Self Deportation Beginning Ahead of Schedule

Yesterday, in the first segment of my weekly podcast, I recalled for the listeners, a story over which I simply switched on my TV. Therein, I saw, on Fox News, Bill O’Reilly speaking with Geraldo Rivera about illegal immigration and deportation. You may listen here.

He retold, in brief, the story of Guadalupe García de Rayos, a Mexican illegal alien who was recently deported. You may read a more detailed account here.

Geraldo said, quite correctly, that this spectacle was all over the news. Everyone was covering it. He then turned to Bill and said that this incident was only one of 11 million. He explained that this leaves 10,999,999 to go. He asked O-Reilly if America is ready and willing to witness the tragedy of millions being deported every day on the evening news and thousands of websites.

In my podcast, as well as many articles I’ve written on the subject, I exclaimed that this will not occur. It didn’t occur when President Eisenhower oversaw the deportation of millions of illegals and it won’t occur this time. I’m certain of it.

During his career in Real Estate, the Trumpster took pride in projects coming in under budget and ahead of schedule. It looks like he’s doing it again.

The leftist media are all broadcasting scenes of illegal men, women, and children hiking over the border in waist-high snow and sub-freezing temperatures (thanks a lot global warming), from the United States to Canada.

Each one of these sites regales the reader with tales of woe of “undocumented migrants” having to brave the elements and hoof it to Canada, rather than get swept up in the Trump dragnet.

And this is the funny part. I don’t mean it’s funny that these people put themselves and their families in danger of the elements. It’s not funny ha, ha – it’s funny fascinating. I find it incredible that, so far, I have not found a single lefty site that sees the irony of what they are reporting. They are making our case for us. This is exactly what I and many others have been preaching for years.

If you build it, they will come. If you provide free refuge (and everything else), they will come. If you take it away, or even threaten to in a manner they will believe, they will go, of their own accord.

It’s called SELF-DEPORTATION, folks, and the left, in their blind ignorance, is documenting these successes virtually every day. It’s priceless.

Doing just a cursory search of the interweb, I found page after page of accounts, documenting (pardon the pun) the march of illegals making the trek into Canada to “seek asylum” from that fiend Trump.

Time.com reported on February 19 that, “Reuters photographer Christinne Muschi has captured several scenes of people trekking through snowy woods to cross the U.S.-Canada border by foot and enter Hemmingford, Quebec. Among her subjects are people from Yemen and Sudan trying to get into Canada after losing hope of obtaining legal status in the U.S.” They added that, “On Friday [02/17], eight people, who said they were from Sudan, made it across the border to Canada, as U.S. Border Patrol tried to stop them…”

May I ask why? Why in the heck are we trying to stop them? I suppose one reason might be that we suspect, as Trump says, they are “bad dudes,” and may attempt reentry later. But other than that – just let them go.

The Washington Post reports that in January alone, there were 452 claims of asylum on the Quebec border. That’s almost four times the amount of the same time last year. They added that “with so many migrants willing to traipse through the ice and snow to reach Canada, there are concerns that numbers could soar with the advent of spring.” Well – let’s hope so.

Now I don’t know whether this was predicted and planned this way, but Trump’s plan is working better than I had hoped. Just look at what little he has had to do.

Trump talks tough about a crack down on illegals and a step up of deportations. ICE goes out, does a few raids and deports a few illegals, and the dolts in the press publicize it everywhere, wholly unaware that they have become unwitting allies of Trump. Illegals witness the hysteria in the press and decide to turn tail and run.

If this was planned – it is a masterful stroke!

Pelosi the Insane ……. Again: Illegal Alien Murderers ‘Are Law-Abiding Citizens’

For those of us who are watching the left implode and self-destruct in front of the American people who were fooled for decades, this is now enjoyable sport. Not the mother’s pain, not for a moment. But Pelosi’s tongue-twisting lies. She is exposed here for what she is.

As for Pelosi telling this aggrieved mother that she’ll pray for her. That’s pretty rich coming from a godless geriatric hoodlum.

PELOSI TELLS MOTHER WHOSE SON WAS MURDERED: ILLEGAL ALIENS ‘ARE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS’ [VIDEO]

Derek Hunter, Daily Caller, January 31, 2017 (thanks to Todd):

Article reposted with permission from PamelaGeller.com
Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books

Xenophobe President Slams Immigrants: “All Americans Are Rightly Disturbed By The Large Numbers Of Illegal Aliens Entering Our Country”

The hits to illegal immigrants just keep coming.

From the President of the United States:

All Americans, not only the states most heavily affected, but in every place in this country are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country.

The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants… the public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers… that’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more… by hiring a record number of border guards… by cracking down on illegal hiring… by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens…

…We will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes.

We are a nation of immigrants… but we are also a nation of laws.

It is wrong and ultimately self defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must do more to stop it.

The President’s words were met with a standing ovation in Congress.

But if you thought it was President Donald Trump, think again.

These are the words of President Bill Clinton in his 1995 State of The Union address:

Article reposted with permission from SHTF Plan

Illegal Aliens: When the Federal Government Won’t Enforce the Law

Article IV, §4, U.S. Constitution, REQUIRES The United States to protect each of the States against Invasion. It says: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, AND SHALL PROTECT EACH OF THEM AGAINST INVASION…” [emphasis added]

In Federalist No. 43 (3rd para under 6.), James Madison says of this provision:

“A protection against invasion is due from every society to the parts composing it…”

Article I, §8, clause 15 grants to Congress the power to provide for calling forth the Militia to, among other things, “repel Invasions.”

But the federal government has persistently refused to call forth the Militia to protect the States on our Southern Border from Invasion, such as Texas and Arizona.

What are States to do when their Lands are invaded, their citizens murdered and kidnapped, their young corrupted by drug-traffickers and recruited by terrorists, and their budgets imploded from unconstitutional federal mandates that we subsidize the invaders? Are the States to sit with folded hands and be destroyed because the federal government refuses to perform its constitutional duty?  No! We are Americans! If the federal government refuses to perform its constitutional duty to call out the Militia to protect the States against Invasion, then the States must perform that Duty.  And as shown below, they have both an implied and an expressly retained authority to do so.

Article 1, §8, clause 16 grants to Congress the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States. This clause reserves to the States the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

What is the “Militia”?  Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language (1828) tells us: “The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service.  The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.”

So! One of the functions of the Militia – that body of weekend warriors trained by the States and whose officers are chosen by the States, is to defend the States against Invasions. As we have seen, Congress is authorized to provide for calling the Militia into service to repel invasions.  But what if the federal government refuses to act?

Alexander Hamilton provides the answer in Federalist No. 29. Hamilton shows that one of the purposes of the Militia is to protect the citizens of the States from threats to their liberties posed by the federal government (7th & 12th paras); and that the States’ reservation of power to appoint the Officers secures to them an influence over the Militia greater than that of the federal government (9th para). On the use of the Militia to repel Invasions, Hamilton says (13th para): “…it would be natural and proper that the militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a common enemy…”

True, it was contemplated that the “United States” would normally be the entity that protects the States against Invasion (Art. IV, §4). But when the federal government has demonstrated its determination that the States ARE TO BE OVERRUN BY INVADERS, then the States are within their Retained Sovereign Rights to employ the Militia to defend their People from those into whose hands the federal government has demonstrated its determination to deliver them.

Furthermore, Article I, Sec. 10, last clause: says: “No State shall …keep Troops…in time of Peace…or engage in War, unless actually invaded…”

So, clearly, the Sovereign States may use their State Militias and engage in War to defend themselves from the Invasions.

In Federalist No. 46 (7th & 8th paras), James Madison speaks of conflicts between the federal government and the States, caused by encroachments of the former. He does not counsel subservience by the States.  He does not counsel submitting the issue to a federal judge!  Instead, Madison describes various forms of non-violent Resistance properly employed by the States, alone or in unison with other States: “…and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

In Madison’s magnificent 9th paragraph, he speaks of a federal government so consumed with madness that it sends its regular army against the States:

“…Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate [State] governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition [of the federal government], more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of…”

Madison made it clear he would be disappointed that we permitted this current state of affairs to arise: “…Let us rather no longer insult them [the American People] with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.”

But we must start from where we are.  We can restore our constitutional republic. We can rein in a lawless federal government, which usurps powers even while refusing to perform its basic constitutional duty of protecting the States from Invasion.

The Federalist Papers were written to explain the proposed Constitution and to induce The People to ratify it.  Madison is the “Father of The Constitution”. These are the highest authority on the meaning of our Constitution.  Clearly, the States may use their Militia to defend their borders, and States may assist one another in this endeavor. And We the People must throw out of office the federal representatives and officials who refuse to perform their constitutionally mandated Duty to defend our borders.

Madison writes in Federalist No. 44 (17th para) respecting remedies against a lawless federal government: “…and in the last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people who can, by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers…”

When the federal government refuses to obey the Constitution, the States must enforce it. And WE the People must throw the faithless ones out of office.  THIS is how we restore our constitutional republic. 

Illegal Aliens Help Social Security – Not

Yahoo News posted an article by the Atlantic attempting to defend and legitimize illegal aliens by trying to convince the reader that illegals are actually a net asset for America, as they pay billions into the Social Security system and get little in return.

“Every year, the Social Security Administration collects billions of dollars in taxes that it doesn’t know who paid. Whenever employers send in W-2 forms that have Social Security numbers that don’t match with anyone on record, the agency routes the paperwork to what’s called the Earnings Suspense File, where it sits until people can prove the wages were theirs, allowing them to one day collect retirement benefits,” the article claims.

Stephen Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, estimates that about 1.8 million immigrants were working with fake or stolen Social Security cards in 2010, and he expects that number to reach 3.4 million by 2040. He calculates that undocumented immigrants paid $13 billion into the retirement trust fund that year and only got about $1 billion in benefits.

“We estimate that earnings by unauthorized immigrants result in a net positive effect on Social Security financial status generally, and that this effect contributed roughly $12 billion to the cash flow of the program for 2010,” Gross concluded, in a 2013 review of the impact of undocumented immigrants on Social Security.

Okay – so around 2 million illegals (six years ago) are using fake and stolen Social Security numbers? Is this not a felony? If a citizen like you or me were to do that, would we not end up in prison? But it’s okay because illegals are supposed to be a net positive? Isn’t that just fabulous! Of course, we also know this is a lie. The current estimate is that illegals cost us well over $113 billion a year. And why are they even getting one dollar in benefits, much less $1 billion? That was rhetorical – we all know the answer.

But the Atlantic story is a fantasy on its face. Even if the working criminal alien class is a net positive, it would make no difference, as they fail to explain the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security.

It has been explained dozens of times, I’m sure, but let’s go through it again.

Employers send to the government a regular lump sum payment consisting of income, social security, and medicare payroll taxes. Most believe the Treasury then breaks up these tax revenues and forwards the portion to the Social Security Administration (SSA) to pay benefits. WRONGO!

FedSmith explains that, “The Treasury both receives the payroll taxes (and income taxes that higher-income retirees pay on their Social Security benefits) and pays monthly benefits on behalf of the Social Security Administration (SSA). The money stays in the Treasury’s hands until it is either paid out as Social Security benefits or otherwise spent by the government [for other programs]. In fact, no money ever goes into the trust fund,” nor does the SSA ever see a dime. One could therefore logically conclude that the SSA is a useless government department.

Treasury estimates the difference between what was supposed to go into the “trust fund” and what was paid out as benefits. Any money (which has already been spent on other programs) left over after benefits have been paid is then converted into bonds, which are called “special issues of the Treasury.” That’s a fancy term for an IOU. These phony bonds are the only thing in the SSA trust fund.

Unlike other Treasury notes or bonds, which can be traded or sold on the open market, these “special issue bonds” have ZERO market value. They are strictly an accounting gimmick. Even the interest that Treasury is supposed to be paying on what they “borrow” from the SSA is in the form of these special and worthless bonds. Every dime in the SSA trust fund has been long ago spent and replaced with non-marketable government IOUs. They could not be sold to anyone, even for a penny on the dollar.

In 2012, the Social Security Trustees Report estimated “that the gap between revenue and the cost of full benefits will be $53.2 billion this year [2012], $95.0 billion in 2020, and a whopping $318.7 billion in 2030. This means that the government will have to find $318.7 billion in its tight budget, and transfer it to Social Security, in order for full benefits to be paid in 2030.”

Yet, Yahoo and the Atlantic want us to believe that the paltry $13 billion of which criminal aliens kick in will make a difference.

Hillary To Use Illegals to Organize the Latino Voters

It is not an unusual thing to see a crook using criminals for their benefit. The criminal is more comfortable around those who have no regard for the law. So, we should not be surprised that this is the first trick Clinton pulls from her bag.

Breitbart reports:

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is launching a new effort to tap into the political power of young, undocumented immigrants, hoping to capitalize on Donald Trump’s promises to make deporting them a top priority of his presidency.

The 730,000 young people brought to the U.S. as children without legal status are prohibited from voting. Known as Dreamers, they’ve proven themselves to be a powerful organizing force in American politics, mounting a high-profile public campaign that pressured President Barack Obama to grant many of them and their parents reprieves from deportation through two executive orders.

Hillary wishes to use this vast group to get registration up among the Latino community. Those who are eligible to vote will be called on to stop Trump. This should be very effective, considering the things Trump has said concerning immigration.

Breitbart continues:

Clinton believes she can harness their power in a more formal way, particularly given her opponent. Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric has sparked outrage and fear within the Latino community.

He’s promised to revoke Obama’s executive orders within the first 100 days of his presidency, calling them the “most unconstitutional actions ever undertaken by a president.”

This may be hard for Trump to overcome. This is particularly the case if we consider the latest polls.

Time will tell.

Article reposted with permission from Constitution.com

Illegals Get to Stay Which Makes ThinkProgress Happy

The ultra-leftist site ThinkProgress is happier today. And why are they happier? Well, once again, liberal open-boarders politics may trump what is right and what is the law.

“A federal appeals court handed down a very brief, two paragraph order on Monday that represents good news for the tens of thousands of immigrants currently subject to a campaign of intimidation from a trial judge,” they write.

Of course they aren’t talking about “immigrants.” They are referring to illegal aliens who were/are allowed to stay in the U.S. under the President’s also illegal “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) decree.

It is interesting and infinitely predictable, the metamorphosis of the term – from illegal alien, to illegal immigrant, to undocumented immigrant, to now just immigrant, making the law breakers completely indistinguishable from those saps who chose to enter legally and play by the rules.

And what has federal Judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas done that was so intimidating and egregious? He insisted that Obama Department of Justice lawyers act ethically in his courtroom and not lie to his face. The nerve of some judges.

As you may be aware, 26 states have filed a lawsuit against the feds over the unlawful DACA program. The suit was originally filed in Texas, which is how Judge Hanen became involved. The states claim, and rightly so, that DHS had no right to issue deferments, allowing illegals to stay.

When the DOJ attorneys were in front of Judge Hanen, they lied to his face, claiming that “the president’s immigration amnesty plan that included three-year deferrals was not being implemented — when, in fact, they knew it was being implemented to the tune of over 100,000 aliens.”

Well, the Judge discovered they had lied and generally acted unethically, although I don’t know why he would be surprised. They’ve probably learned from the master – Obama himself. You know – if you like your doctor, yada, yada, yada, ad infinitum.

And Hanen didn’t just call them out. He “listed the specific statements made by DOJ lawyers in court and on conference calls that were outright lies, and then he lists all of the applicable ethics rules that the DOJ lawyers violated.”

The punishment for these intentional deceptions is for DOJ to hand over all documentation of the thousands of illegals who were illegally “deferred” and for every DOJ attorney who has appeared in any court of the 26 plaintiff states to attend mandatory remedial ethics classes, which amounts to hundreds of smarmy DOJ lawyers.

But to the radicals at ThinkProgress, lying to a Judge’s face in court is a “minor issue,” as the Obama Justice Department attempted to explain the lies away by saying that “the lawyers ‘lost focus’ or that the ‘fact[s] receded in memory or awareness.’” If nothing else, you have to be impressed by the sheer Chutzpah of these dirtbags.

Since Hanen’s ruling, the DOJ has twice sought relief in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, but to no avail. Yet this week, ThinkProgress reported with measured optimism that three new judges from the Appeals Court reviewed Hanen’s punishment and issued their “very brief, two paragraph order,” allowing “tens of thousands of immigrants to breath a sigh of relief.”

It seems that two of three judges “have relatively moderate records on immigration.” That’s code for they are pro-illegal alien. One of the judges, Eugene Davis, has even previously stated that the Obama administration has “broad discretion in matters related to immigration.”

But as it turns out, the liberal judges and their “very brief, two paragraph order” may not have been necessary. On June 7th, judge Hanen inexplicably stayed his own orders, both the document requirement and the ethic classes, until August 22nd. The orders will remain in effect unless they are withdrawn by Hanen or struck down by the Fifth Circuit.

I hope the judge doesn’t go wobbly on these rulings, but postponing them is not a good sign. All it does is give additional time for more DOJ shenanigans, which would make ThinkProgress even happier.

Trump Says Illegals Treated Better Than Vets, And He’s Going To Completely Change That

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump said Sunday at a biker rally in Washington, D.C., illegal immigrants are often treated better than veterans.

In advance of Memorial Day, Trump gave a rousing speech at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, where he said when he’s president, he’s “not going to allow” illegals to be prioritized over vets “any longer.”

While Trump has previously run afoul of veterans by attacking GOP Sen. John McCain for getting himself captured during the Vietnam War, he has come out very clearly ahead of other candidates among veterans.

A recent poll of veterans and people from military households found 47 percent support for Trump over 38 percent for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The poll also found Trump won out over Democratic candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders by 47 percent to 43 percent.

During his Sunday speech, Trump emphasized how he’ll reshape care at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), allowing veterans to get care from doctors at the VA, but also private doctors, if they need it.

“If there’s a wait, we’re going to give the right for those people to go to a private doctor or even a public doctor and get themselves taken care of and we’re going to pay the bill,” he said.

“We’re with you 100 percent,” he added.

