms the legitimacy, as noted by the following Tweet:

https://twitter.com/juliangwan/status/842458257436336128

Article reposted with permission from SHTF Plan

Watch: Steven Crowder Calls Bleeding Heart Progressive Liberals To Ask If They’ll Take In Refugees… The Results Are Just What You Might Expect

Watch as Louder With Crowder host Steve Crowder points out the hypocrisy of bleeding heart liberals who think the American taxpayer should fund large-scale refugee immigration, while at the same time refusing to take in said refugees.

Crowder: Your church is very public about your progressivism… correct?

Liberal Church Representative: Yes, thank you.

Crowder: It’s very impressive… very Christ-like of you to open your doors without so much as security clearance… We’ve seen online about the current refugee situation and the need to help them. I think we’re both on board with that, correct?

Church Rep: Yes.

Crowder: Ok, so how many can I put you down for?

Church Rep: I’ll have to get back with you on that.

Crowder: Time is of the essence. We have some people here who have obviously come over on planes… some by land.. some by sea… just wanted to see how many you can house there at your church.

Article reposted with permission from SHTF Plan