Saturday, September 3, 2016


"Immigration Expert: U.S. to Resettle 

Nearly One Million Muslim Migrants Under

One Term of Clinton Presidency."..... that 

does not mean the Mexican hordes are no 

longer jumping our borders, jobs, welfare 

offices and Dem voting booths!!!


HISPANIC FAMILY VALUES: Mexican flag wavers loot the stupid gringo for billions!
Mexico’s massive looting in our open borders:

Immigration Opinions, 9/2/16

Support the Center for Immigration Studies by donating on line here:

1. "Being Pro-Me Doesn’t Mean I’m Anti-You," Mark Krikorian

2. "On Immigration, GOP Platform Puts Americans First. Dems See It as an Entitlement for Foreigners.," Mark Krikorian

3. "Why Trump Tripped on Immigration:," Mark Krikorian

4. "Using Disaster to 'Transform' Just a Little Bit More of America," Dan Cadman

5. "Coming Your Way: Less Illegal Immigrant Detention, More Releases," Dan Cadman

6. "DHS Proposes New Rules for Inept Entrepreneurs (and Con Artists), Redux," Dan Cadman

7. "Forged ISIS-Destined Passports and Alien Smuggling Plague Europe," Dan Cadman

8. "Expanded Central American 'Refugee' Program: Bring the Whole Family!," Nayla Rush

9. "A Floor, Not a Ceiling; 65,000 Syrian Refugees in FY 2017?," Nayla Rush

10. "Gang of Eight Members McCain and Rubio Win Primaries, as Does Arpaio," David North

11. "DHS Proposes New Rules for Inept Entrepreneurs," David North

12. "Mexican Columnists Vent Their Anger at Trump Visit," Jerry Kammer

13. "Latin American Countries Call for an End to U.S. Immigration Policies Favoring Cubans," Kausha Luna

14. "Conquistador Trump," Patrick J. Buchanan

15. "Trump’s Not Yet President, But Nieto is Saying, ‘Si Se Puede’," Ilana Mercer

16. "The Speech," Rich Lowry

17. "A Tough but Sensible Immigration Policy," National Review Online

18. "Droves of African Migrants in Mexico Awaiting U.S. Asylum Under Secret Pact," Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles

19. "Adapt Mexico's Immigration Policy," Daniel John Sobieski

20. "Abstract Immigrants in an Abstract World," Thomas Sowell

21. "Obama’s 10,000 Syrian Refugees," Fred Fleitz

22. "Immigration Expert: U.S. to Resettle Nearly One Million Muslim Migrants Under One 
Term of Clinton Presidency," Julia Hahn

23. "Trump’s Immigration Speech," Paul Mirengoff

24. "Mexico Gamble a Huge Win for Trump," Byron York

25. "Donald Trump Went to Mexico and Won," León Krauze

26. "The Only Immigration Solution," Charles Krauthammer

27. "Trump: Immigration Must Serve America’s Interests," Matthew Vadum

28. "DCLeaks: Soros People Bragged About Killing Secure Communities Deportation Program Trump Praised in Speech," Matthew Vadum

29. "Media Very Confused as Trump Maintains Same Immigration Stance He's Held All Along," Dan Calabrese

30. "Trump 2016: ‘No Amnesty As Such’," Ramesh Ponnuru

31. "Inspector General: IRS Identified 1.1 Million Cases of Identity Theft But Didn’t Notify Victims," John Sexton

32. "Gary Johnson Lays Out Immigration Vision, Objects to Term 'Illegal Immigrant,' Defends Executive Amnesty," Guy Benson

33. "Another Way Citizens Pay for Illegal Aliens," Michael R. Shannon

34. "Trump Delivers A Speech For The Ages," George Rasley

35. "Which Donald Trump is the GOP Getting on Immigration?," John Sapochetti

36. "The Implosion of America ... Who’s Really Behind It," Cathy Hinners

37. "America’s Twenty Immigration Winks," Peter Huessy

38. "Hillary First Broached Saudi Visa Deal During Visit to Huma Abedin’s Mom’s Saudi Madrassa," Paul Sperry

39. "How to Pay For the Wall? Follow Libs’ Tax Playbook," Howie Carr

40. "Great Night for Bay State Mom, Backers of Immigration Reform," Howie Carr

41. "Trump Goes to Mexico," James Taranto

42. "Illegal Alien Driver Massacre in Louisiana," Cliff Kincaid

43. "Trump’s Immigration Plan is a Winner," Dan Celia

44. "The Biggest Shock About Trump’s Flip-Flop: It’s Not That He Shifted His Stance on Immigration — But How His Followers Reacted," Tamar Jacoby

45. "The Real Trump Demonizes Immigrants," The Sacramento Bee

46. "Donald Trump Gambles on Immigration but Sends Conflicting Signals," Patrick Healy

47. "Trump Hits the Wall on Immigration," The Charlotte Observer

48. "Donald Trump’s Deportation Nation," The New York Times

49. "Trump's Immigration Policy Trap," Peter Beinart

50. "The Fossilization of Donald Trump’s Views on Immigration Complete," Wendy Feliz

51. "Why Going Home First to Get Legal Status ('Touchback') Makes No Sense," Walter Ewing

52. "The Un-Softening: Trump Flips Back His Flip-Flop on Immigration ... or Does He?," Mark Sumner

Being Pro-Me Doesn’t Mean I’m Anti-You

By Mark Krikorian

The Corner at National Review Online, September 1, 20

Rich is right about Trump’s Phoenix address that “From an immigration hawk point of view, it is almost certainly the soundest speech ever given by a major-party presidential candidate.” It was detailed and substantive and touched on issues that everyone’s familiar with (like sanctuary cities) as well as less well-known ones, like the administration’s unwillingness to sanction countries that won’t take their own citizens back. (The text is here.) I hope this puts an end to the Jeb/Marco/Schumer talk that was so alarming last week, though I fully expect to be disappointed soon enough by the next dumb thing Trump says.