The rally was smaller than his usual events, with estimates placing the number of people present at about 5,000. Trump brushed off lower attendance during his speech by saying that people who wanted to get into the event were not being let in.

“I thought this would be like Dr. Martin Luther King, where the people would be lined up from here all the way to the Washington monument, right? Unfortunately, they don’t allow ‘em to come in,” Trump said, according to The Associated Press.

Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller

We Must Change Park Ranger Uniforms to Make Illegal Aliens Feel Better

National Parks, originally known as Federal Reserves, have been in existence for well over 100 years, with the first recognized in 1872 – that being Yellowstone, or Jellystone for you Yogi and Boo Boo enthusiasts. Back then, there was really no one to look after the park – no National Park Service – no Park Rangers.

In 1886 Congress decided to charge the military with the task of overlooking and protecting Yellowstone, but they were not really equipped or trained to do the job properly. Park service demanded a different set of skills and knowledge that soldiers did not possess, not to mention that it took away from the military training these soldiers actually needed.

On August 25, 1916, the Park Ranger Service was born, which means their centennial is just around the corner. Prior to the military influence, 1872 -1886, those who loosely patrolled Yellowstone dressed in civilian attire, but since 1886, those who have looked after our National Parks have always been in uniform. And up until recently, this has been just fine.

But then again, many things have been just fine until the relatively recent rise of blubbering, over-sensitive leftism. Nowadays, there is almost nothing that won’t somehow offend a helpless liberal flower or a protected group – and it seems the Park Rangers have done just that.

The Park Rangers have offended someone, but not just anyone or any single individual. It seems the Rangers have offended and are said to be scaring an entire race of people. Yes, after 100 years of Park Ranger uniforms not offending anyone, it seems now the “Latino Community” has a palpable fear of them.

We know this because the designated representative of the entire Latino community said so. Wait, Maite Arce is not the duly elected, rightfully chosen representative of all Latinos everywhere? No – apparently not. She does however speak for a radical leftist group, similar to La Raza, the Hispanic Access Foundation (HAF), who promote the causes of illegal aliens – but only Latinos. If you are a Norwegian illegal – she doesn’t care.

Now what could possibly be her and her group’s beef? It seems Park Ranger uniforms too closely resemble those of the border patrol and I.C.E. agents. Oh the horror!

So here we go again. Free access to healthcare, a free K-12 education, in state college tuition, welfare, and a myriad of other perks isn’t enough. Now the National Park Service must change their uniforms to accommodate people who shouldn’t be here because they are scared by the way the Rangers are dressed? Yep, that’s it.

Arce says that, “We are calling for drastic and scary change. One example I can give you is with the Latino community, especially among the border states, but even nationwide, just the simple color of the uniforms that rangers wear. It’s such a shame that something as simple as the uniform and it’s similarity to the border patrols uniform – in the coloring – could be very threatening to certain segments of the Latino population.”

Of course it’s not one example – it’s the only example and we all know what “certain segments of the Latino population” she is referring to – the only “segment” who might be concerned with being caught and deported. Sadly, I don’t know where this fear originates from. I.C.E. and the Border Patrol are under orders to catch and release if they even catch. So why on Earth should illegals fear the Park Rangers?

But just in case they do have their precious feelings hurt by the sight of a mean old Ranger, the HAF, along with other groups and pandering liberal lawmakers, is asking Obama to issue an Executive Order for changes to be made.

Among the suggestions are to, “Assess the cultural implications of existing agency uniforms, offices, signage, and other facilities. For example, the Park Service law-enforcement vehicles look like those used by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and uniforms have law enforcement connotations, both of which present a significant impediment to engaging all Americans.”

One problem with that statement. “Americans” don’t have a fear of the Park Rangers, or their uniforms, or their vehicles, or the offices, or the signage. And why? Because we’re Americans! We have a right to be here and your constituents do not!

Newsflash: We “Americans” don’t care how you or your illegal alien brethren “feel” when someone in uniform – any uniform – rolls up. Perhaps we should instead make the Ranger uniforms even scarier. Nothing else seems to be driving away the illegals. Maybe we should give that a go. Conduct a national poll of only illegals to determine what type of uniform would scare them most and design one accordingly.

Should California’s Votes be Disqualified Since They are Allowing Non-Citizens to Vote?

The official number of illegal aliens in the state of California is nearly 3 million. We can estimate the number to be more than double this amount in reality.

Over half of all drivers license issued in California were given to individuals who are here illegally and the state automatically registers those with a driver’s license to vote.

In 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill giving full voting rights to illegal aliens. This gives them the right to vote in all elections from a local level to national elections, including that of choosing who will become President.

The biggest problem with this is it is against Federal law for non citizens to vote in any national election. This in itself negates the votes made by illegal aliens in California and any other state which allows them to vote.

According to the law in California, which gives Illegal aliens the right to vote, along with the Federal law that prohibits them from participating in national elections, we must conclude that all votes cast in California for President of the United States be considered null and void. What this means is the state of California’s votes, both in the upcoming primaries and the general election, have to be disqualified.

In all fairness to the candidates running for president, and abiding by Federal law the Federal government simply must prohibit California votes from counting until which time the state can prove that no illegal alien vote was cast in national elections.

The state has the right to permit them to vote in local and state elections if they choose, but not in national elections.

Since the sheer numbers of illegal aliens voting in California is astounding and is more than likely double that of legal citizens voting, the tally from the primaries must be held up and no delegates awarded. What we have here in disqualifying California from national elections is, aside from it being against Federal law to allow non citizens to vote, it would be keeping people who have no right to be here in the first place from influencing the outcome of elections nationally. The simple fact that they are here in this country illegally supersedes them from having any rights as legal citizens in making decisions as to who runs our country. No country in the world allows individuals who are non citizens to vote in any election. It is time the US abides by the constitutional laws of the land or becomes a nation of chaos where we pick and choose what laws we will obey and disregard the ones we happen not to agree with.

The moral issue is we must stand as a nation of values based on what makes us unique to the rest of the world and refuse to degrade our country to the substandard level socialist politicians wish to sink us to. If the law is adhered to, the California votes must be ignored.

NO EXCUSE FOR DROUGHT IN 21st, CENTURY AMERICA

We hear a lot about droughts these days; places like California seem to be in perpetual drought, while others suffer periodically throughout the year. Most people equate drought conditions with an area’s lack of precipitation; however, nothing could be further from the truth.

Up until the 1990’s, most places called drought conditions based on a lack of precipitation; today, drought is not measured based on precipitation, but on how much water an area uses. A prime example is south Texas. Here, we have been in drought periodically for decades. Just last year, we went from flood conditions in the spring of 2015 to drought conditions by the end of that summer.

San Antonio, for example has an average annual precipitation of 32.27 inches, which is considered normal. In 2015, it received 44.27 inches, 12 inches above average. If we went by just precipitation alone, this area should have been well out of having a drought. Yet, various stages of drought were still called, based on the level of water the aquifer is at.

In California, most areas of the state receive very little precipitation, with the exception of the Sierra Nevada range and extreme northern section of the state. Most areas of southern and central California receive less than 15 inches per year, and a large portion of this area receives less than 5 inches a year. Thus, most of the southern half of the state is either desert or semi arid naturally.

Unfortunately, most of the southern half of the state is where most of the state’s more densely populated areas are, comprising over 22 million people. Thus, for California to be drought free, the state would have to receive the same amount of rainfall as Miami, Florida’s 61.93 annually.

So, as the population explodes across the US, especially in naturally dry areas such as Arizona and Nevada, we can expect to hear more news of massive droughts in the coming years.

In the 21st century, we must do away with our equation of lack of rainfall having to do with drought and accept the fact that it is all due to the amount of water we use.

The only way the US can become a drought free country is to follow the lead of many countries of the world in going totally desalinization. Countries such as Saudi Arabia in desert areas and those with large populations like India and China would not even exist today if it were not for using desalinization technology.

With 71% of the earth’s surface covered with water, it makes no sense for any area to suffer from a lack of water. We have the technology and the need of jobs such an endeavor would require to put drought in the history books as something we used to be plagued by.

Eventually, we will be a civilization who uses desalinated water for all our needs, but this will come out of necessity for survival after politicians exhaust all useless band aid solutions for the gaping wound requiring sutures that is drought.

The Schengen Agreement, Syrian Invasion, and Refugee Resettlement

If you cross the border illegally, in most countries, you are going to jail for a long time; you are beaten, raped, tortured, you may not be heard from again, and you may be treated as a spy. In the U.S., you may be caught, released (if you are lucky), or deported to come back again.

If you cross into Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, or Norway, you are going to receive the following: social insurance, mobile phones loaded with free cards, free health care, spending money, free housing, free language classes, free transportation passes on buses, metro, and trains, free child care, supplements for every child, free legal assistance in deportation cases, no personal responsibility for anything, and more rights than citizens.

On June 14, 1985, five countries—Belgium, France, West Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands—signed an agreement in Schengen, Luxembourg, to gradually abolish border checks at their common borders. At that time, there were ten members of the European Economic Community, but only five chose to sign this agreement.

“Measures proposed included reduced speed vehicle checks which allowed vehicles to cross borders without stopping, allowing residents in border areas freedom to cross borders away from fixed checkpoints” and visa policies were “harmonized.”

The Schengen Agreement (SA), fully operational in 1995 only between the signatories, was incorporated into the European Union law in 1999 via the Amsterdam Treaty. Two members chose to opt out: the United Kingdom and Ireland.

SA currently includes 26 European countries, covering a population of over 400 million people and an area of 1,664,911 square miles.

The Schengen Agreement is the enabler that facilitated the European Invasion by able-bodied “refugees,” 20-40 year old men supposedly from Syria and a few women and children, who are really looking for better economic opportunities away from tribal wars in the areas in which they live. Instead of staying to make their countries better, they flee to specific countries like Germany and Sweden that have more generous welfare systems.

If these were true refugees, why are the majority young men? Why are they fleeing instead of fighting and leaving behind women and children in the path of danger? And why are the surrounding Muslim countries refusing to take them in, under the excuse that they are dangerous, when they speak the same language and share the same culture, religion, and Sharia Law? They are dangerous for the Middle East but not dangerous for the west?

Why is Saudi Arabia not taking in 3 million refugees to fill up the empty, air-conditioned tents in the desert? They can certainly afford it and it is the brotherly and humane thing to do. Unless there is an ulterior motive, one called hijrah.

Leaving a war zone to a neighboring country makes one a refugee. But the moment one steps out of one safe country and enters another safe country, one becomes an immigrant. Looking for a better place to live does not make one a refugee. And paying coyotes thousands of dollars, crossing illegally into many countries, with fake passports, makes one an illegal alien and a criminal.

The Guardian reported that these global “refugees” are now taking “long detours through Latin America to reach the U.S.” Five Syrian men had been detained in Honduras with fake Greek passports and eight Syrians turned themselves in at the Texas-Mexico border the week before in a sinister development that does not bode well for the United States. Migrants from Nepal, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Pakistan are joining “the flood of Central American migrants seeking refuge from violence” and the generous American welfare system.

According to the Guardian, Colombian investigators found that the trek from Asia or Africa to the U.S. via Latin America can cost upwards of $12,000. The five Syrians had passed through Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, and Costa Rica before were detained in Honduras. The Guardian cites Ecuador as having removed visa requirements for all nationalities and it thus became a major point of crossing for all traffickers. Is Ecuador accepting refugees? No, they just drop them at the border.

Our regime’s policy, to “welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety” is what we must do because “slamming the door in their faces would be betrayal of our values,” got an interesting response from Mark Krikorian – “Relocating refugees from the Middle East to the U.S. is morally wrong.”

His argument had nothing to do with the fact that it is impossible to adequately screen “refugees” from Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan because there are no databases to compare these refugees to. Even if we could somehow keep out the terrorists and only admit peaceful Muslims, “the goal is to assist as many people as possible with the resources available.”

Quoting the Center for Immigration Studies, Kirkorian said that “it costs twelve times as much to resettle a refugee in the United States as it does to care for the same refugee in a neighboring country in the Middle East.” The five-year cost of resettling one refugee is $64,000, while the U.N. indicated that a five-year cost for the same refugee in their native region cost $5,300.

Kirkorian said that “each refugee we bring to the United States means that eleven others are not being helped with that money.” The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, “reports a $2.5 billion funding shortfall in caring for Syrian refugees in the Middle East.”

Can we and should we do both? As much as we are humanitarians and we like to help our peaceful fellow men, resources are finite and we should help our own poor citizens, our veterans, and our elderly first.

U.N. estimates put the number of refugees and displaced people around the world at 60 million. Can we afford social services for the 90 percent of refugees that would receive food stamps, SSI, 75 percent on Medicaid, and other welfare programs when they have little education and earning potential, pay little taxes, and would likely become wards of the state and the counties in which they would be settled?

Roy Beck of NumbersUSA.com made an interesting presentation in 2010 on “Immigration, World Poverty, and Gumballs,” asking the question, “Who deserves our humanitarian compassion?” According to the World Bank, it should be people who make less than $2 per day. By this yardstick, Beck said, there are 650 million people in Africa, 890 million in India, 480 million in China, 810 million in Asia, 105 million in Latin America, for a total of 3 billion—yet the United States takes in one million immigrants every year.

Unfortunately, our legal immigrants do not come from the $2/day group; they come from “the better-off poor,” with the majority from Mexico. According to World Bank, 5.6 billion people have an average income below Mexico’s.

Are we really making a dent in the world’s poverty rate, even though we are importing legal and illegal immigrants, regardless of the impact on our own people, on our own unemployment?

These poor countries add 80 million more impoverished people through their birth/death rate every year. We would never get ahead even if we took in 5 million immigrants each year, Beck said. We would just affect our own welfare.

The immigrants we take in are not the $2/day earners because they usually stay where they are. Beck concluded that “Immigration can never be an effective or significant way to help the suffering of the world. They have to be helped where they are. They must make their lives better where they live.”

The small counties and towns were these “refugees” are resettled in the dead of night are ill-prepared to take them in have no additional resources to care for their children in schools and in hospitals, have scarce subsidized housing, nobody speaks English, and they do not know what mental health issues and diseases they may harbor in order to treat them appropriately.

As Ann Corcoran said, it is “dropping needy people” in the middle of small town America. The U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees (UNHCR) chooses refugees without the approval of local residents. UNHCR is under the influence of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Corcoran said. “Not surprisingly, a large number of U.S. bound refugees come from countries with large numbers of people that hate us – Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon from Syria, just to name a few.”

Ann Corcoran explains in her video that “the U.S. State Department distributes the refugees to 9 major federal contractors:

  • Church World Services
  • Ethiopian Community Development Council
  • Episcopal Migration Ministries
  • Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society
  • International Rescue Committee
  • U.S. Commission for Refugees and Immigrants
  • World Relief Corporation
  • Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services
  • U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Six of these so-called religious charities are largely funded by U.S. Treasury.” The “refugees” are sent to 190 cities and towns in the U.S., particularly to states with largest Muslim populations – Texas, California, New York, Michigan, and Florida.

These “refugees” are given help for six months by 350 subcontractors around the country, then “they submit paperwork to admit the relatives of the first group.” Corcoran believes this is hijra (Muslim colonization) and wrote a book to explain it called Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America. How many Christians are among these refugees?

A shadow layer of government, non-governmental organizations with their unelected bureaucrats, faceless faith-based lobbyists, ignoring the wishes of the American people, with billions from the U.S. Treasury, is forever changing the dynamics and the demographics of our society. Many have asked if this is a stealth manufactured refugee crisis pushed by the U.N. and a forced social engineering scheme to redistribute the wealth of the west and to spread Islam in the cradle of western and Christian civilization.

Most Americans I know are not racists or xenophobes and don’t worry as much about the immediate or long-term forced immigration cost as they do about their own safety and survival of their country as a Christian nation. They do not trust their government to protect them.

Would President Trump Fix the “Broken” Immigration?

We keep hearing that our current immigration system is broken and it must be overhauled to better serve the immigrants, especially the illegal ones. And in this process, it seems that immigration, whether legal or illegal, is not necessarily run in the best interest of the American people, but in the best interest of crony capitalists and the ruling elites.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), an agency with the Department of Homeland Security, was created in 2002 and assumed its functions on March 1, 2003, as a result of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. USCIS has over 200 offices around the world and staffs 19,000 employees and contractors in four directorates and nine program offices. Applications are processed in four major USCIS Service Centers and 83 Field Offices in the U.S., Puerto Rico, and Guam.

Funding USCIS operations largely from user fees, less than 4 percent of its FY2014 budget came from Congressional appropriations. According to William A. Kandel, writing in a Congressional Service Report in May 2015, $124 million USCIS funding came from direct congressional appropriations and $3.097 billion came from user fees in 2014.

Over twenty years ago, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was transformed by creating the Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA) in 1988 to fund the agency’s activities. “The agency has two other small accounts that were created to support specific purposes both within and outside USCIS: the H-1B Non-Immigrant Petitioner Fee Account; and the H-1B Fraud Prevention and Detection Fee Account.”

When DHS receives its annual funding, USCIS also receives its direct appropriations. In previous years, Congress also funded special projects through direct appropriations such as backlog reduction. In recent years, according to CRS, appropriations have exclusively funded E-Verify and immigrant integration grants. E-Verify is a system that electronically confirms if individuals have proper authorization to work in the United States.

INS was legally allowed to charge fees for immigration services even before the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA). When the Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA) was created, USCIS collected most of its budget from user fees, and its budget was no longer subject to annual congressional approval. Congress has little or no influence on our immigration policies and enforcement.

Our President issued on November 20, 2014 the Immigration Accountability Executive Action which included provisions such as an expansion of the existing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program started in 2012, and the new Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program that “grants certain unauthorized aliens protection from removal, and work authorization, for three years.”

Applicants submit petitions and pay user fees to USCIS which “would purportedly pay for the cost of administering the program.” This executive action benefited 5 million unauthorized aliens living in the United States. “The deferred action programs of the President’s executive action have been temporarily enjoined.”