But perhaps the most encouraging part (other than the long-overdue critique oflegal immigration) was the end to Mexico-bashing. Both in his successful visit with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto earlier in the day and in the prefatory comments of the Phoenix speech, Trump stressed that being pro-America doesn’t mean you’re anti-Mexico. You couldn’t really see it on TV, but Sessions and Giuliani were even wearing “Make Mexico Great Again Also” hats.

This is important for two reasons. Morally, it’s just the right thing to do. A true patriot loves his country without hating anyone else’s; even Japan and Germany, against which we fought a pitiless war, were not sown with salt after our victory, but rebuilt and befriended. It is especially important that a nationalist campaign stress this point, so as to lead its supporters away from the temptation of chauvinism.

The second reason is specific to our neighbor to the south. Mexico is the most important country in the world to us, after Canada. Nothing that happens in Ukraine or Syria or Burma or Swaziland is remotely as important to us as what happens in Mexico. As Trump said at the Mexico City press conference, “A strong, prosperous, and vibrant Mexico is in the best interest of the United States.” I would go further; the continued development of Mexico into a first-world industrial democracy should be one of the top two goals of U.S. foreign policy, second only to the avoidance of nuclear war.

Mexico’s independence day is coming up in a couple of weeks. As we would expect them to congratulate us on the Fourth of July, let us salute them on September 16: ¡Viva México! ¡Viva México! ¡Viva México!

On Immigration, GOP Platform Puts Americans First. Dems See It as an Entitlement for Foreigners.

By Mark Krikorian

The Stream, August 28, 2016

If you compare the immigration planks of the two party platforms in 2016, you’d think they were addressing completely different constituents. The Democratic platform focuses almost exclusively on serving immigrants (legal and illegal), while the Republican platform welcomes legal immigrants but seeks to put the interests of American citizens first.

The Democrats: Huddled Buzzwords

The Democrats’ drafting committee ticked off every cliché. Statue of Liberty? Check. “System is broken”? Check. “Tears families apart”? Check. “In the shadows” appears three times. “Illegal” does not appear once. To get a sense of the emotive tone, here’s just one passage, with my emphases:

Democrats believe we need to urgently fix our broken immigration system — which tears families apart and keeps workers in the shadows — and create a path to citizenship for law-abiding families who are here, making a better lifefor their families and contributing to their communities and our country. We should repeal the 3-year, 10-year and permanent bars, which often force persons in mixed status families into the heartbreaking dilemma of either pursuing a green card by leaving the country and their loved ones behind, or remaining in the shadows. We will work with Congress to end the forced and prolonged expulsion from the country that these immigrants endure when trying to adjust their status.

One pious reference to “legal immigration, within reasonable limits” toward the start of the section is followed by 865 words that negate limits in every imaginable way. The first order of business is amnesty:

And while we continue to fight for comprehensive immigration reform [amnesty for all illegals, among other things], we will defend and implement President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [Obama’s unilateral amnesty for illegals who came before age 16] and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans [amnesty for illegal aliens with U.S.-born kids – held up in court] executive actions to help DREAMers, parents of citizens, and lawful permanent residents avoid deportation. We will build on these actions to provide relief for others, such as parents of DREAMers [A lawless amnesty decree that was a bridge too far even for Obama]. We will support efforts by states to make DREAMers eligible for driver’s licenses and in-state college tuition.

The Democrats insist: “We will work to ensure that all Americans — regardless of immigration status — have access to quality health care.” A whole committee of Democratic policy and political figures saw no problem with referring to aliens (legal or even illegal) as “Americans.” Citizenship? We don’t need no stinkin’ citizenship.

The platform is faithful to Hillary’s televised pledge never to deport any illegal alien unless he is first convicted of a violent felony. Nancy Pelosi expressed the same view in a 2013 interview with NBC: “Our view of the law is that it, if somebody is here without sufficient documentation, that is not reason for deportation.”

The Democrats oppose any meaningful enforcement: No raids of worksites employing illegal immigrants, no arrests of any illegal aliens with children, taxpayer-funded lawyers for all minors smuggled into the country by their illegal-alien relatives who preceded them, no detention for illegal immigrants to ensure that they appear for hearings (few non-detained illegals bother to show up).

And then there’s legal immigration. Despite the throwaway line about “reasonable limits,” there’s no suggestion of what those limits might be, even in theory. All references to legal immigration call for higher levels and quicker processing, translating into the bedrock goal of the left (and the corporate and libertarian right) to admit anyone and everyone who wants to come and isn’t a terrorist.

The immigration activists who wrote this sentence had just that in mind: “The immigration bureaucracy is full of backlogs that result in U.S. citizens waiting for decades to be reunited with family members.” “Backlogs” here is actually a lie. What causes prospective immigrants to have to wait years for a green card is not “backlogs” – but rather waiting lists, since there is effectively unlimited demand for numerically limited categories. So the platform here is calling for the elimination of numerical caps on the immigration of relatives – i.e., unlimited immigration.

The Republican Platform: Stop the Flood

The 2012 GOP platform was full of tough talk on enforcement that was accompanied by calls for increased legal immigration and “temporary” worker programs. The 2016 GOP Platform takes a tougher line on both legal and illegal immigration, and is night-and-day different from the Democratic Platform.

The Republican platform acknowledges the basic distinction between immigrantpolicy – how we treat those whom we’ve invited to join our society – andimmigration policy – how many newcomers to admit in the future, how to select them and how to enforce those rules.

The document salutes the foreign-born in our armed forces and calls on Americans to “to embrace the newcomers legally among us, assist their journey to full citizenship and help their communities avoid isolation from the mainstream of society.”

These admirable – even morally essential – sentiments regarding immigrants are accompanied by a note of caution rooted perhaps in the assumption that a flood of cheap immigrant labor holds down, and even drives down, wages for U.S. citizens: “The greatest asset of the American economy is the American worker,” the GOP platform states. “Our immigration system must protect American working families and their wages, for citizens and legal immigrants alike, in a way that will improve the economy.”

And a little further down: “America’s immigration policy must serve the national interest of the United States, and the interests of American workers must be protected over the claims of foreign nationals seeking the same jobs.”

A Tougher Line

The 2016 GOP platform is bullish on enforcement: “Our highest priority, therefore, must be to secure our borders and all ports of entry and to enforce our immigration laws.” The specifics include rejection of amnesty; a wall along the entire Mexican border; mandatory nationwide use of the E-Verify system so employers can check whether their new hires are here legally; prosecution of ID theft and fraud; mandatory minimum prison sentences for deported illegals who return (“Kate’s Law”); no federal funds for sanctuary cities; no driver’s licenses for illegals; and more.

There’s also skepticism this year about high levels of legal immigration and worker visas. Backing up the pro-worker sentiments at the beginning of the immigration plank is the following:

In light of both current needs and historic practice, we urge the reform of our guest worker programs to eliminate fraud, improve efficiency and ensure they serve the national interest. In light of the alarming levels of unemployment and underemployment in this country, it is indefensible to continue offering lawful permanent residence to more than one million foreign nationals every year.

The ambiguity of the guest worker reference is no doubt intended to avoid provoking business interests, but it is clearly responding to the outrages over the past several years, where American workers at Disney and many other firms were required to train their foreign replacements. And the call for reduction in overall legal immigration — even as it lacks specifics — is unprecedented.

And one other unprecedented element of this year’s immigration plank: An acknowledgement of Americans killed by illegal aliens released by the Obama administration. “We stand with the victims of his policies, especially the families of murdered innocents.”

The contrast, then, is clear. The Democratic immigration policy is based on the interests of immigrants; the Republican on the interests of Americans.

Why Trump Tripped on Immigration:

He needs to smarten up about how to deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the country
By Mark Krikorian
The New York Daily News, August 29, 2016

Fourteen months after launching a campaign based on immigration control, Donald Trump still doesn’t know what he thinks about the subject.

Over the past week he’s not so much flip-flopped from earlier positions as meandered aimlessly, “softening” and “hardening” his views seemingly based on little more than the views of the person he spoke to last. To Sean Hannity, he repeated Jeb Bush-style talking points about how legalizing illegal aliens isn’t really amnesty if they pay “back taxes.” Then when Anderson Cooper asked if illegal aliens will be sent back to their countries, Trump said, “There is a very good chance the answer could be yes.”

As haphazard and even comical as this is, it’s driven by a problem of Trump’s creation: He has said that he wants a “deportation force” to quickly remove all 11 million-plus illegal aliens. This is not present in the immigration platform on his website. No immigration-control thinker has ever suggested it. He just made it up because it sounded good at the time.

The problem is that, unlike his other, sound, immigration proposals — better border enforcement, ending sanctuary cities, reducting Middle Eastern refugee resettlement — deporting 12 million people is neither practical nor politically sustainable.

But how to walk back from it?

Trump’s comments suggest he’s fallen for the belief that the only alternative to mass deportation is mass amnesty of all but hardened criminals. This is a false choice.

Instead, steady application of current law, plus some essential new tools, would result in fewer people settling here illegally and more who are here already leaving, whether through deportation or just going home on their own. This would cause the illegal-alien problem to shrink over time, which is what policy should aspire to.

Gradual shrinkage, or attrition, of the illegal population over time isn’t some think-tank fantasy. There’s a lot of churn in the illegal population. Census Bureau data suggests that during the first six years of Obama’s presidency, the total number of illegal aliens remained roughly steady.

But that doesn’t mean the situation was static. During those six years, roughly two-and-a-half million people stopped being illegal aliens, some finagling green cards, a few dying, but most leaving, voluntarily or not. The problem is that over that same period, about two-and-a-half million new illegal aliens moved to the U.S.

The answer is obvious: Let fewer people settle down illegally and get more of those already here to leave. Better border enforcement — Trump’s much-hyped wall — would help. But most of the 1,000 new illegal aliens a day who move here actually arrive legally, then don’t leave. A better check-in/check-out system for foreign visitors is badly needed.

In combination with that, we need nationwide use of the free online E-Verify system for employers to check whether new hires are legal, no federal funds for sanctuary cities that subvert federal law — and an end to policies that result in the Border Patrol releasing 80% of the illegal immigrants it arrests.

So what should Trump have said this week?

Folks, my call for deporting all 12 million illegal aliens was a gut reaction to our Swiss-cheese borders. Like you, I’m outraged that this administration and its predecessors have allowed things to get this bad. I confess, I have a little Archie Bunker in me, and I was basically yelling at the TV.

But once I looked into it more, I realized that this is not the way to achieve the goal we all want. Instead, we’re going to stop new illegal immigration, deport all illegal aliens who get arrested, and make sure that only American workers, not illegal aliens, get hired.

Only once all that’s up and running will we talk about what we might do with the remaining illegal aliens. Until then, we have no business even asking the question, let alone speculating about it, as I unfortunately did. You don’t debate how to bail out a boat that’s taking on water until you plug the hole first.

. . .

Using Disaster to 'Transform' Just a Little Bit More of America

By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, August 31, 2016
. . .
Apparently I wasn't the only one to crack the DOJ code. is reporting on a couple of local politicians who hired a bus full of illegal workers in Arkansas to travel down to Louisiana to work on post-flooding clean-up. Unfortunately, the bus was being driven by an illegal alien with no license. He crashed the bus into a group of firefighters responding to a prior vehicle wreck, killing two of them.

Although this incident made the news because of the tragic circumstances, you can bet that right now there are lots of buses of mostly unskilled illegal alien laborers pouring into Louisiana from the surrounding states, most probably rounded up by greedy profiteers who smell the chance to make a buck using cheap, off-the-books work crews while the federal government turns a blind eye.

What I wouldn't give to have been a fly on the wall at the Louisiana ICE and Border Patrol offices while agents got their verbal instructions to "stand down" on policing the incoming wave, because there's almost no doubt in my mind that's what they've been told.