Some Congressmen, reflecting the wishes of their constituents, oppose deferred action programs but have little or no options to stop the programs using the annual funding process. They cannot control an agency which is largely independent of Congress. To change this situation, an enactment of law would be required which Congress does not seem interested in pursuing, as the illegal immigration debacle continues unabated despite the recent violent attacks in Paris by “refugees” from Syria and elsewhere who were allowed into EU unrestricted.

While some are happy that USCIS reduces the burden of cost to American taxpayers, others are concerned over the lack of congressional oversight on its activities and its lack of accountability to Congress.

Additional potential issues include the level of fees that may prevent potential applicants from seeking benefits or deter lawful permanent residents from becoming citizens; the pace and progress of information technology modernization may not serve legal petitioners efficiently, causing huge backlogs of 4 million legal applications; and the inability of Congress to oversee the adequacy of personnel management and resources.

With the leading purpose of processing immigrant petitions, USCIS handled in 2014 six million petitions for immigration-related services and benefits. USCIS performs other functions:

  • Adjudication of immigration and naturalization petitions
  • Refugee and asylum claims and related humanitarian and international concerns
  • Immigration-related services such as issuing employment authorizations
  • Petitions of nonimmigrant change-of-status

“Humanitarian functions have no associated fee” but the following do levy user fees:

  • Immigration adjudication

Of the 6 million petitions processed each year, 1 million are for permanent status and 5 million are for temporary non-immigrant status; adjudicators determine if immediate relatives and family members of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent resident (LPRs) are eligible; if employees U.S. businesses demonstrate they are needed and no other Americans are available; they also determine if foreign nationals on a temporary visa are eligible to change to another non-immigrant status or LPR status

  • Work authorization

Screens aliens for work under certain conditions

  • Employment verification

Checks lawful status to work in the United States (since FY2007, congressional appropriations have funded the E-Verify)

  • International Services

USCIS Office of International Affairs “adjudicates refugee applications and conducts background and record checks related to some immigrant petitions abroad;” a component of this program is the asylum officer corps who interview and screen asylum applicants; according to USCIS, “a person seeking asylum is applying for protection from persecution for the same reasons as a refugee but, unlike a refugee, is present in the United States”

  • Fraud Detection and National Security

This office flags applications and petitions that trigger national security and criminal database notifications; such duties, formerly performed by INS enforcement, are now under the responsibility of DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

  • Civic Integration

Instructing and training on citizenship rights and responsibilities via a Citizenship Resource Center website and via the Immigrant Integration Grants Program “which assists public or private nonprofit organizations that provide citizenship instruction and naturalization application services to LPRs

  • Naturalization

Granting U.S. citizenship to LPRs; adjudicators must check if aliens have continuously resided in the U.S. for a specific period of time, have good moral character, are able to read, write, speak, and understand English, and have a basic knowledge of U.S. civic and history;

Do unsavory characters who are not worthy of American citizenship or of refugee status slip through the adjudication process? Of course they do, the terrorist Tsernaev brothers come to mind.

One of the biggest criticisms of USCIS is that petitions are still processed in the “outmoded” paper form and there are constant complaints of lost files. Since 2008 USCIS has embarked on IT Modernization and Client Services in order to “improve information sharing, workload capacity, and system integrity.” Eventually the system will be “paperless, centralized, and consolidated, ensuring national security and integrity, customer service, operational efficiency, and quality in immigration benefit decisions.” (Fiscal Year 2016 Congressional Budget Justifications, p. 3357)

Since Congress is so weak and unwilling to protect our borders, our American interests, and our sovereignty, would a President Trump be ready to use his executive pen to stop the flood of illegal immigrants by building a fence, enforcing current immigration laws, and deporting criminal illegal aliens?

Four American Presidents Conducted Deportations

Trump is a blowhard. Let’s just admit it. He’s a loud mouth. But that doesn’t mean one can’t still be a Trump supporter. Frankly, if he’s right on the issues, who cares if he’s a blowhard.

Well, he’s not right on all issues. So why is he still so popular? Why does he remain at the top of the heap, despite bashing everyone but his mother? It’s uncivilized, they say.  Yet none of that appears to matter, due to two little words: Illegal Immigration. That’s it.

Although I’m not a Trumpster, I was glad someone finally brought up president Eisenhower and “Operation Wetback,” during the last debate. We “republicans” are supposed to be up on the issues, but I’ll wager 90% in the audience or viewing on TV didn’t know about Eisenhower’s very successful deportation program.

Well, Bill O’Reilly, on behalf of his “folks,” did not take too kindly to Trump invoking the name of Ike. Business Insider writes that the “Eisenhower program has a dark history – including its name, ‘Operation Wetback,’ a derogatory slur.” Of course, they neglect to mention that, in 1950’s parlance, the term “wetback” was more factual than merely derogatory. They also did not care a wit about politically correct speech.

And, according to CNN, “the 1950s-era transfer process resulted in a number of Mexican migrants dying along the way.” They are attempting to make us believe this deportation was the Mexican Trail-of-Tears?

During Tuesday’s Fox Business Network Debate, Trump declared that the Eisenhower program “moved a million and a half illegal immigrants out of this country.”

“That was brutal what they did to those people to kick them back to [Mexico]. The stuff they did was really brutal. It could never happen today,” O’Reilly said to Trump. Bill added that, even if you wanted to, you couldn’t –that “the federal courts would stop you. And they would say each person that President Trump wants to deport has to have due process. So in the year 2050, you would finally get around to it.”

“Bill, they’re here illegally,” Trump insisted.

“Doesn’t matter. The Supreme Court would absolutely rule they all have to have due process because they’re on American soil. You know that,” O’Reilly said.

Okay, first, let’s get to the truth about the actual history of deportation in America.

Four American presidents conducted deportations in our history – Herbert Hoover, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Dwight Eisenhower. Yes, one of the left’s holy men, FDR, continued Hoover’s deportation program for a period. Why that would be shocking is beyond me, considering his treatment of the Japanese, Germans, and Italians during World War II.

Beginning in 1931, under the auspices of trying to preserve jobs for American citizens during the Depression, the government began a series of “repatriation” programs. They called it repatriation because it was being done at the local level and by local authorities, and it was determined that only the feds could “deport.” Both the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations were perfectly content to let the local authorities do the heavy lifting of deportation.

What does that mean? Well, it means that, to a progressive, the law is relevant only to their desired position. Hoover and Roosevelt’s position was that, due to their bad policies, there weren’t nearly enough jobs for Americans, so to heck with what the law concerning immigration and deportation was – if it were easier to allow local authorities to round up the Mexicans, well, that was good enough. It didn’t matter what the “law” actually said. Hoover’s goal was to have local authorities “repatriate” 500,000 foreigners.

Harry Truman was much more successful. In 1950, he wrote: “These people are coming to our country in phenomenal numbers – and at an increasing rate. Everyone suffers from the presence of these illegal immigrants in the community.” His reasoning was a lack of post-war jobs.

Under Truman, approximately 3.3 million Illegals were deported. Yet, looking closer at the numbers, you’ll find that only about 130,000 were removed by the government, and the other 3.2 million self-deported. Yes, when the illegals figured out old Harry “The Buck Stops Here” Truman was serious, they packed up and left on their own. His “deportation force” only had to deport about 4% of all who left. See how this works?

And it worked again under Eisenhower.

In all, from when Hoover began in 1931 to the end of Ike’s term in 1959, about 5-1/2 million Illegal aliens left this country, but fewer than 500,000 (or less than 10%) had to be “rounded up” and removed.

When people understand that a president is serious about deportation, the Illegals, as they’ve always done in the past, will once again respond in kind.

And as far as the “court battles,” a President Trump will just declare that deportations are a matter of national security and trump the courts. Pardon the pun.

Legal Immigration Is an Honor Denied

Millions and millions of legal aliens past and present must feel pretty betrayed and foolish that they have followed the law, spent endless hours filling out paperwork, paid expensive fees, waited and waited, traveled to immigration offices sometimes in faraway places at great cost to them, subjected themselves to interrogations, fingerprinting, medical tests to prove that they were healthy, undergoing financial cross-examination to make sure they would not become a burden to American society, in order to legally immigrate to the United States as resident aliens.

They want a chance at the American dream. But this American dream has been destroyed by the lawlessness that permits illegal aliens to break our laws and demand citizenship and rights that previously were reserved for law-abiding people either born in this country or naturalized, people who wanted to make America better through their contributions once they were given the opportunity to live in a formerly free country.

Now we reward law breakers, no questions asked, with every possible financial incentives an American citizen has and they are not satisfied. They demand American citizenship, free health care, birth certificates even though most were not born in this country, and they demand their own Bill of Rights. This document was just released by United We Stay, a group comprised of illegal aliens, first generation Americans, and liberal human rights activists. In addition to their 10-point demands, they object to the term “illegal” and “alien” because they are “dehumanizing.”

At the same time, illegal alien groups had no hesitation releasing a vile video with very young children using profane language and gestures that cannot be played on screen without blocking the profanity, a message addressed to presidential candidate Donald Trump and to any law-abiding American who supports him. A majority of Americans reject criminality and such behavior unbecoming of adults but especially young children.

If this group was looking for sympathy and acceptance from Americans, this ill-conceived video certainly back-fired. Americans were outraged and disgusted that young children could be used in such a repulsive way by their own parents and other adults.

We are not racists or bigoted because we like the rule of law. You disrespected our country and broke our laws when you decided to sneak across the southern border without proper papers and authorizations.

Americans don’t want to raise their children around your children if these are the values, the vile language, and despicable behaviors that you teach your young children – no respect for the rule of law, for authority, and for the potentially future president of the United States. This video shows in glaring detail your mal-educated youth in action.

We don’t care that you “work hard” and that you do jobs that “Americans won’t do.” Americans and legal immigrants work hard too and pay heavy taxes so that you can have your anchor babies in the United States at taxpayer expense and free emergency healthcare in any hospital in the U.S. Anchor baby is not an offensive term, it is how you anchor yourselves by blood lines to eventual legal residence in the U.S.

Americans in whose faces you spit, whose flags you burn, whom you mock with obscene gestures and call lewd names are paying for your EBT cards, your WIC benefits, your child’s Medicaid, your housing, your food, your unearned income tax credits, your children’s free education, your ESL lessons, school lunch meals for your kids, housing, furniture, and other benefits that poor Americans may or may not receive. You demand your “entitlements” you did not pay a dime into simply because you are human beings. It is not our obligation to take care of you, we must first take care of our elderly and needy citizens.

After the publication of this video and the recent wave of crimes committed by illegal aliens, more Americans realize that presidential candidate Donald Trump, heavily vilified by the main stream media and by progressive groups, was right. A certain segment of the illegal immigrant population are criminals, rapists, and bring in drugs as mules when they don’t have the fee to pay the coyote to guide them across the border illegally in the dead of night.

Unlike illegal aliens already in the U.S., flaunting, demonstrating, and financially benefiting from their illegal status, over four million legal immigrants are quietly awaiting the dispensation of their immigration status application, following the law and waiting patiently in their countries, unable nor willing to jump the border, with no desire to transform America into the third world socialist dictatorship they hope to escape.

Should illegal aliens not get to the back of the line?

Illegal Aliens Attend Elite Universities

U.S. News & World Report’s has released their annual college acceptance list. It has ranked some 1257 colleges and universities with their average acceptance rates ranging from 100% acceptance all the way down to 5%.

Obviously, 100% acceptance means that if you apply, you’re getting in. I assume all you have to do is pay and you’re in. These include the Academy of Art University in San Francisco, City University of Seattle and College of Staten Island, and many others.

On the flip side, some of the more elite colleges and universities make it darn near impossible to be accepted.

One would assume (and be right) that Ivy League Universities would be the pickiest, yet, there are others on the top 10 most difficult list, such as the Naval Academy, College of the Ozarks (which accepts only 8.3% of applicants), and Alice Lloyd College in Kentucky. The rest are pretty much who you would expect–Harvard, Yale, Brown, Princeton, and Columbia. However, the most difficult is University is Stanford, which is considered the Harvard of the West and accepts only 5.1% of all who apply.

One must, therefore, assume that the applicants who are accepted must be exceptional. They must have something that the other 95% don’t. You would also assume that those who do apply consider themselves exceptional and, therefore, if they are denied, the blow would be quite upsetting—even crushing, to some.

I wonder just how those denied applicants would feel if they knew their coveted slot was taken by an illegal immigrant. Stanford, like these other elite universities, has a very limited number of slots to fill each school year, so “When an undocumented student is allowed into a college, ‘there is another kid who wasn’t admitted because we admitted the illegal alien,’ says Ira Mehlman, spokesman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.”

To add insult to injury, the illegal immigrant not only takes the coveted slot from a citizen, but also is awarded financial aid, grant, and scholarship money. Stanford attempts to keep this on the downlow by not officially publicizing its acceptance of illegal immigrants. Harvard, Yale, and Columbia have the same hush-hush policy. I wonder why that is? Could it be that they don’t want to upset those exceptional applicants who are citizens and have been passed over in favor of illegals? You bet your a** that’s the reason.

Karen Cooper, director of [Stanford] financial aid, emphasized that there are no restrictions on using University funds to meet the financial need of applicants – including those who are undocumented.”

She added that, “We do provide support to the undocumented students, and we hope that they could have as normal and integrated a student experience as all of our students.” Well, isn’t that nice. I’m sure the exceptional student who has worked his or her whole life to attend Stanford feels so much better that the illegal immigrant who stole their spot will have a “normal and integrated student experience” at his or her expense.

But things are not as rosy for the “undocumented” student as one would think. Things like internships or counseling resources, available to citizens, may be limited for the “undocumented.”

One illegal immigrant, Fermin Mendoza, attending Stanford, said, “When you’re an undocumented person at Stanford, when you’re an undocumented person at any institution, you can’t do all those things.” 

I guess we’re supposed to feel bad for this student. Well, I’m sorry, but I don’t. They or their families have come here illegally—have been afforded virtually every benefit of citizenship—have been accepted into one of the world’s elite universities—and have done so at the expense of some otherwise exceptional citizen, who may now not be able to live out his or her dream of attending their chosen college. All because someone or some family broke the law and sneaked into our country.

We’re supposed to feel bad for an illegal immigrant who gets to attend Stanford or Harvard or Yale or Princeton, probably on a full scholarship, and instead of thanking God every day for his good fortune, he complains that he may not be able to take advantage of all the services offered to those who actually deserve those benefits.

That’s gratitude for ya!

64% of Americans Agree with Donald Trump – Build a Fence on Mexican Border

In his wildest dreams Donald Trump could not have imagined his campaign going this well. There is just no way. As I write this, Trump continues to dominate the GOP field and is also beginning to overtake his Democrat rivals in the most recent polling. (Leading Clinton by 5 in Iowa and trailing her by just 1 in New Hampshire.)

While I’ve never been on the Trump bandwagon (though I have appreciated some of what he has said), I am beginning to grow very excited about the possibility that he is changing the national conversation on certain issues — illegal immigration being the most prominent of these issues.

Just last week we brought you the news that 59% of Americans agreed with Trump on deporting all illegal aliens; this week we have even more surprising news.

The latest poll out from YouGov finds that 64% of Americans support building a fence along our border with Mexico! 64%!

Those are landslide numbers, folks. That is a vast majority of the population. In fact only about 27% of Americans believe that we should NOT build the fence.

The idea of a border fence is more popular than unpopular with every single subgroup in the polling.

More Democrats support the idea than oppose, more women support than oppose, more African-Americans support than oppose, and here’s the clincher… even among Hispanics – more support the building of a border fence than oppose. 49% of Hispanics want to see the USA build a fence along the border with Mexico and only 38% of Hispanics are opposed to the fence.

This is what we call a “winning issue” in political parlance, and it may very well be all because of Donald Trump.

Wow. Those are words I never imagined myself saying.

Source

College Students Flunked for Using “Oppressive and Hateful Language”: “Male,” “Female” “Illegal Alien”

Free speech has officially failed.

Reports are pouring in that the politically-correct politics surrounding the term ‘white privilege’ are gaining traction at many universities.

Plenty of professors at various colleges across the nation are confronting students with racial and ethnic issues, and decimating their grades if they aren’t sensitive enough to the use of delicate terminology.

Campus Reform reported on political correctness gone too far:

Multiple professors at Washington State University have explicitly told students their grades will suffer if they use terms such as “illegal alien,” “male,” and “female,” or if they fail to “defer” to non-white students.

According to the syllabus for Selena Lester Breikss’ “Women & Popular Culture” class, students risk a failing grade if they use any common descriptors that Breikss considers “oppressive and hateful language.”

At another school, a course in comparative ethnic cultures docks students who fail to recognize “white privilege” and use terms like “illegal alien” to describe people who circumvented immigration laws and came to this country without permission.

According to [Professor Rebecca Fowler’s] syllabus, students will lose one point every time they use the words “illegal alien” or “illegals” rather than the preferred terms of “‘undocumented’ migrants/immigrants/persons.” Throughout the course, Fowler says, students will “come to recognize how white privilege functions in everyday social structures and institutions.”

“The socio-legal production of migrant illegality works to systematically dehumanize and exploit these brown bodies for their labor,” Fowler continued.


 

Washington State University professor John Streamas takes it even further in his detailed syllabus:

• Consider others’ views. Reflect on your own social location, your privileges and power.
• Learn a historically informed definition of racism, and challenge all racist discourse.
• Reflect your grasp of history and social relations by respecting shy and quiet classmates, and by deferring to the experiences of people of color.
• Finally, understand and consider the rage of people who are victims of systematic injustice. James Baldwin wrote that people of color have an obligation to feel rage over this nation’s history of racism.

Streamus even mentioned controversial host Glenn Beck by name, suggesting that Beck would have to “endure 500 years of racism” to “earn the right” to use the N-word.

A lawyer for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education questioned the hypersensitive approach towards multicultural learning – with frequently changing “acceptable” code words that are sometimes dizzying and cloudy in their meaning:

How are students supposed to approach these sensitive and controversial materials at all, let alone to keep an open mind, if they have to fear that a misconstrued statement, or one that unreasonably offends a classmate will lead to a grade reduction or even removal from class?”

As Infowars reported, past proposals for dealing with sensitivity towards race and gender have included bizarre suggestions that students wear a “white privilege bracelet” to remind them of their privilege and to speak out to others about the issue.

Why have things shifted from tolerance and equality to an atmosphere of white guilt that is somehow supposed to be transferred to individuals who have no part in the centuries of racist institutions?

Are these policies seeking to end racism, or to point it in a new, brave direction?

Surely, these are examples of political correctness gone too far, and not part of a proper education…

Source

Huckabee Takes Liberal Stance on Illegal Immigration

Immigration is one hot topic for the 2016 presidential election campaign trail among candidates in both parties. With Donald Trump revealing his plan on illegal immigration, candidates are defining their stance on the problem of unfettered illegal immigration. It is producing quite a stir in the media as candidates comment on their rivals’ remarks.

Former Arkansas Governor and 2016 GOP presidential nominee contender Mike Huckabee insisted on “Fox News Sunday” that he is in the same place he’s always been. His plan is “secure the border first, don’t provide amnesty, but don’t be irrational.”

“In 2006, Huckabee told the Washington Post that the ‘rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship.’ He also advocated as governor for financial assistance for illegal immigrants attending in-state colleges.”

Everyone is dancing around the issue with the media being complicit in “fluff n’ stuff” questions and coverage. First, the US already has a pathway to citizenship. It starts with immigration to this country via legal means. The process to attain citizenship is lengthy and takes years so foreign immigrants learn our government, culture, way of life and assimilate to life here in the US, instead of engaging in sub-cultural activities detrimental to our nation. Any “pathway to citizenship” for illegal alien invaders ignores the crime of entering the nation illegally, regardless of the reason for doing so.

According to Newsmax.com:

Huckabee pointed to an illegal immigrant in Arkansas who had come to this country with his parents as a small child and ended up graduating valedictorian of his high school class.

“Would we rather have him one day become a neurosurgeon or a tomato picker?” Huckabee said. “I’ve never regretted taking the stand that you don’t punish the children for something their parents did illegally. If you did, the next time a person gets stopped in a car, give the kid in the backseat a ticket instead of the dad.”

It is true that the sins of the father should not be applied to the child and vice versa. However, when the parents brought the child with them across the border, they, in turn, made a criminal out of the child. The immigration law does not distinguish age. His “ticket” example is not the same as there is an age restriction regarding driving a motor vehicle.

The entire illegal immigration issue continues to divide the candidates vying for the Republican Party nomination — all spurred by Donald Trump when he raised the issue in his campaign announcement. Or, was it? US citizens plunged headlong into the immigration issue with Obama’s unilateral, unconstitutional, illegal amnesty by fiat announcement, the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill disaster, the mass invasion of the nation by illegal alien invaders crossing the southern border by the tens of thousands, and DHS ordering border patrol to stand down and assist invaders to go wherever they wanted in this nation. The proverbial slap in the face came to many Americans when Obama began flying in planeloads of illegal alien invaders at taxpayer expense.

Donald Trump brought to the forefront of the Republican presidential nomination campaign race issues the citizens of this nation were voicing to the deaf ears of their Washington elected charlatan officials. Criticism abounded against Trump when he claimed Mexico was sending their criminals across the border to the US. His statement may not be totally true, but it isn’t totally false either. Mexico allowed individuals from Central America to cross their country illegally and unimpeded to gain entry into the US. Mexican drug cartels cross between the two countries running drugs and control extensive territory in the southwestern US. The Mexican government deals with neither drug cartels nor individuals moving illegally through their nation, unless it’s Americans. Breaking the law makes one a criminal.

Trump’s criticism of the “anchor baby” practice has split the Republican Party. Some rely on the Fourteenth Amendment to justify the “anchor baby” practice while many conservatives argue the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a guarantee of “birthright” citizenship. And, back and forth the issue goes across the multitude of candidates.

Huckabee said people are not angry about immigration because they hate immigrants, but because they see their way of life threatened.

“They see their jobs just disappearing, going to Mexico, to China, to Indonesia,” he told Fox. “If we deal with the real, acute problems, the immigration problem is not going to be as acute.”

Candidates still cannot get it right no matter how much US citizens try to explain it. It proves they are not listening and do not want to listen. US citizens are angry about immigration in totality right now — legal as well as illegal. Visa programs are abused and unenforced. If someone overstays a Visa or certain Visa programs overused for frivolous reasons by corporations and even our own government, impunity is the norm. US citizens are angered by “guest worker programs” to satisfy corporate America when our nation is experiencing record unemployment.

Illegal immigration angers US citizens because taxpayers foot the bill for many of these individuals through social programs the government allows these illegal alien invaders to access that are normally reserved for citizens. US citizens are fuming over the sheer number of illegal alien invader criminals entering this nation perpetrating heinous crimes against our citizenry, while the government releases repeat offenders into the communities and touts “pathway to citizenship” and “these are ‘dreamers’.” Unvetted Muslims by the tens of thousands are “imported” into our nation by a corrupt administration under some fake “refugee” status from terrorist nations while our government ignores persecuted Christians. Jihadi attacks against Americans are rising.

The issue is simple. These illegal alien invaders, along with this administration, have broken the law and government promotes impunity in the form of handouts, “amnesty” and a “pathway to citizenship.” The bigger issue remains the government and candidates’ support for illegal alien invaders over US citizens. It’s no secret pregnant illegal alien invaders “dropping babies” across the border are used as a means for the parents to stay instead of being deported back to the country of origin. Citizens are tired of the “anchor baby” loophole and handouts that threaten to collapse this nation. Government refused to enforce the law and secure our border to protect this nation from illegal alien invasion. In fact, government perpetrates an illegal alien invasion upon this nation. These are the issues citizens would like addressed, especially the criminal operation of our government.

In regards to legal immigration, certain programs need evaluating for abuse, misuse, and fraud as companies use these programs to import workers for lower wage than hiring US citizens. Violators of the various Visa programs remain in our nation with impunity. While government relegates legitimate applicants for immigration to the “back of the bus,” it promotes lawbreakers to the front and rewards them for criminal behavior. At times, legal immigration needs curbing for various reasons; it is essential for a nation to maintain its security, stability, and sovereignty. What is it about these concepts politicians are unable to grasp?

Unfortunately, these candidates are not interested in hearing the issues from the perspective of conservative citizens. They are busy pandering to special interest, corporations and some legal immigrants who may have families here illegally. How would these candidates suggest society deal with an unemployed, homeless male citizen who stole food and clothing from a store for his family who were cold and starving? Impunity would never cross their mind. But, be it an illegal alien invader or fraudulent “Black’s Lies Matter” looters, rioters and vandals, these charlatans yell “amnesty” and excuse crime perpetrated on irrational reasons.

These “self-professed” conservative candidates are not conservative when it comes to immigration or many other issues. This election cycle will propagate the mantra “Voter Beware.” Although, does it really matter since the machines are rigged and the next POTUS already chosen.

“The Extras on Life’s Stage”

As I sit at lunch across from young people in their early thirties, discussing the reasons why Americans have lost patriotism and respect for their own country, I am reminded of Dr. Savage’s monologue describing the average Americans in New York City who goes about their daily business as “extras on life’s stage,” not unlike the average Roman, who only cared about, according to a quote from Cato the Elder, “the pebble in his shoe.”

The young thirty-somethings’ opinions were rather interesting, and I have paraphrased or directly quoted their statements as closely as possible to their original thoughts.

We have reached the tipping point where there are more America-hating voters who have been brain-washed by the school system for the last five decades than there are patriotic Americans.

Politics are so corrupt that nobody has any faith left in the rigged political system and its viability as separation of powers governance.

People realized that they are being slowly outnumbered and colonized by illegal aliens, who are flooding the country, brought in by our own government to vote Democrat in perpetuity.

We are losing our Christian faith in this country while experiencing a soft communist revolution, and it seems futile to fight when people are going about their daily activities, watching sports and the bread and circuses of “reality TV.”

Americans have full bellies and there are no shortages of food and basic staples; they are not experiencing despair and hunger like people in Venezuela or North Korea.

“We are now under total surveillance and police control, and the military has been reduced to a dangerous point by those in power in Washington.”

The country is run by liberals in the classroom, in universities, in the publishing empires, in Congress, Hollywood, movies, television, press, the main stream media—that is who educates Americans into mediocrity, compliance, and acceptance of progressivism and the stifling of free speech through political correctness.

Have the media and Hollywood perverted reality to such an extent that the pop culture voters believe everything? Can we really have a country without borders? If we give away our sovereignty, we no longer have a country—we are becoming a U.N.-dependent pawn.

We are giving away our manufacturing sector through the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP); we will be left with a service economy. In that case, the best of America will be behind us. We are no longer a force to be reckoned with; we are now a force for good, at the beck and call of the U.N.

America has been fundamentally transformed into a soft tyranny. The border control laws are not being enforced, much less other laws in the country. A nation without laws and borders is not a nation. It invites all terrorists and illiterates, the “flotsam and jetsam of the world.”

We are run by crony capitalists and a handful of oligarchs who control Congress and issue legislation to benefit their cronies to the detriment of the American people.

We have created a permanent underclass of welfare recipients who no longer want to produce or contribute to society, they just vote or protest as rent-a-mobs for a living. They drain resources while staying home and watching reality television all day and drinking beer or smoking pot.

The economy has shrunk to such a degree, due to the EPA and other government-run organizations regulations that destroyed jobs. Other jobs were outsourced overseas. The green movement failed to create the promised jobs. Entry level jobs are scarce, due to Obamacare costs and demands for a living minimum wage. Americans must now compete with illegal aliens for entry-level jobs and professional IT jobs. So people are sitting idle at home or hiring themselves as rent-a-mobs for various progressive causes that aim to create civil and racial unrest.

Millennials see these socialist romanticized countries in Europe as functioning well; they don’t know the level of debt, welfare, and unemployment; they want America to be the same.

Millennials regurgitate “news” from Steven Colbert and Jon Stewart, two comedians, while belittling and calling Donald Trump names, and he is a successful billionaire businessman. Wild Bill said in a recent video that “Donald Trump is America’s middle finger” to corrupt establishment politicians.

Liberal academia brainwashes Millennials to think that America is shamefully ethnocentric, scared of the outside world, and demonizing anyone who is patriotic. They tell us that we must fundamentally change, and people clap and are robotically compliant. The social media, the MSM, Hollywood, and professors tell us that we must change and Millennials don’t ask if the change is good for them or the country. We are told we are backwards, still clinging to our guns, Bibles, and the Founding Fathers, but the same liberals support Islam that still functions by 7th century theocratic rules. Hypocritical feminists say, let’s let women wear burkas because it’s their choice. We are supposed to be the savior of the world, but we are labeled “ethnocentric” selfish people who don’t understand the rest of the world.

Why is it America’s responsibility to fix the bad economies in the tin pot dictatorships all these illegal aliens fled from? Why are we supposed to take care of them financially while they stay home and keep having “anchor babies,” who immediately become Americans, claiming the extended, very large families as permanent residents? Why is it the American taxpayers’ responsibility to support with welfare each of the four wives of a “Muslim refugee” from Somalia in Michigan?

Liberals counter with such feigned passion that we are “lucky” to have been born in this country and who are we not to allow the economically poor of the world to come here? But it was not luck; it was hard work and rejection of dictators. If other nations from whence these illegals come would fix their countries and replace tyranny with relative freedom, they could make a success in their countries. Instead, they come here to reap the fruits of our hard labor while they hate our country and make no efforts to assimilate, to make America better, to adapt to our laws, or to become part of its fabric.

There is an insane, senseless, leftist adulation of primitive cultures that are supposed to be better than us, and wonderful—yet, entire tribes in Africa are being raped, enslaved, tortured, killed, and wiped out off the face of the earth by the religionists of peace, and the MSM is generally silent about it because it does not fit their narrative of “primitive cultures are superior to ours.” “Westboro Baptist, as bad as they are, does not behead people.”

People are ignorant as to what change means. We’ve been cultured since childhood that stagnancy is bad, you get nowhere in life without change. Same with the economy; but it does not work the same way.

Certain wheels that have been set in motion by our Founding Fathers still work just fine today, as long as the law applies equally to everyone.

We are demonizing police officers. Soon, nobody is going to want to go to police academy. We’ll have that national police force, springing all the criminals out of jail as recruits.

We have a mob mentality and go after people’s jobs. Why give so much power to mob rule? Pressuring a person into a corner without any facts is irrational. Arguments are not based on logic; they are based on ad hominem attacks and accusations of racism and bigotry, devoid of logic.

“Millennials are driving the problem, they are dumb, they are entitled, they are going to college to get a classics degree in Latin or in Social justice, or Study of…, and they are the ones on television. They are privileged and whiny, the squeakiest wheels. They do not understand the ramifications of what they are fighting for. They don’t get the power and money it takes to implement what the president proposes.”

“Taking money away from the military, why would you do that, why would you weaken our national defense? The borders need to be secured now more than ever. Every incident in America happened when we had a weak military. Look what happened after the drawdown in Iraq. If you leave a vacuum behind, someone is going to step in to fill it.”

Hollywood is now sponsoring ads that say that making a deal with Iran, giving them the power to make a nuclear bomb, is going to make us safe. On what planet and with what logic does that happen when Iran threatens constantly to wipe Israel and the “Great Satan” U.S. off the map? They’ve been chanting “death to America” in the streets for decades now. Nobody knows what is in this deal, but Hollywood knows it’s good. Secretary Kerry testified that he has not read the agreement personally, he has been briefed.

We are worried about someone’s sex change operation, and women want equal entry in the military even when they cannot perform physically on the same difficulty level as men; standards, then, must be lowered. Political correctness stifles our freedom of speech, and divergent opinions are immediately labeled into silence. That is how progressives vilify and marginalize people, putting them in a corner on the defensive; the rationale of the discussion is lost.

We worry about NSA spying on all citizens, but we voluntarily give up information on social sites, releasing every personal demographic and activity, giving them permission to track you every moment of the day.

“We are going to have a hippie, pot smoking, trust everybody until they screw you over generation.” Is progressivism good, or is it communism? This is not our problem, it is happening somewhere else. It is not the “pebble in my shoe.” Millennials have no memory of bad things happening. They were five years old when 9-11 happened. ”

“Young people are so ignorant, technology has dumbed them down, they can’t think for themselves, they can’t function; they are tethered to a device. They are told by people like
Michael Moore that government did it, or Bush did it, we bombed our own country. One chick said it was the Jews. Never mind that a large percentage of the people who worked in the World Trade Center were Jewish, it’s New York City. Academia is blaming the church as a whole for the Holocaust. Millennials rely on pseudo-facts and backing someone into a corner, typical Saul Alinsky’s
Rules for Radicals‘ tactic.”

Religion is passé; atheism is in, worshipping Gaia. Communism is a religion, climate change is a religion. It is trendy to be anti-Christianity, to be a Holocaust denier, to trash your country’s treatment of slaves, even though Islamic countries around the world keep slaves now and sex slaves exist.

Millennials worry about sex change in the military. They don’t see any urgency; they see social issues because they are low information voters. They do not see the big picture; they see the small picture–what is important to them, such as getting abortions. They are totally in agreement with infanticide and the selling of baby body parts, but organize to stop tribal whaling, or the hunting of sharks, or the tribal killing of seals, or protection of a tiny minnow to the detriment of crops and our vegetable and fruit crops failing for lack of water because the minnow must live at all costs.

Oxford, MS, just voted to take down the Mississippi flag at the courthouse, for fear that it would offend progressives, race baiters, and atheists. History is being revised and changed at an alarming rate.

Detrimental change is happening at such an accelerated pace that, if nobody is standing up for our country, its borders, and its history, we will soon live under a dictatorship ruled by progressive mobs funded by billionaire oligarchs. And people will be going to jail for expressing divergent opinions, sent there by the thought police.

There was a German song, “Die Gedanken sind frei” (thoughts are free), but I am not so sure anymore that this is true, given the current NSA spying technology that Americans like Jeb Bush think does not go far enough. Somehow, humans will adapt and accept their fate. Those who refuse to apologize for being white will be demonized and punished.

Perceived or real privilege is hard work, thousands of study hours, learning, taking the opportunity given in a free market and turning it into success instead of a perennial welfare mentality.

Age of Sexual Consent in U.S. Will Be Drastically Lower Soon Due to Massive Immigration

On a daily basis, we constantly hear about some illegal alien who has raped a underage child, about marriages taking place between older men and young girls some as young as 8 or 9 years old in mostly Middle East countries, or some pedophilia act here in the states. Recently, Jared Fogle, spokesman for Subway restaurants was in the news for allegedly paying a 16 year old girl for sex.

Children disappear on a massive scale daily here in the US and abroad, most of them kidnapped and sold on the world sex trade market.

Here in the US, mostly in Utah and parts of the southwest there are entire small towns made up of followers of the traditional branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who believe they are following God’s will in having multiple wives, many of which are underage girls.

Over the last few decades, we have learned of the massive pedophilia forced on children by Catholic priests and other church officials. 

Many in the United States are astounded at the number of people who see nothing wrong in having consensual sex with a minor. Yet, what it all boils down to is the age of consent. In many countries in the world, the age at which one can engage in consensual sex is considerably lower than the 18 years of age most of us here in the states are used to. 

In Mexico and some Central American countries, for example, the minimum age for consensual sexual relations is mostly 12 years of age. Since most of the illegal immigrants here in the US are from these countries, it is a natural part of life to have sex with young children. 

The massive invasion of immigrants we are now experiencing from Muslim countries brings yet more people to our country who are used to having sex with pre-teens and having multiple wives.

As far as the world goes with the age of consent, the US is among just a handful of countries who have the age at 18 years of age, most other countries have a lower age. In Canada for example, the legal age for sexual relations is 16 years of age.

Many of us here in the US would be surprised to know that many states have a lower age of consent than the standard 18 years. Two thirds of US states have an age of consent at 16 years of age, many with certain restrictions.

I suspect Jared Fogle is in more hot water for the $100.00 payment for sex to the 16 year old girl than her age since in Indiana, the age of consent is 16. However, restrictions under the law could still have him prosecuted.