As to the dead firefighters? Sad, but collateral damage from the cold calculus of an amoral administration that always reflexively thinks — first, last, and in between — about politics, optics, and "transformational" opportunities to open the door to more illegal aliens every chance it gets, not about human tragedies and natural disasters.
. . .

Coming Your Way: Less Illegal Immigrant 

Detention, More Releases

By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, August 31, 2016
. . .
One might reasonably conclude that the basis for this radical resolution is that it serves two major politico-philosophical goals of the "transformative" Obama administration.

First, it helps keep the pressure on a recalcitrant House of Representatives, which has been reluctant to go along with the desire of the president (and, indeed, some of the leaders of both parties in both chambers of Congress) to "reform" the nation's criminal justice and penal systems by ensuring that "non-violent" offenders are released and, in the long term, not incarcerated at all. Unfortunately, from an objective point of view, many of those who have already been released through presidential pardons, commutations, and revision of sentencing guidelines are not the docile model prisoners they would like us to believe. The same would be true of the various legislative bills I've seen to "amend" sentencing of criminals.

Second, the DOJ decision opens the door to also closing down contract immigration detention, which, as in the case of the BOP, has been critical to DHS's ability to detain illegal aliens (when they do so at all any more), such as those swamping our borders from Central America. Apparently, the master plan is to make it impossible to deter illegal border crossers through the threat of detention, but simultaneously to render it unnecessary to do so by opening up the floodgates in the countries of origin through specious and inappropriate use of the immigration parole mechanism, as my colleagues Nayla Rush and Kausha Luna have documented (see here, here, and here).
. . .

DHS Proposes New Rules for Inept Entrepreneurs (and Con Artists), Redux

By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, August 30, 2016

My colleague David North has published a blog post titled "DHS Proposes New Rules for Inept Entrepreneurs". The rules in question are the latest installment of the long-running Obama do-it-myself series, "How to Demolish Federal Immigration Integrity and Enforcement in 1,000 Easy Steps While Congress Acquiesces".

North has it exactly right when he says the rule is for the inept, but I also think there's plenty of latitude for the clever and manipulative out there too. What outrages me most is the qualifier for alien "entrepreneurs" who "receiv[e] significant awards or grants (at least $100,000) from certain federal, state or local government entities".

Follow along as I create one of many short hypothetical scenarios of how this could play out.
. . .

Forged ISIS-Destined Passports and Alien Smuggling Plague Europe

By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, August 26, 2016
. . .
First, we should not fool ourselves into thinking that there is some presto change-o! means by which government inspectors can immediately detect fraudulent documents. It is easy but naive to believe that, being forged, a travel document will inevitably result in the alien being detected and either turned around or held and prosecuted when he attempts entry. Not so. If, for instance, the document is a stolen but real blank among the thousands looted from Syrian passport offices, then if the identifying data and cachets are filled in by a reasonably competent forger, they can readily pass muster. The same can be said for using altered real (but stolen) passports in which the presenter is essentially engaging in identity theft. If the scrutiny is hasty, particularly in the hustle and bustle of modern international ports of entry such as JFK during peak flight arrival times, the individual can easily get away with it.

A Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision recently surfaced that proved this point beyond all doubt. The BIA case revealed that the alien (a Syrian) was so successful that he repeatedly achieved entry to the United States and even managed to obtain conditional resident alien status before it all unraveled and he was arrested. We should be pleased that the man was simply a fraudster and con artist and not a terrorist because his case shows just how precarious and subject to real-world constraints our vetting processes are.
. . .

Expanded Central American 'Refugee' Program: Bring the 

Whole Family!

By Nayla Rush
CIS Immigration Blog, August 28, 2016
. . .
To recapitulate: The Central American Minors program is no longer just for minor children sponsored by their parents already in the U.S. Adult children, married children, biological parents, as well as "caregivers" (a vague term that leaves room for interpretations: part-time, full-time, multiple caregivers such as grandfather and grandmother, aunt and uncle etc.?) can now join. This opens a huge door for numerous family members (no matter how remotely related) to be brought here. The rest of the "family" will probably follow later.

Furthermore the U.S. government is expanding its welcoming arms to every individual – not just children or adults "accompanying" children – from these countries who claims persecution. It is setting up a specific refugee resettlement system to be able to process these individuals in the region (whether in their own country or in Costa Rica), then fly them directly here.

This "humanitarian call" comes with a high cost.
. . .

A Floor, Not a Ceiling; 65,000 Syrian 

Refugees in FY 2017?

By Nayla Rush
CIS Immigration Blog, September 2, 2016
. . .
But there is almost a month left in the current fiscal year, so the number of Syrian refugees resettled by September 30 will be larger. We are anticipating a total of 12,000 since that many were interviewed by USCIS in Jordan during the special three-month "surge operation." Of those 12,000 Syrian refugees, 10,000 have already made it to the U.S.; there is still time for the other 2,000 to get here by September 30. After all, the regional refugee coordinator at the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Gina Kassem, had clearly stated back in April that the 10,000 target was "a floor and not a ceiling, and it is possible to increase the number".

"Increasing the number" is highly encouraged by the International Rescue Committee, one of the nine "voluntary agencies" working closely with the Office of Refugee Resettlement (and funded for the most part by the State Department). IRC applauded the U.S. for meeting its goal to resettle 10,000 Syrians refugees but asked for more. In the words of David Miliband, IRC's ‎President and CEO: "IRC encourages the White House to consider this 10,000 milestone 'a floor and not a ceiling.'" (Emphasis added.)
. . .

Gang of Eight Members McCain and Rubio

Win Primaries, as Does Arpaio

By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, August 31, 2016
. . .
In other results, Joe Arpaio, the long-time controversial sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., and in recent years a strong advocate of immigration enforcement, won his GOP re-nomination fight in Arizona's most populous county. The only congressional member to lose a primary yesterday was Florida's Corrine Brown, a Democrat in a reasonably strong Democratic district, who is facing major corruption charges in the federal courts. She has a career grade of F on immigration and probably will be replaced by a member who will earn a similar rating.
. . .