Not a single person alive today can claim to have either grandparents or great grandparents of which one of them did not have an underage spouse. Only in the last few decades has the age of consent been 18 years of age here in the US. 

In 1957, Jerry Lee Lewis made headlines when he married his 13 year old cousin in Mississippi. 

Thus, what we have here in the US is a moral standard for sexual relations being 18 years, when most of the world has a lower age. The only problem with this is millions of illegal and legal immigrants alike have moved here, or will soon from countries where the age of consent is much lower than ours and in some cases as low as the onset of puberty. What this will eventually do is cause the Federal government to lower the age of consent here in the US, primarily because there will be too many cases of sex with minors to prosecute, as well as no room in prisons for those who would be.

The lowering of the age of consent has already begun here in the states in the form of the changing laws of marriage. Now standard marriage between a man and a woman is no longer the norm in the fact that homosexuals can now get married. The moral bar of acceptance will be further lowered when those who desire multiple wives or husbands will force their rights to marry into law by citing this fact.

In the end, when the political smoke clears and we have more immigrants both legal and illegal living in the US than citizens, I predict that we will have a blanket age of consent at 14 or more than likely much lower. The Feds will end up lowering the age due to a majority of millions demanding it.

Illegal Aliens Storm Florida Beach – Obama, Rubio and Gang of Eight Silent

As a model was being filmed for a fashion shoot on a Florida beach in Miami by Ekaterina Juskowski, the camera caught more than a dark-haired beauty. It caught a group of nine illegal aliens leaping from their boat and rushing the Florida shoreline.

“They’re ruining my video,” exclaimed Juskowski as she perceived it to be a scuba boat.

Juskowski turned the camera off briefly, but resumed filming once she began to witness the illegals abandoning the boat in the surf and running for shore.

According to Broward Palm Beach New Times:

U.S. Border Patrol spokesperson Frank Miller said, “That’s a testament to how confident these organizations are — what we call transnational criminal organizations — who smuggle criminals and narcotics right onto the beach.” He said the incident was under investigation and noted, “There has been an increase in known maritime smuggling in Florida — from Key West all along the Florida coast — from fiscal year 2014 to now.”


It is not unusual for migrants to strip identifying numbers off their boats and, once close to shore, just jump off and leave the boat abandoned. Experts believe the migration is driven by organized trafficking rings, who pool clients in the Bahamas, Jamaica, or Haiti; bring them to the Florida coast; and coordinate with people already living here who tell them when and where to come ashore and help the migrants get settled.

Miller said that the Florida coastline is so vast that “it’s impossible to cover with just Border Patrol agents,” so the agency works closely with the Coast Guard, other law enforcement agencies, and foreign allies. Even so, “it’s difficult to get a solid level of situational awareness on what’s coming in.” He asked that the public report tips to 877-772-8146.

Juskowski, who followed immigration laws to migrate to the US legally at age 18 from Russia said, “Witnessing people starting their life anew by jumping off the boat and running into the city made my personal struggle seem rather small. As controversial as the problem of illegal immigration can be for many of us, it is important to remember that people come here in search of the better life, and it comes at a very high price of great courage, hard work, and loneliness. I got to know America as a country with a big heart. While I trust it to the U.S. government to work out the policies on improving the immigration laws, it feels natural to stay compassionate and understanding on a personal level.” 

Sadly, Juskowski is wrong in trusting the US government for anything. They’ve already demonstrated their impotence and unwillingness to follow our immigration laws.

While there can certainly be those who seek refuge from poverty and war and such, one law enforcement officer told BPBNT that “groups of men only are more likely to consist of ‘bad dudes’ and violent felons who have already been deported.”

The Border Patrol website indicates that 2,034 illegal alien apprehensions were made in 2014 by the Miami office and that 3,942 were made via the “coastal border.” The Coast Guard claims 3,587 alien migrant interdictions.

Interestingly, we’ve heard nothing from these DREAMER advocates like Barack Obama, Marco Rubio or the notorious and treasonous Gang of Eight regarding those who come to our shores in violation of the law.

Immigration has never been an issue for America. Lawless immigrants have been.

Obama’s Executive Order Means Amnesty for 80 Percent of Illegals

With a court-ordered hold on Obama’s order, we do not have to worry about many of the illegal aliens being given a free pass.  But, we do have to worry if this hold is somehow overturned.  There is a study that shows that the president’s executive order covers more people than he had represented in his November announcement.

The Washington Times reports: 

President Obama’s executive actions on immigration shield more than 80 percent of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country from any danger of being deported, a top immigration think tank reported Thursday.

We should not be shocked at this stage that the president is a liar.  That he has misled or sought to mislead the people he works for.  This is a normal thing for Obama.  He thinks that he knows better than the people.  But, he went one step further.

The Times continued:

As part of his November amnesty Mr. Obama announced a program to proactively grant a temporary deportation amnesty to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants. But he also directed immigration agents not to bother deporting millions of others, even though they weren’t eligible for the official amnesty, which grants work permits and other benefits.

What this means is that the president had told the public one thing and had told law enforcement another.  What this means is that the president of the United States advised—no, ordered law enforcement not to enforce the law.  Obama wanted the people in charge of enforcing the law to ignore, essentially, his own orders.

Follow me on this.  Obama told the American people that only 4 of the 11 million Illegals would be affected by his executive order.

U.S. News and World Reports said:

Last night, President Barack Obama unveiled a broad plan for the nation’s immigration challenges, to be enacted by executive order. By all accounts, the president’s plan would affect nearly 4 million undocumented individuals in this country.

So, then, this is less than half of those currently here illegally.  But, what the president did not say was that over half of the remaining number was not going to be dealt with because they were not going to face enforcement.  The president had no intention of seeing those not meeting the eligibility for amnesty being deported.

The Times reports:

The directions to immigration agents were deemed enforcement “priorities” and instructed agents not to bother arresting or deporting anyone who didn’t meet the top priority levels.

“Implementation of the new enforcement priorities is likely to affect about 9.6 million people,” MPI’s Marc Rosenblum, author of the new study, said.

The president is meeting none of the requirements he set on his own policy and continues to allow illegals to snub their nose at our laws.

Source

In Defense of The Donald

As republicans, our number one job–our only concern–is to not upset anyone—particularly protected groups. We can’t say anything about the overwhelming and disproportionate amount of black crime, black murders, etc. They say this will anger the “black community.” We can’t stand up against same-sex marriage or any LGBT cause or we’ll anger the sodomite community. And we darn sure can’t have anything but respect and reverence for people who cross our southern border illegally, particular Mexicans. That is certain to cause every single person of Latin heritage to instantly and forever turn against us.

And Donald Trump has broken this most important commandment, for he dared to be brutally honest about what’s really happening on the border and who is making the crossing.

Here’s a quick recap:

“When do we beat Mexico at the border? The US has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems,” Trump exclaimed in his now infamous speech.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

“But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.”

“It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably — probably — from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”

So now the soft gooey center of the Republican Party and faux-conservative intelligentsia have come out from hiding under their desks to line up against the Donald.

Former establishment standard bearer Mitt Romney told CNN: “Yes, I think he made a severe error in saying what he did about Mexican-Americans. And it’s unfortunate.” And in an obvious effort to further divide the right the reporter followed up with: “Do you think the candidates should speak up about that?” Predictably, Romney’s reply was “I think a number of them have.”

Rick Perry called Trumps remarks “offensive,” and that “he will have to stand up and defend those remarks – I never will.” Rick Santorum kind of said nothing while saying something. Jeb said that Trump is just doing this to inflame and to incite.

“Trump’s comments are not just offensive and inaccurate, but also divisive,” Marco Rubio said. “Our next president needs to be someone who brings Americans together – not someone who continues to divide.

And then there’s my man Ted Cruz, who said: “The Washington cartel doesn’t want to address that. The Washington cartel doesn’t believe we need to secure the borders. The Washington cartel supports amnesty and I think amnesty’s wrong, and I salute Donald Trump for focusing on it.” Way to go Ted!

So really – what did Trump say that was offensive – the truth? He didn’t say all Mexicans are rapists and criminals – but there are sure enough of them. Murderers, rapists, MS-13 gang members, drug and human traffickers. Want just a few? Here’s a link.

And really, Marco? Listen to your own quote. “Our next president needs to be someone who brings Americans together.” But we are speaking of illegals, not Americans. Did you just misspeak? Was this just gibberish boilerplate or did you tip your hand? 

So to heck with the whole lot of you cowardly Republicans. You just showed us all that nothing will be done at the border if you are elected, and that’s not acceptable.

I’m really starting to come around on The Donald. He’s still a progressive, but maybe his courage will rub off on others.

Illegal Immigrants Released by Obama’s ICE Have Committed 121 Murders So Far This Year

Our federal government wishes to be intimately involved in every aspect of our lives. They think they know best when it comes to health-care, insurance, and our earnings. The government has no problem with incarcerating thousands for petty crimes, but the immigrant cannot be held but for six months. As we previously
reported, Immigration and Customs Enforcement is regularly releasing dangerous criminals. Now we have found out just how dangerous this move was.

The Washington times reports:

More than 100 immigrants the Obama administration released back into the community went on to be charged with subsequent murders, according to government data released Monday that raises new questions about whether immigration authorities are doing enough to detail illegal immigrants awaiting deportation.

So, this means that we live in a country that has threatened fines and imprisonment for failing to purchase a product, but turns its head when murderers are put back on the street. That is one of the most stupid things I have ever heard. The problem is not the budget or the number of beds; it is unconcern for the citizenry and lawlessness.

The Times continues:

ICE officials say they don’t regularly notify local authorities when they release someone, and don’t have a way of finding out from those authorities whether someone has gotten in trouble with the law again, so they didn’t know whether Mr. Altamirano’s $10,000 bond should have been revoked.

But the issue is that we allow these people to continue to walk our streets. The reason is that the Supreme Court has determined that once the illegal has been arrested, there is a six-month window in which ICE has to return them to their country, or they have to be released to await deportation. Sadly, there seems little that anyone wants to do to rectify the problem.

The Times adds:

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, are seeking answers from Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Secretary of State John Kerry.

The problem is not just in one branch or just in one department. The breakdown is in the system. It seems that these 121 people would have been alive if these people had been returned to their own country, or at the very least held for breaking the laws of this country. But the issue with ICE goes to the State Department because as the Times reports, they have done nothing to speed up the process.

In Mr. Kerry’s case, the senators want to know why he hasn’t done more to put pressure on other countries to take back their immigrants when the U.S. wants to deport them. Under that 2001 Supreme Court ruling, known as the Zadvydas case, if other countries won’t accept their citizens, the U.S cannot usually detain them for longer than six months. Every year, thousands of immigrants are put back on the streets because of Zadvydas.

Source

Paying For School Is Hard for Some – Not for Others

I was speaking to the father of one of my sons’ best friends the other day. As it turns out, the father is also one of my close friends. His older son is graduating high school and will be heading off to college in a few months. He wishes to study aeronautic engineering, and schools that specialize in this field are pretty pricey.

He told me that he is too wealthy to be poor and too poor to be wealthy. In other words, he’s just above the threshold for his son to qualify for low income assistance, so student loans are what they are left with. And that’s okay. He doesn’t expect anyone else to pay for his son’s education.

It’s just a shame that his son isn’t an illegal alien. I suggested he and his son fly down to Tijuana, Mexico, drop him off, have the kid walk across the border, claim DREAMer status, and he’ll be all set.

If, we’ll call him Julio, picks the right state and the right school, he’s virtually home free. And if he needs help in how to achieve this, he may read a US News article from 2014 entitled “How Immigrants without Legal Status Can Pay for College.”

Notice they are careful to describe them as immigrants without legal status, rather than what they are – illegals. Only once, in this relatively lengthy post is the word illegal mentioned.

Good news for Julio – for the article begins by stating that “Scholarships, state aid and tuition payment plans can help make college a financial reality for some immigrant students.”

To start, 18 states allow illegals to pay in-state tuition and “students living in California, Texas, New Mexico, Minnesota and Washington are also eligible for state-based financial aid…”

Uh-oh, Rick Perry – weren’t you Gov. of Texas for quite a long time? Hmmm. Your state has been doling out aid to illegals for almost a decade.

Anyway, there is a key to getting free money from the American taxpayers, according to Alejandra Rincon, author of Undocumented Students and Higher Education: Si Se Puede.

“It’s important for students to be informed and persistent. Bottom line, if they are in a state that has in-state tuition, the key thing is to not take no for an answer,” Rincon says.

There are also organizations, like “United We Dream” and “Educators for Fair Consideration” which “publish resources for students without legal status.” And it gets better. DreamUS is a “$32 million scholarship fund established in February 2014, which awards scholarships of up to $25,000 to immigrant students with temporary resident status.”

States also have their own DREAM funds, like the Illinois Dream fund. It’s good that Illinois can do this, being that as of 2014, their total state debt was only $321 billion.

So Julio might be in good shape, and, if he’s lucky, he may achieve what Cesar Vargas of New York (by way of somewhere other than the United States) did. He is “the Empire State’s first undocumented immigrant to gain a law license after an Appeals Court, Wednesday found ‘no legal impediment or rational basis for withholding the privilege of practicing law in the state of New York from undocumented immigrants who have been granted DACA [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals] relief.”

Well that’s great! We need another attorney in America. I wonder what type of law he will specialize in. “As a lawyer, I’m going to have more power to help people to confront and fix broken legal systems that our community faces every day,” he says.

Wow – couldn’t have seen that one coming. So Vargas is still technically an illegal alien, who now has a license to practice law in the state of New York, to advocate and harass the American legal system, and to allow more illegals in, give them free stuff and an education, so they can become lawyers to advocate for more illegals.

Awesome! How stupid are we?

The Courts Have Stopped Obama’s Amnesty Plan—For Now…

After Obama issued an executive order stopping the processing and deportation of millions of illegal aliens, a Texas judge granted 26 states a temporary injunction against his order. The Justice Department asked for a stay of the injunction, but the Fifth Circuit Court refused to grant the stay. According to the opinion, of the 1.2 million persons who qualify for Deferred Action against deportation, approximately 636,000 non-citizens have been accepted as of 2014. That’s 636,000 Republican votes nullified, 636,000 US citizen jobs lost, and the enormous loss of Social Security, disability, health, education, and other benefit resources that are supposed to be reserved for legitimate US citizens.

US law does not permit illegals to vote or even to register to vote, under penalty of prison and heavy fines. Yet, Obama continues to encourage illegals to flood our borders in the hope of converting them into a massive new voting block for Democrats. Although their votes would not be legal, millions of illegal votes would overwhelm and entangle the electoral process and make an honest vote count difficult, if not impossible. Democrats want this because their entire agenda is wildly unpopular with American voters.

This attempt to defraud legal US citizens of their right to control elections has gone on for decades, but only in the past 6 years of the Obama Administration has it reached such threatening proportions. A review of author Ann Coulter’s new book Adios America, states “Voter fraud has been the most destructive issue facing the stability of the Republic, it has been perpetrated to elect politicians who would assist Obama to change the Free Enterprise System into a Socialist State.” This book should be read by all US citizens who value their right to elect their representative politicians.

Some key excerpts from the “Stay opinion” are clear and will be difficult for the Justice Department to challenge.

  1. The district court held that the cost to issue driver’s licenses to DAPA beneficiaries would be prohibitive; the government has exclusive authority over a particular policy area but declines to act. Texas is likely to meet its burden of evidence. Texas has likely asserted an injury that is “concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent.” In fact, all the States named in the brief are likely to satisfy all three requirements of “injury, traceability, and redressability,” so the government’s challenge to standing is without merit.
  2. The United States government has not rebutted the strong presumption of reviewability. DAPA’s version of deferred action, is more than non-enforcement, it is the affirmative act of conferring “lawful presence” on a class of unlawfully present aliens. The action at least can be reviewed to determine whether the agency exceeded its statutory powers.
  3. The United States government has no legal precedent. We would expect to find an explicit delegation of authority to implement DAPA, a program that makes 4.3 million otherwise removable aliens eligible for lawful presence, work authorization, and associated benefits, but no such provision exists.
  4. The United States government has not shown “prosecutorial discretion.” The DACA Memo instructed agencies to review applications on a case-by-case basis and exercise discretion, but the court found that those statements were “merely pretext” because only around 5% of the 723,000 applications have been denied. A declaration by Kenneth Palinkas, the president of the union representing the USCIS employees processing the DACA applications, said that “DACA applications are simply rubberstamped if the applicants meet the necessary criteria” and that “The [g]overnment has publicly declared that it will make no attempt to enforce the law against even those who are denied deferred action.” It further states that “[R]outing DAPA applications through service centers instead of field offices…created an application process that bypasses traditional in-person investigatory interviews with trained USCIS adjudications officers” and “prevents officers from conducting case-by-case investigations, undermines officers’ abilities to detect fraud and national-security risks, and ensures that applications will be rubber-stamped.” The United States government has not made a strong showing that it was clearly erroneous to find that DAPA would not genuinely leave the agency and its employees free to exercise discretion.
  5. The United States government has not shown that DAPA does not require notice and comment. Texas has a quasi-sovereign interest in not being forced to choose between incurring millions of dollars in costs and changing its laws. DAPA establishes the “substantive standards by which the [agency] evaluates applications which seek a benefit that the agency has the power to provide,” a critical fact requiring notice and comment, and receipt of those benefits implies a “stamp of approval” from the government.
  6. The United States government has not shown how the USCIS, nor any other agency within DHS, confers public benefits on DAPA beneficiaries.

In summary, Justice Department made a weak case that was unlikely to succeed. This is hopeful for citizens who likes the US as it is and does not want it turned into a third world country by Liberal Progressive Elites who see themselves as an aristocracy running over us ordinary people. The Justice Department has declared it will not continue its appeal. However, the Democrats have more tricks up their sleeve, to create more legislative power through redistricting.

An article entitled “Crucial Texas Voting Case to be Heard, the American Civil Rights Union Brief Urged Supreme Court to Consider Challenge to Counting Illegal Aliens in State Senate Districting” (May 26, 2015) asserts that Democrats’ next ploy is to giving more political power to areas with high illegal alien populations by offering asylum to illegals posing as refugees. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 assigns legal designations for asylum to certain classes of refugees, allowing them lawful US residence. After remaining in the US for a single year, these non-citizens can get a green card. Thereafter, they may be put on a fast track to become citizens, as DACA/DAPA beneficiaries would receive. Not all aliens coming to the US qualify as refugees, but, as DHS busses Somalis across our southern border and relocates them among the US population, the legalities are being deliberately blurred.

The illegal alien issue is of major importance to the status of US elections. As Governor Abbot of Texas stated against the lawlessness of Obama’s Justice Department, “Sheer incapability of laws barring entry into this country, coupled with the failure to establish an effective bar to the employment of undocumented aliens, has resulted in the creation of a substantial ‘shadow population’ of illegal migrants—numbering in the millions—within our borders.” Americans are only now becoming aware that Liberal Democrats are using illegal votes to defraud US citizens of their right to run our country. Liberal Democrats have all but ruined cities such as Baltimore and Detroit, where lawlessness dissipates into riots, high murder rates and other crimes that destroy the fabric of American society. If citizens fail to recognize the danger of massive illegal immigration and illegal voting, the Liberal Democrats will establish a permanent majority, inflicting even more devastation upon not only cities, but upon American civilization itself.

Abolish Motor Voter Registration Now!

After the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant a stay to the Justice Department in its current attempts to stop law enforcement against illegal aliens, the Justice Department has announced that they will not continue their appeal. This would seem to mean that DHS will now be able to process illegals, arresting them, detaining them, and then deporting them. But the prohibitive cost to taxpayers is likely to delay the process of law enforcement, thus giving the Democrats at least a temporary victory, for as long as these illegals remain in the US, there is the ultimate possibility that the Administration will be able to put into place a second “back door” strategy for keeping them here, giving them benefits, and ultimately getting them to the voting booths.

Although now prevented from conferring amnesty on illegals, the Administration still has the option to grant political asylum. The Administration must show cause to grant asylum, but cause is determined by the Justice Department. Asylum is meant for individuals and, only in rare cases, for larger groups escaping violent tyranny. It was never meant as a tool to import vast numbers of illegal aliens to take part in US elections! Whether they sneak across the border or are bussed in, as the Obama Administration is doing with Somalis, once granted asylum, the process of giving driver’s licenses will follow. And, although they are not legal citizens, per se, therefore, do not have the right to vote—or even to register to vote under penalty of law!—they will nonetheless have access to both, regardless of their status, aided by the US government to commit voter fraud.

It is estimated that between seven and twenty million illegals are already in the country. Some estimate that the number could be much larger. If allowed to vote, they would have significant impact on the outcomes of US elections. And, since the Obama administration is actually inviting illegals to “come out of the shadows” and offering them not only residence, but benefits, they will register with the party that gave them this extravagant gift. Thus, Democrats will have created an entire new voting block to insure their continued election to power for generations to come. This is massive voter fraud being perpetrated by the US government against its citizens.

The facts and figures from 2012 alone are alarming and the situation has grown worse since then. According to various watchdog organizations concerned with the integrity of American voters’ rights:

  • 46 states have prosecuted or convicted cases of voter fraud.
  • More than 24 million voter registrations are invalid, yet remain on the rolls nation-wide.
  • There are over 1.8 million dead voters still eligible on the rolls across the country.
  • More than 2.75 million Americans are registered to vote in more than one state.
  • True The Vote recently found 99 cases of potential felony interstate voter fraud.
  • Maryland affiliates of True The Vote uncovered cases of people registering and voting after their deaths and uncovered more than 348,000 dead people on the rolls in 27 states. California: 49,000, Florida: 30,000, Texas: 28,500, Michigan: 25,000, Illinois: 24,000
  • 12 Indiana counties have more registered voters than residents.
  • The Ohio Secretary of State admitted that multiple Ohio counties have more registered voters than residents.
  • Federal records showed 160 counties in 19 states have over 100 percent voter registration.

The enormity of this problem has caused many organizations to react against the Government’s effort to commit voter fraud. Currently, the Florida New Majority Education Fund, Democratic Party of Florida and the National Council of La Raza are currently under investigation for alleged voter registration fraud.

Several organizations are trying to make them Americans of the dire urgency of this problem. One such organization headed by Catherine Engelbrecht is True the Vote. Its objective is eliminating voter fraud and securing the integrity of the US vote by supporting voter ID laws and other measures to ensure that voter registrations and voting itself is legal.

In an article entitled As Illegals Receive Their Driver’s Licenses, They’re Being Signed Up to Vote, author Sara Noble states that True The Vote worries that illegals will determine who becomes the next US President. She states, “When non-citizens receive their driver’s licenses, they are at the same time getting signed up to vote.” According to Ms. Noble, True The Vote has found two relevant issues that must be addressed to prevent illegal registration. The first is the physical appearance of the image on the driver’s license issued to illegals. This can affect the ability of the poll worker to determine an illegal voter.”

I had personal experience with this some years ago, when I took my NY driver’s test. I was told by my examiner that some Asians and Hispanics looked enough alike that they would send a stand-in to take tests for them. Consequently, he was instructed to ask whether the person named on the learner’s permit was actually the person taking the test. This illustrates how easy it is for illegals to vote once they have been registered. And if they are granted driver’s licenses voter registration is more or less automatic despite the illegality. If no one is allowed to ask for their IDs at the polling place the prospect of massive fraud is guaranteed.

The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) an independent agency of the Federal government charged with the responsibility for maintaining the integrity of American voting, has responsibilities for disseminating to states various methods for insuring that only legitimate voters cast votes. It tests, certifies and monitors voting equipment oversees mail-in voter registration forms. Because it is answerable to the Administration in power, the EAC has been criticized openly in the press during Republican administrations for applying immigration guidelines strictly. But Democratic administrations the effort goes in the opposite direction.

The EAC’s guidelines offer States alternatives to enforcing citizenship requirements without asking for additional information from Federal Form applicants. One alternative
is coordinating with driver licensing agencies suggesting careful examination of records presented when someone votes. Thus, the EAC places the burden of possible fraudulent voting on election officials. But often Election Officials do not scrutinize records carefully. Some temporary non-citizen driver’s licenses look very much like official driver’s licenses making the problem worse.

Other “alternative means” of enforcing citizenship requirements include the threat of criminal prosecution as a “deterrent” to unlawful registration or voting by non-citizens, but this is hardly an alternative when election officials do not
look up criminal records. Ironically, to many illegals, threat of imprisonment is absurd, since jail is better than conditions in some of their native countries.

One step in resolving the voter fraud being deliberately created by the Obama Administration is to rescind the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, also known as The Motor Voter Act. This legislation originated when legitimate voters were prohibited from voting based on race or origin, a civil rights violation. It was thought that making it easier to register to vote would also stop these violations. NVRA requires state governments to offer voter registration to any eligible person who applies for or renews a driver’s license, through use of a federal voter registration form. The law also prohibits states from removing registered voters from the voter rolls unless certain criteria are met.

This seems reasonable on the surface, but it has limited effect if ineligible voters are not recognized. In the US, non-citizens are forbidden to vote or even to register to vote, under severe legal penalties that include deportation. But the Federal government removed the check box asking about citizenship from its form. This combination effectively enables non-citizens to register to vote automatically when they get driver’s licenses. Moreover, there is an effort by the Federal government to prevent officials at voting booths from asking for IDs. Effectively, the government encourages voter fraud by way of Motor Voter.

This law should be rescinded and proof of citizenship required when voting. This would protect the integrity of the vote to qualified US citizens by eliminating deliberate fraud by the US government against legal US citizens. Moreover, states should be allowed to purge voter files of all illegal voters, including dead persons and non-citizens. Whether these changes will take place in future administrations is unknown, but the wisdom of vigilantly guarding the integrity of US votes and restoring control over elections to the people of the US cannot be argued against.

Guess Who Supports Illegals Voting?

Let illegal immigrants vote? In what world does that make any sense? Given this logic, why don’t we let anyone who wants to vote, vote? Why shouldn’t that family from London vacationing at Disney World get to vote? Or the businessman who travels to the US for work several times a year? How about that large Chinese family taking in the sites at the Grand Canyon?

In fact, all of those people should really be given a crack at voting first, no? At least they are here legally. They’ve broken no laws to enter our country, and they are breaking no laws by being here. If anyone should get a chance to vote, it should be these very legal visitors. But, of course, allowing any citizen from another nation to vote here would be pure folly!

So how is it possible that anyone would think citizens of other nations who are here illegally, and avoiding our legal system as best they can, be given the right to vote?

I really have no idea. I’ve tried to wrap my head around this and understand the argument, but I just cannot. Working in this business, I’ve made friends with good conservatives from various other nations – Ireland, Australia, England and so on – who would love to become citizens of our fine country. But they can’t. It’s too hard. Our friend, Jonathon Dunne over at Freedom’s Disciple, has been waiting for 10 years now to leave Ireland and become a legal resident (and one day citizen) of the USA. That’s ten years of trying to enter the system legally.

Why? Because illegal immigrants have flooded our nation, forcing us to choke off the flow of legal immigration.

So who are the fiendish malcontents who want to exacerbate our illegal immigration problem by giving lawbreakers the right to vote? The Democrat Party, of course.

A recently released Rasmussen poll found that 53% of Democrats believe that tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote!

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that one-out-of-three Likely U.S. Voters (35%) now believes that illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote if they can prove they live in this country and pay taxes. Sixty percent (60%) disagree, while five percent (5%) are undecided.

Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats think tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote. Twenty-one percent (21%) of Republicans and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major political party agree.

This simply continues the recent trend of Democrats collectively putting their party ahead of our country and seemingly trying to do everything within their power to destroy our economy and our laws.

Source

Good Bye America, It Was Good to Know You

It used to be that as one grew older their experience developed wisdom that could help guide succeeding generations. Today the world moves too fast. In some ways my 10-year-old granddaughter knows more intuitively about computers than I do after working online since there was an online.

My father grew up plowing with mules as had his father and his grandfather and so on back to houses with no floors, no running water and no electricity. While they had passed wisdom down for uncounted generations, what they had to say to the flower children of America’s prosperity seemed hopelessly out of date just as what we have to say to the children of the Millennials seems like gibberish from the Dark Ages.

One thing however remained a constant. We were all Americans. We all believed in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. We not only expected our freedoms we came to take our heritage for granted. Today most people can tell you more about their local sports teams than they can about their government or the History of America. None of us get the luxury of living in the country we grew up in yet in the past we could at least look forward to living in one that shared the same values and generally the same goals.

Today, as our values swirl the drain and our goals have morphed from freedom to free access to government largess, we are staring into the maw of an existential crisis that threatens to leave our children with the proverbial bowl of pottage for which we traded their future.

What is this issue that dramatically portends the ultimate doom of the America in which most of us grew up? As a British politician once said, “Demographics is destiny.”

It used to be if the politicians were out of step with the voters the voters threw them out at the next election. Now our politicians have decided to import new voters who will support them and submerge us.

Just when you thought we were safe from the latest version of the Children’s Crusade there is another surge of unaccompanied minors breaking on our borders like a tsunami. The second wave of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children has begun, with more than 3,000 of them surging across the Mexican border into the U.S. last month — the highest rate since the peak of last summer’s crisis and a warning that another rough season could be ahead.

Immigration officials warned that they expected another surge as the weather improved. Although the numbers are down some 40 percent compared with last year’s frenetic pace that sparked a political crisis for the Obama administration, fiscal year 2015 is shaping up to mark the second-biggest surge on record.

If this sounds ominous for us, never fear our ever vigilant Big Brother has a solution. Why don’t we just spring for a free flight, education, health care and food stamps ad infinitum?

To facilitate the often treacherous process of entering the United States illegally through the southern border, the Obama administration is offering free transportation from three Central American countries and a special refugee/parole program with “resettlement assistance” and permanent residency.

Under the new initiative the administration has re-branded the official name it originally assigned to the droves of illegal immigrant minors who continue sneaking into the U.S. They’re no longer known as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC), a term that evidently was offensive and not politically correct enough for the powerful open borders movement. The new arrivals will be officially known as Central American Minors (CAM) and they will be eligible for a special refugee/parole that offers a free one-way flight to the U.S. from El Salvador, Guatemala or Honduras. The project is a joint venture between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department.

Specifically, the “program provides certain children in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras with a safe, legal, and orderly alternative to the dangerous journey that some children are undertaking to the United States,” according to a DHS memo obtained by JW this week. The document goes on to say that the CAM program has started accepting applications from “qualifying parents” to bring their offspring under the age of 21 from El Salvador, Guatemala or Honduras. The candidates will then be granted a special refugee parole, which includes many taxpayer-funded perks and benefits. Among them is a free education, food stamps, medical care and living expenses.

I often wonder since we cannot know who or where the illegals are off in the shadows how do conveniently locate them to apply for programs, give interviews, attend inaugurations, or do anything else. Then again they do gather in large numbers to demonstrate for more rights. You would think the TV lights would at least brighten up the shadows a little bit.

Since it wouldn’t be sporting to have so many people living, eating and breeding in America and not allow them to vote our visionary masters have that one figured out as well.

New York City is routinely described as a “global hub”, a place so thoroughly penetrated by international capital and migration that it seems at once within and without the United States. It is the center of American commerce and media, but its politics, demographics and worldly outlook make the Big Apple an outlier.

New York may be about to become even more distinct. The left-leaning New York City Council is currently drafting legislation that would allow all legal residents, regardless of citizenship, the right to vote in city elections. If the measure passes into law, it will mark a major victory for a voting rights campaign that seeks to enfranchise non-citizen voters in local elections across the country. A few towns already permit non-citizen residents to vote locally, but New York City would be by far the largest jurisdiction to do so.

Under the likely terms of the legislation, legally documented residents who have lived in New York City for at least six months will be able to vote in municipal elections. Reports suggest that the city council is discussing the legislation with Mayor Bill de Blasio’s office, and that a bill might be introduced as soon as this spring.

While the legislation stands a good chance of sailing through the council and even winning the approval of the mayor, the prospect of New York City enfranchising its residents has stoked controversy. Many Americans find the idea of non-citizen voting entirely unpalatable and fear that it undermines the sanctity and privilege of citizenship.

Advocates for non-citizen voting in New York City argue that it would right a glaring wrong. Invoking the ancient American battle cry of “no taxation without representation”, they point to the enormous numbers of non-citizen residents who pay taxes, send their children to public schools, are active members of their communities, but have no say in local elections. This could add up to as many as one million voters.

Let’s see no voter ID allowed. No purging of dead people from the voter lists allowed. Non-citizens voting is allowed can illegal alien voting be far behind? Of course they would never be allowed to vote in a presidential election, no how no way…..;–)

And how are they supposed to get to the welfare office, the emergency room or the post office to pick up their check from the IRS for not paying taxes (Earned Income Tax Credit) without a driver’s license? Oh wait the America Last crowd has a fix for that too.

A surge of undocumented immigrants seeking driver’s licenses has surprised the California Department of Motor Vehicles, pouring in at twice the rate officials expected and underscoring the massive interest in the new program.

Just three months after driver’s licenses became available to immigrants living in California illegally, the product of legislation advocates had pursued fruitlessly for years before prevailing and passing Assembly Bill 60 in 2013, 493,998 have sought licenses. The number has surprised officials who spent months bracing for an influx of new customers by hiring staff, opening new DMV offices and extending hours.

“The interest in this program is far greater than anyone anticipated,” DMV Director Jean Shiomoto said in a statement.

In preparing to offer the new licenses, the DMV estimated that about 1.4 million immigrants would apply over the course of three years. The new figures show they have handled one-third of that expected total in three months, a rate double what the DMV expected, although the official estimate of the total number of eligible applicants remains the same. About 203,000 people have received licenses.

Following the trail to the Fundamentally Transformed Amerika of course brings us proudly to motor-voter, that legacy from the Clinton administration, another gift that just keeps on giving.

Local and state government officials are registering non-U.S. citizens as valid voters — even when the non-citizens say they are not Americans on their voter registration forms, a former Justice Department attorney tells The Daily Caller.

J. Christian Adams, a former United States Department of Justice official in the Civil Rights Division will show the Supreme Court in a brief later this month that non-citizens are registering to vote through the government’s motor voter program. The motor voter act became law during the Clinton administration as an easier way to register voters through their local Department of Motor Vehicles offices, but Adams says the program is failing to weed out those who are not American citizens.

Top of Form

At least our educational system will teach our children what America is all about? They will instill in them a decent appreciation for our system, our History and our values.

Oh wait a minute the Denver Public School system is allowing immigrants who have resided illegally in the United States since they were children to teach in its classrooms under a relaxed employment policy advanced by the Obama administration, district officials said this week.

Denver has hired teachers in the program as part of its participation with Teach for America, which places teachers in low-income schools, many of whom are recent college graduates without a background in education.

Fred Elbel, director of the Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform, an organization that opposes granting any type of legal status to such immigrants, criticized the program.

“There are at least 20 million Americans who either do not have a full-time job or are underemployed. This includes teachers,” he said. “It is unlikely that most of the illegal aliens with (DACA) status are trained, qualified and certified as educators.”

So if the illegals are teaching our children what do you think they learn about illegal immigration? Oh excuse me I mean Undocumented Voters.

Now that I think about it the status for some of our visitors is changing. These aren’t illegal aliens they are refugees. This gives them a special status according to our blue helmeted world government over at the U.N.

Take New Hampshire as an example. The number of refugees arriving annually in New Hampshire has waned in recent years, down from a peak of 559 in 2009 to 345 in 2014. However, those numbers represent a small fraction of the total number of refugees resettled nationally. During the last fiscal year, for example, 7,214 refugees arrived in Texas, 6,108 in California, 4,082 in New York, 4,006 in Michigan and 1,941 in Massachusetts. Connecticut and Maine resettled slightly more than New Hampshire; Vermont and Rhode Island resettled slightly fewer.