DHS Proposes New Rules for Inept 


By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, August 26, 2016
. . .
If the entrepreneur is worth his or her salt, that person will be able to use one or more of the multitude of immigration provisions for smart people, and for rich people, and particularly those for smart rich people.

The immigration process can be viewed as a sort of IQ test for such people; if they can't figure it out they should not be allowed to stay in the United States.

The use of the word "stay" above is deliberate. This program is not for able business people who live in other countries, it is for aliens who have already been in the United States for several years and who want to (and apparently have failed to) figure out how our immigration system works, hence my term, inept. I will get back to that point momentarily.

But first, let's back up a bit. The parole authority is for very special circumstances. For example, someone has an acute and unusual brain injury that can be fixed only in a U.S. hospital, not the ones in the home country; or, to use a different example, the person is needed to testify in a U.S. court case. It is not intended to cover whole classes of people.

There is already a large collection of programs that could be used by a reasonably competent entrepreneur with a little imagination and one or more of these could be manipulated to secure a visa, though not all of the programs would benefit all of the entrepreneurs. There are the EB-5 immigrant investor program, the treaty trader and treaty investor programs, various loopholes in the H and L visa programs, some uses of the J-1 program, the O visas for the outstanding, the first and second parts of the Employment-Based Immigrant Programs, and I am sure others that I have missed.

So the proposal is both needless and yet another effort by the administration to open every conceivable hole in the immigration control system. Clearly one million new immigrants every year — not counting the illegal aliens and exploited foreign workers who come in droves — is not enough and one must create new classes to add to the millions already arriving.
. . .

Mexican Columnists Vent Their Anger at 

Trump Visit

By Jerry Kammer
CIS Immigration Blog, September 1, 2016
. . .
Ricardo Rafael presented a series of indignant questions for Pena Nieto: "Why didn't you protest against the offensive tone this man has used against us? ... Did you consider that the topic of the wall was going to come up? Why didn't you take a firm stand against this ridiculous proposal? What did you think when in your presence he said that you had not talked about who was going to pay to build the wall? What did you think about his speech later in Arizona when he said that we would pay for it 100 percent?"
. . .

Latin American Countries Call for an End 

to U.S. Immigration Policies Favoring 


By Kausha Luna
CIS Immigration Blog, August 30, 2016
. . .
The concerns expressed in the letter have been better addressed in statements made by some of the signatories. During a press conference Ecuador's foreign minister said the following: "From Quito, Ecuador we make a call to put an end to this outdated, anachronistic, and I would say even say hackneyed, 'wet foot, dry foot policy, the discriminatory U.S. policy towards Cuba, and the double standard in the treatment that is given to Cuba and the treatment that is given to other countries in Latin America." Another example comes from Costa Rica's Foreign Minister, during an interview he explained, "We don't disregard the humanitarian perspective...But this has cost us millions of dollars – and millions of dollars that we don't have available. Our people are claiming how is it possible that you don't invest in your own people and you spend millions of dollars on handling migrants?"
. . .

Conquistador Trump

By Patrick J. Buchanan, September 2, 2016
. . .
Standing beside Nieto, graciously complimenting him and speaking warmly of Mexico and its people, Trump looked like a president. And the Mexican president treated him like one, even as Trump restated the basic elements of his immigration policy, including the border wall.

The gnashing of teeth up at The New York Times testifies to Trump's triumph:
. . .
Trump's stance in Mexico City and Phoenix reveals that there is no turning back. The die is cast. He is betting the election on his belief that the American people prefer his stands to Clinton's call for amnesty.

A core principle enunciated by Trump in Phoenix appears to be a guiding light behind his immigration policy.

"Anyone who tells you that the core issue is the needs of those living here illegally has simply spent too much time Washington. ... There is only one core issue in the immigration debate, and that issue is the well-being of the American people. ... Nothing even comes a close second."
. . .

Return to Top

Trump’s Not Yet President, But Nieto is Saying, ‘Si Se Puede’

By Ilana Mercer, September 2, 2016
. . .
If President Nieto harbored the urge to make manipulative appeals to American “permanent values,” so as to lighten his political load—there was no evidence of it. It's fair to infer that on that occasion, a show of unparalleled strength and patriotism—Mr. Trump's—extinguished the bad habit. The biblical proverb worked:

Act like a fearless lion before an adversary, and the adversary will retreat.

Naturally, the network nits failed to notice just how reverential and conciliatory Nieto was. He expressed hope that differences would be bridged and that the ideas of freedom and prosperity would form that bridge. Indeed, a surprisingly respectful President Nieto voiced his wish to work constructively with the next president of the United States. There would be challenges to meet and opportunities to realize, but these would be met by the two nations as friends, neighbors and strategic partners.
. . .

The Speech 

By Rich Lowry
The Corner at National Review Online, September 1, 2016
. . .
It was a mistake in my view to give the speech in a rally setting, which made it seem a typical bombastic Trump performance. And much of it was. But the policy was unassailable. From an immigration hawk point of view, it is almost certainly the soundest speech ever given by a major-party presidential candidate. He implicitly backed off from mass deportation, which was never going to happen. The rest of it disappointed the (exaggerated) expectations of a “softening.” Trump outlined a comprehensive and coherent enforcement-first agenda. Some people are saying that Trump has adopted a version of the Obama program in his emphasis on getting out bad actors first. But Obama gutted interior enforcement and Trump is promising to bring it back. The press will be relentless in continuing to ask about legalization for the 11 million, although Trump’s position of ambiguity–let’s not address the remaining illegal population until we have a new, functioning system of enforcement–is the correct answer for now.
. . .

A Tough But Sensible Immigration Policy

National Review Online, September 1, 2016
. . .
These are the right priorities. On border security, Trump renewed his commitment to a “physical” wall on the southern border (as well as, alas, his absurd promise that Mexico would pay for it), pledged to swell the ranks of the understaffed Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol agencies, and vowed to deploy technology, such as below-ground sensors, to aid them. He also promised an end to the catch-and-release policies that have defined the Obama-era commitment (or lack thereof) to border security and to defund sanctuary cities (an initiative that would, of course, have to come out of Congress). And as Trump noted, about half of America’s illegal-immigrant population overstayed legally gotten visas, meaning that a comprehensive visa-overstay tracking system of the sort he is proposing is also crucial part of any real enforcement agenda.