What rights are we obligated by the U.N. to provide our reclassified visitors? It cannot be many, right? Here is the official list:

Articles 12 – 30 of the Refugee Convention set out the rights that individuals are entitled to once they have been recognized as Convention refugees:

  • All refugees must be granted identity papers and travel documents that allow them to travel outside the country
  • Refugees must receive the same treatment as nationals of the receiving country concerning the following rights:
    • Free exercise of religion and religious education
    • Free access to the courts, including legal assistance
    • Access to elementary education
    • Access to public relief and assistance
    • Protection provided by social security
    • Protection of intellectual property, such as inventions and trade names
    • Protection of literary, artistic and scientific work
    • Equal treatment by taxing authorities
  • Refugees must receive the most favorable treatment provided to nationals of a foreign country concerning the following rights:
    • The right to belong to trade unions
    • The right to belong to other non-political non-profit organizations
    • The right to engage in wage-earning employment
  • Refugees must receive the most favorable treatment possible, which must be at least as favorable to that accorded aliens generally in the same circumstances, concerning the following rights:
    • The right to own property
    • The right to practice a profession
    • The right to self-employment
    • Access to housing
    • Access to higher education
  • Refugees must receive the same treatment as that accorded to aliens generally concerning the following rights:
    • The right to choose their place of residence
    • The right to move freely within the country
    •  Free exercise of religion and religious education
    • Free access to the courts, including legal assistance
    • Access to elementary education
    • Access to public relief and assistance
    • Protection provided by social security
    • Protection of intellectual property,
      such as inventions and trade names
    • Protection of literary, artistic and scientific work
    • Equal treatment by taxing authorities

Being a nation of immigrants I am sure the average American is totally on board with these policies. Maybe not, despite President Obama’s efforts to cool the nation’s views on illegal immigrants storming over the U.S.-Mexico border, Americans have reached a new level of anger over the issue, with most demanding a more aggressive deportation policy and reversal of an interpretation of the 14th Amendment that currently grants citizenship to kids of illegals born in the U.S.

A new Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday also finds Americans questioning spending tax dollars on government aid provided to illegal immigrants. A huge 83 percent said that anybody should be required to prove that they are “legally allowed” to be in the country before receiving local, state or federal government services.

Overall, the poll is bad news for the White House because it shows sustained, and in some cases, elevated anger and frustration over the surge in undocumented immigrants in the United States. For example, 62 percent told the pollster that the U.S. is “not aggressive enough” in deporting those illegally in the United States. Just 15 percent believed the administration’s current policy was “about right” and 16 percent said it was “too aggressive.”

That 62 percent number was a jump from a year ago when it was 52 percent.

When asked if the baby of an illegal born in the United States should automatically become a U.S. citizen, as is now the law, 54 percent said no versus 38 percent who said yes.

In another area that seems to test American patience with the administration, 51 percent said that illegal immigrants who have American-born children should not be exempt from deportation.

No matter how the haters try to stop it at least this tidal wave drowning America in the third world is all being done legally, or is it?

Take the celebrated case of a Federal Judge trying to staunch the flow down in Texas. President Obama’s new deportation amnesty will remain halted, a federal judge in Texas ruled Tuesday night in an order that also delivered a judicial spanking to the President’s lawyers for misleading the court.

Judge Andrew S. Hanen, who first halted the amnesty in February, just two days before it was to take effect, said he’s even more convinced of his decision now, particularly after Mr. Obama earlier this year said he intends for his policies to supersede federal laws.

Judge Hanen pointed to Mr. Obama’s comments at a February town hall when the President warned immigration agents to adhere to his policies or else face “consequences.”

“In summary, the chief executive has ordered that the laws requiring removal of illegal immigrants that conflict with the 2014 DHS directive are not to be enforced, and that anyone who attempts to do so will be punished,” Judge Hanen wrote.

“This is not merely ineffective enforcement. This is total non-enforcement,” the judge continued, saying that Mr. Obama’s descriptions of how he is carrying out his policies have hurt his case.

Mr. Obama in November announced a new amnesty for illegal immigrant parents whose children are either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. The amnesty could apply to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants.

Texas and 25 other states sued to stop Mr. Obama, and Judge Hanen sided with them, finding that they suffered an economic harm from the policy, granting them standing in court, and then finding that the President broke the law in bypassing Congress to announce his policy.

The administration has appealed Judge Hanen’s ruling, but also asked the judge to reconsider.

On Tuesday, the judge not only refused to reconsider, but also said the administration misled him when it said no part of the amnesty had been implemented, and the lawyers bungled their attempt to try to repair the damage by filing an “advisory” with the judge early last month.

Since November, the administration had been granting a three-year amnesty to illegal immigrant Dreamers under the new policy. That’s a year longer than the two-year program Mr. Obama announced for the Dreamers in 2012.

More than 100,000 applications were approved for the three-year amnesty between Nov. 21 and the February date when Judge Hanen halted the program.

“Whether by ignorance, omission, purposeful misdirection, or because they were misled by their clients, the attorneys for the government misrepresented the facts,” the judge said, adding that he was stunned the government waited for two more weeks after his ruling to inform him that the applications had already been processed. In addition, the DHS broke the judge’s order moving forward in approving amnesty applications despite injunction

Texas argues that had it known applications were being processed, it would have taken extra legal steps to try to halt the program earlier.

Judge Hanen said he might still issue sanctions against the government for misleading him though he declined to strike the government’s pleadings, which would have essentially closed the case and granted victory to Texas.

The judge said that while that may be warranted, it would do a disservice to the weighty issues at stake in the case, including fundamental issues of presidential power.

What about that passport to everything else a legal Social Security number? That has to be well regulated to make sure none of our uninvited guests can gain unfettered access to the entire social network we have built and paid for, doesn’t it?

The Obama administration has issued more than half a million new Social Security Numbers (SSN) to illegal immigrants granted amnesty under President Obama’s Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals program.

In a letter to Sens. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Ben Sasse (R-NE), exclusively obtained by Breitbart News, the Social Security Administration (SSA) reveals that, by the end of Fiscal Year 2014, the Obama administration “had issued approximately 541,000 original SSNs to individuals authorized to work under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy since its inception” in 2012.

What do we face in America today?

  • A government dedicated to importing enough voters to achieve unassailable dominance.
  • A government that is out of control, ignoring laws and trampling on the rights of its own citizens in favor of those who have crashed the gate.
  • If the Constitution was established to guarantee Americans a limited government what can we say except that, at this moment in American History, the Constitution Failed.

Looking at the sad state of our Republic about all I have left to say is, “Goodbye, America, it was good to know you.”

Obama Admin Violates Federal Court Order – Approves Thousands of Amnesty Applications

Obama’s executive amnesty has already been determined to be unlawful and unconstitutional. US District Judge Andrew Hanen placed an injunction against the Obama administration concerning its illegal executive amnesty back in March and continued to uphold it into April, even though the administration sought an appeal. Now, the administration admits to violating the order by approving at least 2,000 illegal alien applications for amnesty.

The Washington Times reports:

President Obama’s lawyers admitted to a federal judge late Thursday that they had broken the court’s injunction halting the administration’s new deportation amnesty, issuing thousands of work permits even after Judge Andrew S. Hanen had ordered the program stopped.

The stunning admission, filed just before midnight in Texas, where the case is being heard, is the latest misstep for the administration’s lawyers, who are facing possible sanctions by Judge Hanen for their continued problems in arguing the case.

The Justice Department lawyers said Homeland Security, which is the defendant in the case, told them Wednesday that an immigration agency had approved about 2,000 applications for three-year work permits, which was part of Mr. Obama’s new amnesty, even after Judge Hanen issued his Feb. 16 injunction halting the entire program.

Top Obama officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, had repeatedly assured Congress they had fully halted the program and were complying with the order.

So, we have criminals admitting to their crimes and continue to walk the streets, collect their paychecks and thumb their nose at the judge without consequence.

Judge Hanen has already threatened the attorneys with sanctions for committing perjury in his court after they admitted that more than 100,000 amnesty applications had already been approved illegally. Will he now make good on those threats?

Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) said, “The last time I checked, injunctions are not mere suggestions. They are not optional. This disregard for the court’s action is unacceptable and disturbing, especially after Secretary Johnson’s assurances that his agency would honor the injunction.”

In a letter to Homeland Secretary Jeh Johnson, Grassley asked why DHS approved 100,000 applications for expanded deferred action before February 18, 2015, even though the Department told a federal court that it would not implement Obama’s executive order expanding the deferred deportation program before that date. He also referenced the numerous times the attorneys were not honest about the department’s activities.

As a result, Grassley requested the following:

  1. All communications within or between DHS and USCIS relating to the implementation of the policies set forth in Secretary Johnson’s November 20, 2014, DHS Directive, including, but not limited to, communications regarding the timing of such implementation.
  2. All communications between the White House and DHS or USCIS relating to the implementation of the policies set forth in Secretary Johnson’s November 20, 2014, DHS Directive, including, but not limited to, communications regarding the timing of such implementation.
  3. All instructions and memoranda sent to USCIS Field Offices, USCIS personnel involved in the processing of DACA initial application, renewal, and work authorization forms (such as I-821D and I-765), and/or USCIS Directorates and Program Offices concerning implementation of the DHS Directive, including, but not limited to, the timing of such implementation.
  4. All questions or comments DHS or USCIS received from any DHS or USCIS personnel concerning the scope or implementation of the DHS Directive, including, but not limited to, questions or comments concerning the timing of such implementation.
  5. All communications within or between DHS and USCIS relating to the potential or actual effects of the States’ lawsuit on the implementation of the DHS Directive, and any actions to be taken in response. 10 Order 2-3, ECF No. 226. 11 Order 3, 6, ECF No. 226. 12 Sarah Flores and Cameron Langford, Judge in Immigration Case Questions Trust in Obama, COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE, Mar. 19, 2015. Secretary Johnson and Director Rodriguez April 27, 2015 Page 4 of 4
  6. All communications between the White House and DHS or USCIS relating to the potential or actual effects of the States’ lawsuit on the implementation of the DHS Directive, and any actions to be taken in response.
  7. Any reports or other data to or from USCIS Field Offices, USCIS personnel involved in the processing of DACA applications or renewals, and/or USCIS Directorates and Program Offices documenting grants of three-year DACA approvals and work authorizations –for both initial applications and renewals– from November 20, 2014 through February 18, 2015.
  8. All communications between DHS or USCIS and the Justice Department concerning when USCIS would begin implementing the DHS Directive, including, but not limited to, when USCIS would begin granting three-year DACA periods for both new applications and renewals.

According to the letter, that information is supposed to be supplied to the Senate Judiciary Committee by Monday, May 11.

For Judge Hanen’s part, The Times reported, “Judge Hanen said he was surprised that the three-year applications were being approved, since he thought the administration had told him none of the new program was in effect.”

Obama attorney’s said apologized for leaving a wrong impression, but said it wasn’t their intent to mislead.

Intent is not the issue here. Actions are. Actions are punishable. Intentions are not.

It seems to me that these lawyers will not learn a lesson unless they are dealt with judicially and promptly arrested and charged. Furthermore, the criminals surrounding the criminal-in-chief will not learn either unless justice is brought swiftly upon them. This is the reason their crimes continue to be more blatant.

While he’s at it, I hope Judge Hanen will also deal with the issue of the usurper-in-chief’s fraudulent social security number, which he also had documents on in his possession.

Mexican Food at University Space-Themed Event Causes Illegal Alien Supporters to Go Ballistic

When sponsoring or hosting an event with an “intergalactic” theme that includes the stars, planets, and the possibility of extraterrestrial aliens, don’t serve any type of Mexican food as you are going to offend Latino citizens and illegal alien invaders that crossed our borders. According to the Daily Caller, “an administrator at the University of California, Santa Cruz, issued an apology to students after some of their peers made the ‘poor decision’ to include Mexican food at a space-themed event on Tuesday.” These are college students who chose to serve Mexican food at the event because “they hadn’t yet had Mexican food for one of these events.”

However, Scott Hernandez-Jason stated in an email to the Daily Caller that “several students complained at the event and several more complained after the event” – an event attended by 450 students.

In response, an email was sent out to the students at UC Santa Cruz’s Stevenson campus by Carolyn Golz apologizing for the students’ decision. Golz stated in the email that those involved with planning the program “made a poor decision when choosing to serve a Mexican food buffet during a program that included spaceships and ‘aliens’, failing to take into account how these choices might be perceived by others.”

It takes a real stretch to be offended by serving Mexican food at an “intergalactic” fun time College Night event. But, that’s how liberal progressive leftists operate; they find offense in the most innocent of things.

Golz stated in the email, “We would never want to make a connection between individuals of Latino heritage or undocumented students and ‘aliens’ and “is so sorry that our College Night appeared to do exactly that.”

Furthermore, Golz insisted that serving the Mexican cuisine at the event that featured extraterrestrial aliens in the theme “demonstrated a cultural insensitivity on the part of the program planners and though it was unintentional mistake, I recognize this incident caused harm within our community and negatively impacted students.”

Golz described herself as “an ally for students of color, and in particular, undocumented students” and that she is “committed to ensuring that student life staff receive the training necessary to make sure that this type of incident does not happen again at Stevenson.”

Golz’s apologetic email included “information for the Student Services Diversity and Inclusion Office, the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Psychological and Counseling Services and a website for individuals to ‘Report Hate’.”

So, this woman supports illegal alien invader students going to college, possibly, on the American tax-payers dime. Not only that, serving of Mexican food at “intergalactic” themed events are inappropriate, insensitive and cause “harm within” the community.

What would have happened if the students chose to serve Italian, Chinese, Thai, Indian, German, Japanese, Korean or any number of food that could be termed “ethnic?” Would Golz have issued the same apology if students of those ethnic groups complained? The choice was an innocent one. One could say the students were being inclusive as Mexican cuisine had not yet been featured at a College Night program event. Things would be much better if looking on the positive side instead of the negative.

What should the students have served at the event, a futuristic Soilent Green? For all anyone knows, extraterrestrial life may eat waste material, rocks, chemicals toxic to humans, or cosmic radiation. Wonder what the students would say had anything like that been on the buffet table? More than likely they would have complained about the lack of food.

Maybe students should stick to serving hot dogs, hamburgers, chips and apple pie instead of trying to be varied in their food choices so as not to “offend” anyone. That probably wouldn’t work as vegetarians would be offended at the meat on the buffet table. In fact, serving what some term “American” food might be considered “offensive” and “exclusive” to some of these overly sensitive college students. Goodness knows, you can’t serve “regional” American food as that would probably be in poor taste and offensive as well.

Golz obviously thinks this incident deserves notifying students of a website to “report hate” or she would not have included it in her email apology. Seriously? How can someone equate serving a Mexican food buffet, innocently, at an intergalactic themed fun time night for college students as hateful?

What are students to do in a “lose-lose” situation created by “sensitive” students supported by an accommodating administration? The students could cease the events all together or stop serving food at all events. Honestly, there would be no food the students could serve that someone who is overly sensitive would not find offensive.

This is what America has now become – a nation populated by over sensitive individuals finding offense in any and everything imaginable then acting like children by “telling Mommy.” Never once do these “sensitive” individuals question their reaction as inappropriate or “stretching” associations in order to “find” offense where none exists.

The bigger question that emerges is how anyone is supposed to do anything in a society where anything and everything could be construed to “offend” someone so as not to be “reported?” You can’t which means that liberty and freedom are truly lost when something as innocent as a food choice results in an apology that refers to a website for “reporting hate.” Everyone in this country is now reduced to “walking on eggshells” lest something you do offend someone else in the slightest manner. The innocent choices made could result in being reported for hate. At least, that is what is implied by UC Santa Cruz.

Pelosi Butchers Declaration of Independence’s Meaning to Support Bigger Government

According to former Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), “Obamacare, equal pay and President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration are fulfilling the Founding Fathers’ vision from the Declaration of Independence.” Pelosi honed in on the phrase “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” to declare these “legal and executive” steps were in keeping with honoring the vision and vows of our founders. Unfortunately, Nancy left out a few details, along with the “long train of abuses” perpetrated by King George I proving his “government” had become destructive of the unalienable rights endowed to men by their Creator.

In honor of National Equal Pay Day, Pelosi spoke at the Department of Labor saying, “The strength of America is families, and that means empowering moms and dads. It means what we did with the Affordable Care Act.”

She went on to say, “Our founders, they said life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Imagine, they put that in a founding document: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So, all of this with health care and all the related issues, equal pay, all of that, give people a life, a healthier life to pursue their happiness.”

“The liberty, the freedom, money gives you freedom but liberty to pursue their happiness. So we are honoring the vows of our Founders when we do this. This is what they had in mind that every generation would take responsibility to make the future better for the next.”

Shouldn’t we call “bull manure” on this? Either that or she has totally lost all intellectual capacity if she ever had any at all from the beginning.

The Declaration of Independence states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ….”

First of all, individuals are “endowed by their Creator (God) with certain unalienable rights.” Among the unalienable rights given to man by God are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not all unalienable rights are listed in the Declaration of Independence – free speech, self-defense, owning property, etc.; these listed are the main unalienable rights that governments are instituted among men to secure. In the context of the Declaration of Independence, the framers are referring to the unalienable right to live, exist, the “right to life.” The unalienable right to liberty is the right to live “free,” without being oppressed by overbearing government under whimsical “laws, regulations, and dictates” and by heavy military presence, the right to be treated fairly regardless of status under the law, and to provide for ourselves and our families. The right to pursue happiness is to be able to direct our own lives, deciding what is best for us without interference from others.

The Founders declared that governments are created by men to secure those rights; but, government is only to secure those rights in specific ways that is appropriate for a federal government. Knowing this, the way our Framers wrote the Constitution created the federal government under it, delineating the specific, limited powers of the federal government to be able to secure God-given rights in specific ways. The government is to protect individuals from others who would seek to take away our God-given rights. By following the Constitution, the government fulfills its established role in securing the rights appropriate for government to secure.

There is no way on God’s green earth the Framers ever intended for government to control health care. Certainly, the framers never envisioned “empowering” certain groups over others. One can almost bet the framers were supportive of personal responsibility in securing one’s own future and protecting freedom and liberty for generations to come – that is the responsibility every generation owes the next in the United States. To make the future better for each generation, freedoms and liberty have to be secured through each generation in order to pass it to the next.