Trump would add to this an expanded use of E-Verify, which would help prevent employers from exploiting illegal labor and so make it more difficult for illegal immigrants to find work. “Turning off the jobs and benefits magnet,” to use Trump’s words, would make the prospect of entering and residing in the country less enticing for foreigners. If immigration trends at the height of the Great Recession are any indication, a sizable number of illegal immigrants are likely to return home when jobs are not readily available.

It’s for this reason that the common refrain of either amnesty or mass deportations is a false choice. Much of our illegal-immigrant population is here because the economic incentives outweigh the possible costs. Reversing that calculus would cause many to go home. But deportation is still a necessary tool. Trump has rightly determined to focus limited government resources on criminal aliens — illegal aliens residing in the country who have committed crimes. This superficially resembles the Obama administration’s stated enforcement policy, but, of course, the administration has gutted interior enforcement, while Trump is promising to strengthen it dramatically.

Additionally, Trump says that “we will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers.” One element should be a major reduction in low-skilled legal immigration, a glut of which over the past several decades predictably has held down wages in low-skill jobs. Also, the use of high-skilled workers to undercut their American counterparts in the tech industry shows the need to reform the H-1B visa program.
. . .

Droves of African Migrants in Mexico 

Awaiting U.S. Asylum Under Secret Pact

Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles, September 2, 2016
. . .
The Africans are mostly entering Mexico through the southern state of Chiapas, which borders Guatemala. This week alone 424 Africans arrived at the Chiapas immigration station, which is situated in Tapachula. Shelters in Tijuana currently have 154 migrants from African countries waiting on their U.S. asylum solicitations, according to figures provided by the INM. “The undocumented don’t want to stay in Mexico,” the news article clarifies. “They want to make it to U.S. territory to solicit asylum based on the life conditions that prevail in the continent.” Authorities in Tijuana are offering support to migrants from El Congo, Somalia, Ghana and Pakistan to facilitate entering the U.S. through the San Isidro crossing, according to the news story. San Isidro is the largest land border crossing between San Diego, California and Tijuana.

The Obama administration has done a great job of promoting its various back-door amnesty programs, which include perpetually extending a humanitarian measure designed to temporarily shield illegal immigrants from deportation during emergencies. It’s known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and in the last few years migrants from several African countries have received it so the new influx is not all surprising. Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone got TPS back in 2014 over the lingering effects of the Ebola Virus and earlier this year Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson extended it. The administration cited the “continued recovery challenges” the African countries face for the extension.
. . .

Adapt Mexico's Immigration Policy

By Daniel John Sobieski
American Thinker, September 1, 2016
. . .
Appearing on Fox News, Chris Cabrera of the National Border Patrol Council noted that it is a felony just to cross the border into Mexico illegally. There is no green card, no food stamps, or pathway to Mexican citizenship. And. as Investors Business Daily has observed:

Mexico's legal immigration policies are designed to provide the country with the skill sets that the country needs. There's no talk of letting in those who'll do the work that Mexicans won't do. Mexican immigration law accepts those who have the "necessary funds for their sustenance" while denying entry to those who are not healthy or would "upset the equilibrium of the national demographics."…

There will be no fundamental transformation of Mexico under the Mexican constitution. While we invite illegal immigration with jobs, service in the U.S. military, driver's licenses and discounted college tuition denied U.S. citizens from another state, Mexico slams the door.

Article 32 of Mexico's constitution bans non-native-born residents from holding sensitive jobs and joining the country's military in peacetime. Article 33 gives the president of Mexico the right to deport foreigners at will without the deportation hearing that 90% of our illegals fail to show up for. Foreigners are prohibited from participating in Mexican politics "in any way."

All Donald Trump has to say is that we are going to do what Mexico does -- have a zero-tolerance policy towards illegal immigration that protects the country’s demographics and economic and political stability. As Victor Davis Hanson notes at
. . .

Abstract Immigrants in an Abstract World

By Thomas Sowell

Human Events Online, August 31, 2016
. . .
Yet there are immigrants from some countries who swell the welfare rolls, while immigrants from some other countries almost never go on welfare. Immigrants from some countries are highly educated — more so than most Americans — while immigrants from other countries have little education and few skills.

So much of what is said about immigration today simply lumps very different immigrants together, and even lumps very different circumstances together. Insipid statements about how “we are all descendants of immigrants” blithely ignore the fact that millions of Americans are descendants of legal immigrants who were not allowed into the country until they met medical and other criteria.

Today people flood across the border with whatever diseases they bring, and are dispersed to various communities around the country by the federal government, without even a notice to local authorities as to what history of diseases, or crimes, these immigrants bring — much less what risks of terrorism they bring.

Such high-handedness is neither incidental nor accidental. It is part of a much wider pattern, extending beyond immigration, and extending beyond the United States to many European countries, where narrow elites imagine themselves so superior to the rest of us that it is both their right and their duty to impose their notions on us.
. . .

Obama’s 10,000 Syrian Refugees

By Fred Fleitz
Family Security Matters, September 2, 2016
. . .
I wrote last November that the United States should give priority to admitting Christian and Yazidi Syrian refugees because they have been systematically targeted with brutal persecution and murder by ISIS. Senators Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton also have called for this. Unfortunately, President Obama has made the ridiculous claim that this idea amounts to bigotry. As a result, because of threats to Syrian Christians in refugee camps and President Obama's ignorance, only 0.51 percent of the 10,000 Syrian refugees Mr. Obama admitted this year are Christian even though Syria's population is about 10 percent Christian.

This is the story of Barack Obama's 10,000 Syrian refugees. It's a story that will grow even worse if Hillary Clinton wins the 2016 presidential election since she plans to admit 65,000 Syrian refugees per year but has no plan on how to vet them for ISIS or al-Qaeda terrorists posing as refugees.
. . .

Immigration Expert: U.S. to Resettle Nearly

One Million Muslim Migrants Under One 

Term of Clinton Presidency

By Julia Hahn, August 26, 2016
. . .
“While Clinton has not spelled out her long term plans for how many Syrian refugees she would take into the country, the number who could come from that country is certainly enormous,” Camarota added.

If the same policies were followed in Clinton’s second term, roughly 1.7 million migrants from the Muslim world could potentially arrive during two terms of a Clinton presidency.

Camarota explained that these figures are just part of the larger immigration expansion that would take place under a President Clinton, who could potentially add as many as 10 million new immigrants to the country– not including the millions of illegals to whom Clinton would grant amnesty.

“Census data shows that each year the U.S. adds 1.5 million legal and illegal new arrivals. If a President Clinton were to add 65,000 Syrian arrivals on top of that number, then you could potentially see more than 6 million new immigrants added during her first term alone,” Camarota explained.

“Further, if Hillary Clinton were able to pass a bill that were similar to the Rubio-Schumer bill, then it would likely add another one million legal immigrants on top of that figure annually,” Camarota said—pointing specifically to previous analysis Camarota conducted on the Clinton-backed Gang of Eight bill, which demonstrated how the plan would have doubled legal immigration.
. . .

Trump’s Immigration Speech

By Paul Mirengoff
Powerline, September 1, 2016
. . .
I think it was a very good speech mainly because it gets Trump to where he needs to be substantively on immigration, and because of its tone — conciliatory towards Mexico, more sensitive than he been to the plight of illegal immigrants, but insistent on the need to stop future illegal immigration before considering a possible change in the status of illegals.
. . .
After discussing the large amount of crime committed by illegal aliens, including some murders, Trump contrasted his approach to Hillary Clinton’s:

Hillary Clinton, for instance, talks constantly about her fears that families [of illegal immigrants] will be separated. But she’s not talking about the American families who have been permanently separated from their loved ones because of a preventable death [caused by an illegal immigrant]. No, she’s only talking about families who came here in violation of the law.

This, I think, is powerful stuff.
. . .

Mexico Gamble a Huge Win for Trump

By Byron York
The Washington Examiner, August 31, 2016
. . .
Not agree on everything? Before the meeting, it's fair to say that Pena Nieto and Trump didn't agree on much of anything — from the border wall to NAFTA to Trump's statements about Mexicans to Pena Nieto's statements about Trump. But after the meeting, the president and the candidate stood before the press like two world leaders calmly and rationally discussing the issues of the day.

It didn't matter that in his remarks, Pena Nieto offered a positive case for his country and his people that served as a rebuttal to much of what Trump has said in the past. What mattered more was the Mexican leader's public acceptance of Trump as an American leader
. . .

Donald Trump Went to Mexico and Won

International bullying got the presidential seal of approval.
By León Krauze
The Washington Post, September 1, 2016
. . .
Some slammed Trump for not demanding Peña Nieto pay for the infamous wall, but such criticism misses the point. Trump’s goal in Mexico was not confrontation. In fact, it was the exact opposite: the international debut of “diplomatic Trump,” a man who dutifully praises his host, stresses common ground over conflict. Trump’s take on a real presidential candidate came in the unlikeliest stage imaginable: Los Pinos, the Mexican president’s official residence. Just a few hours later, in Phoenix, Trump would put his new perceived legitimacy to immediate use, giving a ferocious speech on immigration policy that repeated all of his insults and boasts, and then taunted “wonderful” Mexican leaders by saying they’d pay for the wall, even if “they don’t know it yet.”
. . .

The Only Immigration Solution 

By Charles Krauthammer

Investor's Business Daily, September 1, 2016
. . .
This was the premise of the 1986 Reagan amnesty. It legalized almost 3 million immigrants. Because it never enforced the border, however, three has become 11.

And that's why the Gang of Eight failed. They too got the sequencing wrong. The left insisted on legalization first. The Gang's Republicans ultimately acquiesced because they figured, correctly, this was the best deal they could get in an era of Democratic control.

The problem is that legalization is essentially irreversible and would have gone into effect on Day One. Enforcement was a mere promise.

Hence the emerging Republican consensus, now that Trump has abandoned mass deportation: a heavy and detailed concentration on enforcement, leaving the question of what happens to those already here either unspoken (Trump on Wednesday) or to be treated "case by case" (Trump last week).

The Trump detour into -- and retreat from -- deportation has proved salutary. Even the blustering tough guy had to dismiss it with "we're not looking to hurt people."

The ultimate national consensus, however, lies one step further down the road. Why leave legalization for some future discussion? Get it done. Once the river of illegal immigration has been demonstrably and securely reduced to a trickle, the country will readily exercise its natural magnanimity and legalize.

So why not agree now? Say it and sign it. To get, you have to give. That's the art of the deal, is it not?
. . .


Trump: Immigration Must Serve America’s 


Donald Trump embraces the long-forgotten idea that immigration is supposed to make America better.
By Matthew Vadum, September 1, 2016
. . .
The speech, which was met with loud applause, was a ringing, patriotic affirmation of conservative values, particularly the rule of law which has become all but a dead letter in the Obama era. Instead of backpedaling and watering down his stance on the illegal immigration crisis as pundits had expected, he refined it and put flesh on proposals that had until now been overly abstract. (A full transcript is available here.)

Trump made the case that immigration has to be rational and make America better, not worse, a radical idea in today’s political and cultural climate.

The “fundamental problem” with the immigration status quo “is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful, powerful politicians.” The current system “does not serve you, the American people.”
. . .

DCLeaks: Soros People Bragged About Killing Secure 

Communities Deportation Program Trump Praised in 


By Matthew Vadum
Canada Free Press, September 1, 2016
. . .
As NBC reported at the time, the Secure Communities program alerted federal immigration authorities when people were booked into local jails. Jailers sent fingerprints from new arrivals to federal law enforcement which matched them to files on illegal aliens who could then be flagged for deportation.