To hear Nancy Pelosi talk, the government gives life, the government gives liberty and the government allows the pursuit of happiness. Her statements echoed that sentiment.

So, all of this with health care and all the related issues, equal pay, all of that give people life, a healthier life to pursue their happiness.

Money gives you freedom.

After stating money gives freedom and each generation is to make the future better for the next, Pelosi called it “The American Dream” and why people are coming to this country. According to Nimwit Nancy, “people flocking to our shores, that invigoration made America the greatest country that has ever existed in the history of the world and will continue to.”

Seriously, Nancy? The American Dream was freedom, independence from tyranny. People, in the past, came to America to be free, have freedom and escape tyranny, along with persecution. What made America the greatest country ever and ever to come was freedom, self-government, limiting the power of a centralized government to prevent intrusion into the daily lives of individuals, protecting against mob rule, securing individual rights from not only government intrusion but intrusion from those who “think they know best what’s best for everyone else.”

Under the premise of “government being the giver and taker” and immigration making America the greatest country ever, Pelosi stated, “That’s why we had to fight hard on Homeland Security so that they could not erase what the president did on immigration because that’s what America is. Every immigrant who comes here with hopes, dreams, aspirations, courage, determination to make a future better for the next generation honors the values of our founders, they make America more American.”

If uninhibited immigration, legal or illegal, or invasion by masses of individuals was the “value of the founders,” why in the world would they cite immigration, rules of naturalization and protection from invasion as delegated powers afforded the created federal government to secure our right to life? The founders recognized that to secure certain rights, the government was to protect the people from masses entering this nation unimpeded.

And, let’s be honest, those immigrating illegally, aka invading, today do not come to this country “with hopes, dreams, aspirations, courage, and determination to make a future better for the next generation” – those attributes can be attributed to legal immigrants of the past, the present and the future due to the desire for freedom. Illegal alien invaders today come for the government freebies, to drop babies in order to skirt deportation, and send their kids to experience unknown atrocities so the federal government can fetch them up here later. Others actually come with the intent of destroying this nation and killing its people. By supporting illegal, unconstitutional, unilateral action on immigration by the usurper in the White House, Pelosi has basically declared that the “created federal government” is no longer in the business of securing the unalienable rights it was established to protect. Pelosi has told every American it is your responsibility to support those who come here illegally through government assistance – this is what they had in mind that every generation would take responsibility for making the future better for the next.

How can one individual so misconstrue the framer’s intent? Well, it seems Piglosi isn’t the only one. A comment to an article on CNSnews.com by “Homeland Security Research” proves the point.

The commenter wrote:

You cannot deny she is correct.

You can yell nasty things about Pelosi all you want but she is dead on accurate as to what the founding fathers vision of Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

1) You cannot have life or quality of life without affordable health care.

2) You cannot have liberty if you are discriminated against because of race, sex or religion.

3) You cannot have the pursuit of happiness if you are prevented from climbing the ladder of success and have the financial means to succeed

The FF understood that and anyone claiming that is not what the FF meant has never studied the constitution and writings of the FF.

This same individual in another post also contended that the founding fathers supported social programs citing Article I, Section 8 “providing for the general welfare.” Either this person is a troll or they actually believe what they are writing. Based on the susceptibility of some Americans to be brainwashed by those in government who have malicious intent and the loudness of the liberal left, it might be there are plenty who believe what the tripe Pelosi is spewing along with the “Homeland Security Research” commenter.

In looking at the condition of our country, one could say plenty have bought into the misconstrued bile vomited up by Pelosi. It is difficult to counter brainwashing, once it has been so ingrained as the brainwashed are unwilling to face facts. At this point, God help us and those who support, uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution.

California Sheriff Defies Obama & Governor on Immigration Policies

Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood is being called the new “Sheriff Arpaio.” He has recently declared

Sheriff Youngblood, 64, is a Vietnam Veteran and president of the Major County Sheriffs’ Association. He’s also been elected three times by voters in the county for his conservative views.

In a phone conversation with the governor over the issue of illegal immigration and the laws and policies coming from his office, Sheriff Youngblood said the governor asked him, “What are you trying to do to me?” In response, Youngblood questioned, “What are you trying to do to me?”

According to the LA Times:

A Republican in one of the reddest counties in the state, Youngblood had riled the Democratic governor when he announced that his department would defy the Trust Act, a law signed by Brown that restricts cooperation between local law enforcement officials and federal immigration agents.

The sheriff said the law put him in an impossible position, stuck between a federal program that relies on local jails to hold inmates who might be deportable and a state law that says inmates in jail for low-level crimes can’t be detained past their release dates.

That kind of stance has won him enemies in California’s immigrant-rights movement and frequent comparisons to Joe Arpaio, the brash Arizona sheriff notorious for his workplace raids and ID checks.

Youngblood believes the federal government needs to enforce the current immigration laws or else correct wrongs in the current laws with Congress writing new ones.

He was critical of Obama’s unlawful deportation policies that are not adhering to current immigration laws. Among those policies of Obama, which are not based in law, is that illegal aliens who are in the United States, have not committed serious crimes and have less than three minor crimes on their record won’t be deported.

“You’re in this country illegally and we’re going to give you three bites of the apple?” he said. “That’s three victims! If you commit crimes, you oughta go.”

Additionally, the Times went on to report that Youngblood “has largely refused to sign paperwork that immigrant crime victims need to apply for U visas, which allow some victims to stay in the country lawfully.”

He has also asked Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to share data with local law enforcement so that they might be able to determine who is in the country illegally.

Though he and his deputies began to follow the Trust Act last year on the advice of their attorneys, Sheriff Youngblood says that he reserves the right to violate it.

“If ICE calls me and says, ‘You have someone there who has committed this heinous crime, and we really need you to hold them,’ I’m probably going to hold them,” Youngblood told the Times.

The LA Times piece gave an example of a couple who has been living in the US illegally for 9 years who had been attacked, beaten and robbed. According to the husband, he believes the sheriff has a problem with Latinos. “We are at his mercy,” said the illegal alien.

Normally, a U visa will be issued to these illegals for their commitment to be helpful by the Bakersfield Police Department, who make it a matter of policy to sign all of them. However, Sheriff Youngblood believes the premise of the law is unfounded.

“If you have a system that rewards you for being a victim, it’s subject to abuse,” he said.

And his supporters agree. Ellen Fluhart, 70, a retired rancher said, “They broke the law. They shouldn’t be rewarded.”

Now, granted, an injustice doesn’t demand that justice be exercised. However, if one is in the process of knowingly committing a crime and becomes the victim in the midst of that crime, there does seem to be a real issue with that.

While Youngblood is being compared with Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, I think he believes that is a compliment.

“We are right-of-the-center on things,” he said. “I always say Kern is a county that ought to be in Arizona.”

In speaking about Kern County, “If everybody thought the same, this would be a pretty boring place. This is where I learned my behaviors and my thoughts and my beliefs. None of which make me right.”

Socialist Democrat Tool Luis Gutierrez Releases Toolkit to Aid Illegal Alien Criminals in Not Getting Deported

I’m the first to admit that I’m a bit slow. My conservative and liberal friends both tend to make fun of me for being naïve or idealistic. I’m not “pragmatic” enough for some conservatives, and I’m too trusting for others, but I truly believe the things I say I believe. One of those naïve beliefs usually has to do with liberals… I happen to think that many liberals really do love our country and only want what is best for our people. They just have the worst ideas on how to accomplish what is best. One example of that is Democrat Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois.

Rep. Gutierrez has become the leader of the amnesty faction in Congress. In fact, Gutierrez has become so pro-illegal that he is now publishing books to teach people how to break our laws! This is an example of where a liberal who wants to do “good” has lost sight of what is “good” and has settled in on success by “any means necessary.” Sadly, the truth of the matter is that the “ends” don’t always “justify the means.” Rep. Gutierrez has gone too far in his support of illegal immigrants and has begun to openly tutor them on the best means of flouting our laws and escaping prosecution.

The Democrat Representative has produced what he is calling a “toolkit” to help illegals avoid deportation. He has also put together a short video explaining to illegals how his toolkit works. In his video he implies that by following his advice, illegals can somehow avoid the long arm of the law and skip out on the just prosecution they deserve for their crime. However, while Gutierrez’s advice may work, illegals should keep in mind that his plan is not foolproof and that law enforcement may still deport illegal criminals for their crimes. While immigration officials may be overtaxed, that does not mean they’ll simply give every illegal criminal a free pass to stay in our country illegally.

“Only pull [the card] out when you’re detained by an immigration official; it explains in English and Spanish that you’re eligible for DACA and DAPA. By using this card after you’ve been arrested or detained, you can explain that [according to] the policy in place today, you should be released because you’re not a priority for deportation…

I hope that you never have to use this card, but if you do, don’t be scared, because you’re prepared. Soon enough the DACA and DAPA applications will be available.”

I believe that Rep. Gutierrez means well for our country, but I’ve been wrong before and I’ll probably be wrong again. Rep. Gutierrez, if you love our nation, as I hope you do… please stop this insane defense of crime and of citizens of another nation, and please remember that you are supposed to be upholding the law and representing the citizens of your district. Do they want you teaching people how to break the law? I think not.

Source

Scott Walker Backs Illegals Becoming Citizens – Claims He Doesn’t Support Amnesty

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, a potential GOP presidential candidate for 2016, has flip-flopped over the issue of illegals and amnesty. In fact, at a recent, private dinner with New Hampshire Republicans, he advanced the idea of allowing those who are illegally in this country to stay and become eligible for citizenship. Obviously, this is at odds with statements he has made earlier this year on the issue.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Mr. Walker’s remarks, which were confirmed by three people present, vary from the call he has made for “no amnesty”—a phrase widely employed by people who believe immigrants who broke the law by entering the country without permission shouldn’t be awarded legal status or citizenship.

The statements by Mr. Walker, a likely candidate for the GOP presidential nomination, show the difficulty that some in the Republican Party face as they try to appeal both to the conservative GOP primary electorate—which largely opposes easing immigration laws—and business leaders and general election voters who have been more supportive of granting legal status to undocumented immigrants.

Mr. Walker’s “no amnesty” position, first articulated earlier this year, was a change from his prior decadelong support for a pathway to citizenship. He has explained in public that his shift to a more restrictive view came after consulting with border-state governors and hearing from people opposed to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

But during the March 13 private dinner, organized by New Hampshire Republican Party Chairwoman Jennifer Horn at the Copper Door Restaurant in Bedford, N.H., Mr. Walker said undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be deported, and he mocked 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s suggestion that they would “self-deport,” according to people who were there.

Instead, they said, Mr. Walker said undocumented immigrants should be allowed to “eventually get their citizenship without being given preferential treatment” ahead of people already in line to obtain citizenship.

“He said no to citizenship now, but later they could get it,” said Bill Greiner, an owner of the Copper Door. Ken Merrifield, mayor of Franklin, N.H., who also attended, said Mr. Walker proposed that illegal immigrants should “get to the back of the line for citizenship” but not be deported.

Kirsten Kukowski, a Walker spokeswoman said on Thursday, ““We strongly dispute this account. Gov. Walker has been very clear that he does not support amnesty and believes that border security must be established and the rule of law must be followed. His position has not changed, he does not support citizenship for illegal immigrants.”

Walker has backed a “path to citizenship.” He has also supported granting “legal status” to illegals in the past. However, the matter in question is not his flip flopping, nor is it which opinion he has at any given moment. The issue is what does the law state? We already know that Barack Obama decided to ignore immigration law, something that is entrusted to Congress to legislate and something in the power of the office of the executive to enforce.

WSJ went on to report:

At a 2002 Mexican Independence Day event in Milwaukee, Wis., Mr. Walker, then the county executive, signed a resolution that praised the economic and civic contributions of undocumented immigrants and called for “a new program similar to the Federal amnesty program enacted by Congress in 1986.”

In 2006, he signed another county resolution backing the immigration proposal written by Sens. John McCain (R., Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.) that would have granted legal status to many illegal immigrants.

 

As late as 2013, Mr. Walker told Politico he backed a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and told the Wausau Daily Herald more border security wasn’t necessary. “You hear some people talk about border security and a wall and all that,” he told the Wisconsin paper in a videotaped interview. “To me, I don’t know that you need any of that if you had a better, saner way to let people into the country in the first place.”

 

Mr. Walker has shifted his stances on other aspects of immigration law. In May 2010, after Arizona lawmakers passed tough restrictions on illegal immigrants, he told the Associated Press he had “serious concerns” about the law because it “impedes on the inherent right of the federal government to do its job and to protect our borders, and also because in America we don’t want our citizens getting pulled over because of how they look.”

Hours later, Mr. Walker, then in a GOP primary for governor, reversed himself. “I too would sign the Arizona immigration bill,” he said, after conservatives inundated his Facebook page to criticize his first position.

On the 2016 campaign trail, Mr. Walker has sought to portray himself as an unabashed conservative. This year, he has signed right-to-work legislation, which is vigorously opposed by labor unions, and signaled support for a state ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. In a 2014 campaign advertisement, Mr. Walker had said he backed abortion legislation that “leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor.”

 

And why is Walker doing these things? That’s right. He’s politicking! Just like every other politician. He can say he is not for amnesty, but allowing a “pathway to citizenship for those here illegally is amnesty. He may claim he is pro-life, but his stance to claim the final decision to murder an unborn baby is between her and her doctor is actually a pro-death stance. He can claim that federal judges have unconstitutionally told states that they must redefine marriage to include those who practice sodomy, but that is not a Constitutional, but rather a tyrannical position since the federal government was given no authority to tell the states how they deal with sodomy.

So, here’s a guy that supports rewarding unlawful behavior, the murder of the unborn, the redefinition of marriage (and yes, he is supporting it by going along with the federal court) and apparently is not willing to stand us for state’s rights. But I can hear the cries now, “Those are social issues, and he’s been great on economic issues.” Maybe, but just remember, social issues have economic consequences.

Released FOIA Documents: 165,900 Convicted Criminal Illegals Released Into US by Obama Homeland Security

Yesterday, I reported on the fact that more people have been crossing the US/Mexico border illegally since October, including over 12,000 children 17 and under. Additionally, more than 30,000 illegals have been released into the US population rather than being sent back to their homes in various Central American countries. Now Judicial Watch has released documents which indicate that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) released 165,900 illegal aliens as of April 26, 2014, all who were convicted criminals and many of whom had been convicted of violent crimes, back into the American population.

Judicial Watch obtained the 76-page document via a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit they filed on July 21, 2014. The lawsuit had to be filed because Homeland Security would not respond to the FOIA request by the organization.

According to that lawsuit, the request was made to seek:

Any and all records of communications including, but not limited to, emails and memoranda, to or from personnel in the office of the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (including its component offices, such as the Office of Public Affairs), from May 1 to May 15, 2014, concerning, regarding, or related to the report published by the Center for Immigrations Studies concerning the release of 36,000 criminal aliens.

In a report by the Center for Immigration Studies dated 2014, CIS documented that ICE “freed 36,007 convicted criminal aliens from detention who were awaiting the outcome of deportation proceedings according to a document…”

At that time, Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) called it the “Worst ‘Prison Break’ in History.”

“This would be considered the worst prison break in American history, except it was sanctioned by the President and perpetrated by our own immigration officials,” he said. “These criminal immigrants should have been deported to ensure that they could never commit crimes on U.S. soil.  But instead, ICE officials chose not to detain them and instead released them back onto American streets. The Administration’s actions are outrageous.  They willfully and knowingly put the interests of criminal immigrants before the safety and security of the American people.”

Judicial Watch reports:

The ICE documents confirm a May 2014 Center Immigration Studies (CIS) report showing that in 2013 ICE freed 36,007 convicted criminal aliens, who had nearly 88,000 convictions, including 193 homicide convictions, 426 sexual assault convictions, and 303 kidnapping convictions.

As has been previously reported, and is evidenced in these documents, the 36,007 criminal aliens freed by ICE in 2013 were just the tip of the iceberg. In a DHS “Overview of ICE” document marked “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY,” the following figures are reported through April 26, 2014 [NOTE: “Final Order” indicates the illegal aliens were ordered to leave the country, but have not done so and remain free]:

  • Non-Detained Final Order Convicted CRIMINAL       165,950
  • Non-Detained Final Order NON CRIMINAL               706,950
  • Non-Detained Final Order TOTAL                              872,900

The documents also detail the difficulty caused by local policies that interfere with federal enforcement of immigration law and provide “sanctuary” for illegal alien criminals.

An email dated May 2, 2014, highlights how such a policy in Montgomery County, Maryland, prevented immigration officials from gaining access to an illegal alien “in state custody on rape charges”:

ERO [Enforcement and Removal Operations] officers were also denied access to interview the alien at police station last Friday due to Montgomery County prohibitions against immigration enforcement.

The documents also include a May 14, 2014, email from House Homeland Security Subcommittee Counsel Valerie Baldwin to ICE Executive Associate Director Thomas Holman expressing the subcommittee’s frustration over ICE stonewalling of information concerning the criminal alien release policies:

Gentlemen, At the ICE hearing and throughout the data call on ICE’s budget request, we’ve requested data on the make-up of the non-detained ATD [Alternatives to Detention] docket, specifically as it relates to violent crimes. I’m wondering why the Washington Times and Washington Post have more information on the ATD population than the Chairman and the other members of the subcommittee. Please respond with an answer today.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “It’s appalling that we’ve had to sue in federal court to get key information about the Obama administration’s release of 165,950 convicted criminal aliens. These documents show the Obama administration is lying when it says that its ‘enforcement priorities’ include deporting illegal aliens who have committed heinous crimes. And lawless localities that help protect illegal alien rapists and other criminals show that politicians at all levels put politics above the rule of law and the public safety.  Where do the innocent victims of the illegal alien criminals this president’s appointees have set free go for justice?”

Fitton could rightly ask where the American people go to get justice for the crimes committed against them by this criminal administration’s actions. The people certainly would like Congress to bring justice down, but they seem as though they are incapable (and willingly so) to keep from being just as corrupt themselves.