The program was so burdensome (or successful from Trump’s perspective) that it generated resentment among governors, mayors, state and local law enforcement who stopped cooperating, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Jeh Johnson wrote in a memo. The program supposedly made “immigrants” (the NBC article doesn’t indicate if they were illegals) reluctant to come forward to report crimes or cooperate in investigations.
. . .
Open Society Foundations’ comprehensive immigration reform

As a result of OSF’s push for comprehensive immigration reform:

By 2013, states and cities started passing pro-immigrant policies that included community trust policies, driver’s licenses for DACA recipients, driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants, municipal identification, tuition equity, financial aid, public assistance, limits on E-Verify, and professional licensing and credentialing. The following year, states enacted almost 300 pro-immigration-related laws and resolutions. In the first half of last year, 46 states and Puerto Rico enacted almost 400 laws and resolutions related to immigration. Currently, 40 percent of immigrants live in a state that gives authorization to undocumented immigrants to drive, up from four percent at the beginning of 2013, and more than 75 percent of immigrants live in a state with a tuition equity law or policy.
. . .

Media Very Confused as Trump Maintains Same Immigration Stance He's Held All Along

By Dan Calabrese
Canada Free Press, September 1, 2016

We talked last week about how just about everyone is getting Donald Trump’s position on immigration wrong. He is not going to round up 11 million people and deport them. Never was. Never will. What he’s said all along was that everyone in the U.S. illegally will be subject to deportation, which means that unlike Obama and Hillary he’s not going to concede up front that they’ll be given a pass for breaking the law. He will prioritize those who are lawbreakers or otherwise causing problems in deciding who to deport, but no one just gets - for lack of a better term - flat out amnesty.

You might not get deported. But legal authorities are not going to declare you above the law.
. . .

Trump 2016: ‘No Amnesty As Such’

By Ramesh Ponnuru
The Corner at National Review Online, August 25, 2016
. . .
The biggest problem with an amnesty of the sort Trump is talking about is the possibility that it will act as a magnet for future illegal immigrants by persuading them that the U.S. will never enforce its laws (and that they will themselves get an amnesty one day). That’s why any broad amnesty should happen after we have ramped up enforcement, especially at the workplace. Trump has not specified that his amnesty would be conditional on such enforcement, although Senator Jeff Sessions is trying to spin Trump’s remarks that way. It would not shock me if Trump’s position were to have gone directly from no-amnesty-ever to amnesty-before-enforcement, but he could still land where Sessions wants him to.
. . .

Inspector General: IRS Identified 1.1 

Million Cases of Identity Theft But Didn’t 

Notify Victims

By John Sexton, August 31, 2016
. . .
It’s not hard to guess why the IRS is not informing taxpayers that their SSN has been used by an illegal immigrant. If they did, that would upset a lot of people and could lead to a push for the IRS to actually do something about the thieves, i.e. report them to ICE. But the IRS doesn’t want to be involved in enforcing immigration laws. The official explanation is that doing so would discourage people (again, illegal immigrant identity thieves) from paying taxes. The Hill reported in April:
. . .
So there you have it. The IRS has known this was a problem since 2011. Since then it has identified an additional 1.1 million victims of employment related identity theft and, with the exception of a 2014 pilot program, failed to notify the victims. The IRS’ stated reason for not doing more to stop this is that it doesn’t want to discourage the illegal immigrants who use identity theft to get a job from filing tax returns.
. . .

Gary Johnson Lays Out Immigration Vision, Objects to 

Term 'Illegal Immigrant,' Defends Executive Amnesty

Guy Benson, August 31, 2016
. . .
One issue that has consumed much of the 2016 cycle's political oxygen is immigration, on which the Republican nominee has issued a series of controversial statements and proposals -- and the Democratic nominee has vowed to go even further than President Obama in pursuing constitutionally-dubious executive actions if Congress fails to bend to her will. I asked Johnson about his immigration policies from the perspective of a border state governor (:30), and pressed him on his previously-stated support for Obama's unilateral executive amnesty (6:45). Along the way, we also sparred over the term "illegal immigrant," to which Johnson strenuously objected (4:20) as "incendiary" and offensive:

Johnson laid out a pro-immigration platform, making the case that a robust legal immigration regime, featuring permissive work permit standards, is a boon to the US economy. And he again defended Obama's 'DAPA' executive order as "appropriate," although he hedged on its constitutionality. In another segment of our chat, Johnson offered an "elevator pitch" to undecided right-leaning Americans, offered indictments against both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and explained his greatest government-constraining achievement over eight years as the Land of Enchantment's chief executive. Plus, why does he, a libertarian, keep saying that he agrees with Bernie Sanders, a socialist, '73 percent' of the time? And how might this assignment of agreement percentages apply to other major political figures on the scene today? Watch:
. . .

Another Way Citizens Pay for Illegal Aliens

By Michael R. Shannon
Canada Free Press, August 29, 2016
. . .
Dallas is a Sanctuary City and investigating citizen Vs. illegal car crashes is no problemo. Since the INS won’t be involved this time the automovilista doesn’t choose to flee the scene. No driver’s license or other form of legal identification means the officer takes down whatever alias the illegal is using that day and issues Jose two tickets. (Que lastima! More government paperwork!) Those are tickets that will never be paid, but that’s not the officer’s concern.

No need for the tedious exchange of insurance information and arguments over penmanship because the Mexican export not only has an aversion to government documentation, he also eschews insurance company certificates. Leaving the officer free to answer the next call.

The paying begins as Jessica experiences first hand the hidden cost of undermining the rule of law. Here is a brief rundown of some of the expenses imposed on a citizen, first–year school teacher by the Democrat’s plan to change the electorate and the RINO conspiracy to import Central America’s wages.
. . .
I’m tired of all the hand–wringing over illegal’s families. How about some outrage over the damage this slow–motion erosion of our American culture is doing? Illegals choose to come here and they can bear the consequences. Citizens certainly have.

As far as I’m concerned if Uncle Sam put a man on the moon, he can return a Mexican to Mexico.
. . .

No comments: