Monday, March 7, 2016

Senator David Vitter Says It's Time to End Mexico's Looting. Hillary Clinton Says It's Time For Obama's Amnesty to Legalize Mexico's Looting and Expand the LA RAZA "The Race" Welfare State On Our Backs

TIME TO END MEXICO'S LOOTING?

"As alarming as those numbers are, it's gotten a whole lot worse. It's the reason why in both 2013 and 2015 I introduced legislation, the "Remittance Status Verification Act," to fix this. I call this the "Wire Act" for short."

"My bill would require a fee on remittances for customers who wire money to another country but cannot prove that they are in the United States legally. The fee would be used to enhance border security. Basically, we would be able to dramatically improve border security while making illegal immigrants pay for it."

"We also have evidence that many of those illegals who are remitting money are more likely to be illegal immigrant households receiving Social Security, health care benefits, unemployment insurance and/or stimulus money. Is it really fair for those individuals to live off our tax dollars but send untaxed, under-the-table money abroad?"

ON TOP OF THESE FIGURES ADD THE TENS OF BILLIONS HANDED TO INVADING MEXICANS IN THE FORM OF WELFARE.

ON THE STATE LEVEL ALONE, MEXIFORNIA HANDS LA RAZA $30 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES.

THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CHIPS IN ANOTHER BILLION FOR THE LA RAZA ANCHOR BABY BREEDING FOR GRINGO WELFARE PROGRAM.

NOW..... HOW MUCH DOES THE MEX DRUG CARTELS HAUL BACK? SOME ESTIMATES PUT THE NUMBER AT $40 - $60 BILLION!

BLOG: IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THE COUNTY OF LOS 

ANGELES HAS A MEXICAN TAX-FREE UNDERGROUND 

ECONOMY CALCULATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $2 

BILLION PER YEAR!


There are the billions of taxpayer dollars used to subsidize illegal immigrants' health care and education. There's the revenue we lose out on when illegal immigrants don't pay income taxes. And there's a less recognized pot of billions — the billions of dollars of earnings that illegal immigrants wire out of the United States with no tax or penalty.

 more here:

We need to crack down on illegal immigrants wiring money out of the U.S.: We need to crack down on illegal immigrants wiring money out of the U.S.

MEXICO'S LOOTING OF AMERICA BY INVITATION OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY - We need to crack down on illegal immigrants wiring money out of the U.S.

TIME TO END MEXICO'S LOOTING?

"As alarming as those numbers are, it's gotten a whole lot worse. It's the reason why in both 2013 and 2015 I introduced legislation, the "Remittance Status Verification Act," to fix this. I call this the "Wire Act" for short."

"My bill would require a fee on remittances for customers who wire money to another country but cannot prove that they are in the United States legally. The fee would be used to enhance border security. Basically, we would be able to dramatically improve border security while making illegal immigrants pay for it."

"We also have evidence that many of those illegals who are remitting money are more likely to be illegal immigrant households receiving Social Security, health care benefits, unemployment insurance and/or stimulus money. Is it really fair for those individuals to live off our tax dollars but send untaxed, under-the-table money abroad?"

ON TOP OF THESE FIGURES ADD THE TENS OF BILLIONS HANDED TO INVADING MEXICANS IN THE FORM OF WELFARE.

ON THE STATE LEVEL ALONE, MEXIFORNIA HANDS LA RAZA $30 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES.

THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CHIPS IN ANOTHER BILLION FOR THE LA RAZA ANCHOR BABY BREEDING FOR GRINGO WELFARE PROGRAM.

NOW..... HOW MUCH DOES THE MEX DRUG CARTELS HAUL BACK? SOME ESTIMATES PUT THE NUMBER AT $40 - $60 BILLION!

BLOG: IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THE COUNTY OF LOS 

ANGELES HAS A MEXICAN TAX-FREE UNDERGROUND 

ECONOMY CALCULATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $2 

BILLION PER YEAR!


There are the billions of taxpayer dollars used to subsidize illegal immigrants' health care and education. There's the revenue we lose out on when illegal immigrants don't pay income taxes. And there's a less recognized pot of billions — the billions of dollars of earnings that illegal immigrants wire out of the United States with no tax or penalty.

 more here:

We need to crack down on illegal immigrants wiring money out of the U.S.: We need to crack down on illegal immigrants wiring money out of the U.S.

HILLARY AND WALL STREET'S BIGGEST LOOTERS: Hillary's super PACs and K Street friends attack Bernie for opposing corporate welfare

Hillary's super PACs and K Street friends attack Bernie for opposing corporate welfare: Clinton reportedly attacked Sanders for his consistent opposition to the Export-Import Bank.

HOW MANY LA RAZA "The Race" MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS ARE IN OUR OPEN BORDRS AND OPENLY LOOTING AMERICA? - It's the Democrat Party's Biggest Secret!!!

ONLY 16 MILLION ILLEGALS? 


"These numbers raise profound questions that are seldom even asked: What number of immigrants can be assimilated?"



HALF OF MEXIFORNIA'S  (THE FORMER AMERICAN STATE OF CALIFORNIA) 35 MILLION POPULATION ARE MEXICAN ILLEGALS! 

ON THE STATE LEVEL ALONE, CA HANDS ILLEGALS $30 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES! 


61 million immigrants in US, 15.7 million of them illegals

A study done by the Center for Immigration Studies has determined that there are 61 million immigrants in the U.S., with 15.7 million of them here illegally.

In 1970, there were 13.5 million immigrants in the country 6.6% of the U.S. population.  The 61 million immigrants in the U.S. today constitute an astonishing 18.9% of the population.

Washington Examiner:
"These numbers raise profound questions that are seldom even asked: What number of immigrants can be assimilated? What is the absorption capacity of our schools, health care system, infrastructure, and labor market? What is the effect on the environment and quality of life from significantly increasing the nation's population density?" wrote Steven Camarota, the Center's director of Research.

"With 45 million legal immigrants and their young children already here, does it make sense to continue admitting more than one million new legal permanent immigrants every year?" he added.
His report found that the normal pattern of immigration to the United States changed after 1970. At that time, there were 13.5 million immigrants, or about one in 15 U.S. residents.

But since 2000, the number of immigrants has increased 18.4 million, and now nearly one of every five U.S. residents are immigrants.

"The number of immigrants and their young children grew six times faster than the nation's total population from 1970 to 2015 — 353 percent vs. 59 percent," he added.

Camarota dug deep into Census Current Population Survey and other data to determine his estimate of 15.7 million illegals in the United States.

"Our best estimate is that in 2015 there were 5.1 million children with at least one illegal immigrant parent. Taken together, the best available evidence indicates that there were a total of 15.7 million illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children in the adjusted December 2015 CPS, accounting for 25.7 percent of the 61 million immigrants and their children in the country," he said.
I don't see how any rational person can look at these numbers today and say we're not allowing enough immigrants to enter the U.S.  Those who make that point clearly have an ulterior agenda not related to compassion for poor people or the well-being of the United States. 

And from now on, I will have to use the 15 million figure rather than the previously accepted number of 11 million for illegal aliens.  That 15 million number actually falls right in the middle of previously estimated numbers of illegals 10-20 million. 

Camarota is correct in pointing out the growing strain on our education and health care systems, as well as employment.  But it's more than that.  The people behind this push for open borders don't care about the U.S. as a sovereign entity with citizens who share a common language and who respect our history and culture.  We are being balkanized, and the process is only getting farther along.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/61_million_immigrants_in_us_157_million_of_them_illegals.html#ixzz42F5ssIEp
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

61 Million Immigrants and Their Young Children
Now Live in the United States
 
Three-fourths are legal immigrants and their children


WASHINGTON, DC (March 7, 2016) — A new Center for Immigration Studies analysis shows that more than 61 million immigrants and their American-born children under age 18 now live in the United States. Although the national debate focuses primarily on illegal immigration, the Center's report, based on December 2015 government data, shows that three-fourths (45.3 million) of the 61 million are legal immigrants and their children. This is the reality in which Congress proposed and almost passed the Schumer-Rubio "Gang of Eight" immigration bill, which would have doubled the number of legal immigrants allowed in the country.

Dr. Steven Camarota, the Center's Director of Research, said, "These numbers raise profound questions that are seldom even asked: What number of immigrants can be assimilated? What is the absorption capacity of our schools, health care system, infrastructure, and labor market? What is the effect on the environment and quality of life from significantly increasing the nation's population density?" Camarota continued, "With 45 million legal immigrants and their young children already here, does it make sense to continue admitting more than one million new legal permanent immigrants every year?"

View the report and individual state analysis at: http://cis.org/61-Million-Immigrants-and-Their-Young-Children-Now-Live-in-the-United-States

Among the findings of this analysis:

• In December 2015 there were 61 million immigrants (legal and illegal) and U.S.-born children under age 18 with at least one immigrant parent living in the United States.

• Immigrants allowed into the country legally and their children account for three-fourths (45.3 million) of all immigrants and their children.
• Almost one in five U.S. residents is now an immigrant or minor child of an immigrant parent.
• The numbers represent a complete break with the recent history of the United States. As recently as 1970, there were only 13.5 million immigrants and their young children in the country, accounting for one in 15 U.S. residents.
• Just since 2000, the number of immigrants and their children has increased by 18.4 million.
• The number of immigrants and their young children grew six times faster than the nation's total population from 1970 to 2015 — 353 percent vs. 59 percent.
• In many states the increase in the number of immigrants and their minor children from 1970 to 2015 has been nothing short of astonishing: 
  • In Georgia, this population grew 3,058 percent (from 55,000 to 1.75 million), 25 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Nevada, this population grew 3,002 percent (from 26,000 to 821,000), six times faster than the overall state population.
  • In North Carolina, this population grew 2,937 percent (from 47,000 to 1.43 million), 30 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Arkansas, this population grew 1,831 percent (from 12,000 to 228,000), 34 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Tennessee, this population grew 1,823 percent (from 28,000 to 537,000), 27 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Virginia, this population grew 1,150 percent (from 114,000 to 1.42 million), 15 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Oklahoma, this population grew 1,139 percent (from 37,000 to 458,000), 22 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Texas, this population grew 1,084 percent (from 582,000 to 6.89 million), 7 times faster than the overall state population.
  • In Arizona, this population grew 1,019 percent (from 131,000 to 1.46 million), four times faster than the overall state population.

The Final Fall of Hillary Clinton



Hillary Clinton repeatedly claims that she is the champion of the little guy.  It has always been a risible claim, but if any of her supporters (including at the Post) are actually paying attention to the scoundrel, this latest gambit ought to disabuse them of the notion.  

The last refuge of the scoundrel Hillary

Samuel Johnson’s aphorism that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel doesn’t apply to Hillary Clinton in her email scandal, because nobody – not even her die-hard supporters – would believe her if she said that she set up the private email server in the interests of the United States.  Rather, the last refuge of this scoundrel is to blame everybody else she dealt with at the State Department, in the process impugning not only her own close aides, but career diplomats and other nonpolitical professionals who deserve better.  

This strategy is reflected in the campaign’s current mantra that “everybody,” including former secretaries Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, at one time or another sent emails that were later determined to be classified.  A recent Washington Post analysis of Hillary’s released classified emails demonstrates that she directly sent at least 104 to various aides and officials, and that they too, including the current secretary of state, John Kerry, occasionally sent out emails through nonsecure servers that were later deemed classified.  However, what the analysis also shows is that these government officials, when they did use unsecured servers, at least used government accounts, which provide a measure of security, not a private home-brewed server like Mrs. Clinton’s.
The Post’s news editors must be popping a lot of Thorazine, because their coverage of Clinton is increasingly schizophrenic.  As longtime readers of the paper know, the news operation is considerably more left-leaning than the editorial side (which occasionally takes a more centrist view).  News stories are routinely slanted to present the most favorable liberal perspective and mock or demean opposing outlooks.  This tendency is apparent in the Clinton case as well.  The Post has broken some important stories in the email scandal, like the recent revelation that the Justice Department granted former Clinton I.T. aide Bryan Pagliano immunity.  And the Post’s most heroic figures, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, have separately suggested that the Clinton scandal is the real thing.  But since Hillary is the Post’s gal, they seeded the Pagliano report with expert liberal analysis that suggested that the immunity deal is either nothing to get excited about (a weird way to promote a scoop) or actually a good thing for Clinton, while omitting contrary interpretations

The Post’s analysis of her emails follows the same pattern.  On the one hand, the news that Clinton herself personally authored over 100 classified items cuts against her chosen narrative that she got a lot of emails and that she can hardly have been expected to actually read and analyze them all for security issues as she received them or passed them on.  On the other hand, the article goes out of its way to suggest that this was an endemic problem at State.  And strangely again, the explanation is rather contradictory.  We are told that the sending and receipt of classified information was the result of poor security procedures that preceded Clinton’s arrival.  But we are also told (in line with claims made by Clinton and her campaign) that there is a culture of “over-classification” in the government.  So which is it?  Were officials at State too lax about security procedures or too anal?  If nothing else, one thing this controversy demonstrates is that the Clinton State Department was pretty much a mess. 

But besides the country itself, which is now enduring yet more Clintonian malfeasance in the midst of a critical election, are many individuals that Clinton is cold-bloodily demeaning in an attempt to exonerate herself with the “everybody did it” canard.  This rests on the weak premise that other government officials – aides, ambassadors, career officials – occasionally misidentified information as innocuous or insufficiently sensitive to merit security classification.  There is little doubt this happened, and continues to happen, as government employees do their best to protect sensitive information but not bog the government down in layers of unnecessary security protocol.  But none of the officials identified in the Post analysis did this deliberately by establishing a private home-brewed email system to avoid State Department classification procedures entirely – and this no less, by the head of the State Department itself. 

The Post article anonymously quotes one poor soul (identified as a former senior official) whose good name has now been impugned as a careless operator: “I resent the fact that we are in this situation – and we’re in this situation because of Hillary Clinton’s decision to use a private email server.”      

Hillary Clinton repeatedly claims that she is the champion of the little guy.  It has always been a risible claim, but if any of her supporters (including at the Post) are actually paying attention to the scoundrel, this latest gambit ought to disabuse them of the notion.  

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/the_last_refuge_of_the_scoundrel_hillary.html#ixzz42F4IlYvd

 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes

visit judicial watch org for more on hillary's crimes and corruption


ALL HILLARY CLINTON DID AS SECRETARY of STATE, ARGUABLY ALL SHE DOES PERIOD, IS SUCK UP TO MUSLIM DICTATORS, OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS AND CRIMINAL BILLIONAIRE CRONYIES OF BILLARY.... SO SHE AND BILLARY CAN SUCK IN THOSE BIG BRIBES TO THEIR PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION!

OTHER THAN THE TENS OF MILLIONS IN BRIBES SHE SUCKED UP AS SEC. OF STATE, HER TENURE WAS AN UTTER DISASTERS AS WOULD BE ANOTHER WALL STREET BACKED CLINTON ADMINISTRATION!


The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes


The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes

By Tom Hall


7 March 2016
Last Monday, the US State Department published the last batch of declassified emails from a private, unsecured server used by Democratic

presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during her tenure as secretary of state. This latest release draws to a close a year-long review by US intelligence agencies of 52,000 pages of Clinton emails, ostensibly motivated by concerns over possible leaks of classified material.

To date, more than 30,000 emails dating from Clinton’s four-year tenure as secretary of state have been released to the public. Clinton played a central role in the prosecution of aggressive wars in Afghanistan, Syria and Libya as well as the carrying out of drone assassinations and other
illegal actions in a number of additional countries, including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Yet in its extensive reporting of the email scandal, the American media has virtually ignored the actual content of these emails, which contain a wealth of information about the day-to-day functioning of the Clinton State Department.

A review of even a small sampling of the emails, which are available on the State Department’s web site, reveals the reason why: the emails are a damning indictment of the criminal activities of not only Hillary Clinton herself, but the entire imperialist state apparatus, with the corporate-controlled media in tow. The emails could easily serve as evidence in future war crimes trials of Clinton and other top US officials.

One particularly revealing email from 2010, cited by the Interceptn web site but not picked up by the national media, recounts the experiences of former ambassador Joseph Wilson (whose CIA agent wife
Valerie Plame was outed by the Bush administration in retaliation for his criticisms of the war in Iraq) during a recent trip to Iraq in his capacity as an executive for a US engineering firm. The Obama
administration, elected by exploiting mass anti-war sentiment, continued the US occupation of Iraq for three years during Obama’s first term in office, when Clinton was secretary of state, prolonging a conflict that claimed more than 1 million lives. Since then, US troops have returned to Iraq, ostensibly to fight ISIS, as part of the US war for regime-change in neighboring Syria.

Wilson’s email begins: “My trip to Baghdad (September 6-11) has left me slack jawed. I have
struggled to find the correct historical analogy to describe a vibrant,historically important Middle Eastern city being slowly bled to death.Berlin and Dresden in World War II were devastated, but they and their populations were not subjected to seven years of occupation.”

Describing the rampant racism and sadism among US occupation troops, Wilson writes, “Shirts with mushroom clouds [for sale at a gift shop on a US military base at the Baghdad airport] conveyed the Baghdad weather as 32,000 degrees and partly cloudy. Others referred to Arabs as camel
jockeys and those were the least offensive… The service people don’t see themselves there to bring peace, light, joy or even democracy to Iraq. They are there to kill the ‘camel jockeys.’”

Hundreds more emails deal with the US-led proxy war in Libya, in which Clinton played a
leading role. As a recent series of articles in the New York Times confirmed, Clinton was the leading advocate in the White House for the clandestine arming of “rebel” militias comprised largely of Islamic fundamentalists, which comprised the main fighting force against the regime of Muammar Gaddafi.

One email from February 2011, written by a veteran diplomat before the launching of the US-NATO war that ended with the murder of Gaddafi, lays out proposals for the construction of a future “post-Gaddafi” political order in Libya. The memo recommends the use of the United Nations to lend political legitimacy to the imperialist carve-up of the country.

“A UN ‘hat’ for multinational/international assistance efforts could be effective,” the author states bluntly. However, the extensive involvement of Italy, whose participation in the war marked a return to the scene of its bloody colonial occupation, should, the author recommends, be “kept relatively low-profile.” Another email chain discusses how to disburse the tens of billions of dollars of frozen Libyan assets stolen by the imperialist powers during the regime-change operation.

Many other emails concern the organization and coordination of the Obama administration's drone assassination program, which has killed thousands in Afghanistan and Pakistan alone. “Twenty-two of the emails on Mrs. Clinton’s server have now been classified as ‘top secret’ at the demand
of the CIA because they discuss the program to hunt and kill terrorist suspects using drone strikes, as well as other intelligence operations and sources,” the New York Times noted two weeks ago, prior to
the latest release. “The emails [also] contain direct and indirect references to secret programs,” the newspaper added obliquely.


One such secret program was the bribing of high-ranking officials in the Afghan government by the CIA. “[The US embassy in Afghanistan's] line has been and will be the standard approach--that we refrain from comment on stories discussing intelligence matters,” one embassy official
writes in a 2010 email, in response to an impending New York Times story revealing that Muhammad Zia Salehi, head of the Afghan National Security Council, was on the CIA payroll. Later reports by the Times revealed that former President Hamid Karzai for years received shopping bags full of cash from the CIA on a regular basis.


Dozens of emails document the collusion between the corporate-controlled media and the State Department in containing the fallout from the release of US diplomatic cables by Wikileaks. In one
2010 exchange, Washington Post writer Craig Whitlock reaches out to the State Department to request “a mechanism to receive [the] State [Department's] input” before running a series of articles based on cables revealing the existence of a secret US drone base in the Seychelles Islands, off the coast of Somalia.

The exchange demonstrates that the major newspapers, including the Washington Post and the New York Times, provided the State Department with advance printed copies of every cable about which they planned to write, along with drafts to the White House, to be redacted or censored at their discretion. In a conversation between Whitlock’s State Department handlers, they note approvingly
that the practice “was extremely helpful in preparing our redaction requests, as well as anticipating what damage control we’d need to do in diplomatic channels.” Another email describes an editorial by the Washington Post calling for the prosecution of Wikileaks editor Julian Assange and
Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning as “helpful,” adding, “We’ll try and get pickup in [the] international media.”

Clinton also received hundreds of emails via her private server from Sidney Blumenthal, a
former advisor in the Bill Clinton administration, who served as the head of Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign. Blumenthal, then an employee of the Clinton Family Foundation, functioned as a de facto back channel intelligence gatherer and advisor for Clinton, despite not
officially being a member of her staff. It was Blumenthal’s 2015 testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi, the Republican-controlled body set up for the purpose of torpedoing the
likely presidential run of Clinton, which revealed the existence of Clinton’s private email server.

Blumenthal sent Clinton a wide array of intelligence reports from foreign countries targeted by US
imperialism. In one email, he passes on concerns that Islamist militias in Libya might retaliate against the assassination of Osama bin Laden,using weapons obtained from the United States. In another, he recounts the furtive dealings between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian military to smother the Egyptian revolution, writing that the two will “continue to work together secretly in an effort to establish a stable government” and create “a secure environment throughout the country” for
investment.

In another email, Blumenthal advises Clinton on how to orchestrate the cover-up of the circumstances surrounding the assassination of bin Laden in a cross-border raid into Pakistan by US Special Forces. As a report by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh later made clear, the official version of bin Laden’s death was a collection of lies from start to finish.

“Show [the pictures of bin Laden’s body] to members of Congress in a special secure room,
something like when members were permitted to view Abu Ghraib pictures,” Blumenthal writes. “Each of them will emerge speaking to the national and local press on what they have seen… Having members of Congress testify to the reality of the photos will suppress any potential ‘Deather’ movement, that the administration has either fabricated the event or suppressed some aspect of it.”

What the ultimate out come of the Clinton email scandal will be is not yet clear. An FBI criminal
investigation into the emails is ongoing, with signs that the case might be headed to a grand jury. On Wednesday, a former employee of Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, Bryan Pagliano, who set up the private email server in Clinton’s home, was granted immunity by federal investigators as part of the investigation.


THE USW'S WAR ON THE AMERICA WORKER - IS IT AS BAD AS OBAMA'S? - USW-ATI contract imposes health care and pension cuts, casualized labor

USW-ATI contract imposes health care and pension cuts, casualized labor

USW-ATI contract imposes health care and pension cuts, casualized labor

By Evan Winters
7 March 2016
On Tuesday, the United Steelworkers (USW) forced through a contract for 2,200 locked-out workers at Allegheny Technologies Inc. (ATI). The contract, which will end the over six-month lockout of ATI workers in six states, gives in to all of ATI’s major demands, and in some cases is actually worse than the contract ATI proposed at the beginning of the lockout.
The contract essentially transforms the ATI workforce into casual labor. Increased contracting and brutally arbitrary scheduling practices allow ATI to exploit workers on its terms. Workers and retirees face thousands of dollars in increased health care costs. The elimination of defined-benefit pensions for new hires creates a second tier of workers, which ATI and the USW plan to mobilize against current workers and retirees in future contracts.
The contract sets a precedent that will be exploited by employers across the country as they seek to offload the crisis of capitalism onto the backs of workers.
Even if no other information were available, one would not need to look beyond the USW’s conduct during the ratification process to know that the contract is a miserable betrayal. The USW and ATI announced a tentative agreement February 22, more than a week after unemployment benefits had expired for ATI workers. The USW then waited until an informational meeting on Saturday, February 27, to release any information about the contents of the contract.
At that meeting, workers were presented with a self-serving summary, instead of a full contract. Although retirees are deeply affected by the contract’s provisions, they were not invited to the meeting. In a highly unusual move, the USW invited steelworkers’ spouses to the meeting in a transparent attempt to generate additional pressure for a “yes” vote. ATI workers were given only three days to study the contract summary before voting on Tuesday, March 1.
If the USW truly believed that it had negotiated a good contract, there would have been no need to hide the full contract and employ these bullying tactics.
The actual contents of the contract summary confirm this assessment. Despite the USW’s claims that the contract contains “virtually none of the drastic concessions ATI sought to arbitrarily impose,” in fact the contract summary released last Saturday is nothing more than a slightly edited version of ATI’s August “last, best, and final offer.”
ATI’s most egregious demands centered around increased health care costs for active and retired workers, increased use of outside contractors, brutal changes in scheduling rules, and the elimination of defined-benefit pensions and health benefits for new hires.
The contract introduces 10 percent health care cost-sharing for active employees, with a $6,000 per year out-of-pocket maximum for families. This is a major increase in health care payments for active ATI workers, although ATI demanded even higher payments in its August offer.
Unlike ATI’s August offer, the final contract directly attacks retiree medical benefits. Non-Medicare-eligible retirees are now subject to the same 10 percent cost-sharing, along with an additional $45 per month in premiums, a new $600 deductible and a $3,600 annual out-of-pocket maximum. Those eligible for Medicare have an out-of-pocket maximum of $3,400 per year.
In 2012, retirees sued over similar attacks in the 2007 and 2011 contracts, but the suit was dismissed by a federal judge.
The contract also allows ATI to reduce its payments into the union-run Voluntary Employee Benefits Account (VEBA), which pays for retiree health benefits. While ATI will pay a fixed annual lump sum per retiree, the company’s hourly contributions fall from $2.50 per hour worked by active workers in 2016, to $1.00 in 2020. Fifty cents per hour of these payments are taken directly out of the quarterly bonus workers formerly received.
Even if payments remained the same, union control of the VEBA gives USW executives an incentive to cut retiree benefits to boost the profitability of this investment vehicle. With retiree health care contingent on the hours worked by active workers, benefits will be dependent on whether or not ATI schedules enough hours to fund the VEBA.
The USW bizarrely claims that contractors are necessary to restart production because of attrition during the lockout. They insist upon this even as 420 workers from the idled Bagdad and Midland plants in western Pennsylvania require transfers. The Brackenridge, Vandergrift, and Louisville, Ohio mills were understaffed even before the lockout. Most importantly, workers report that roughly 200 workers retired during the lockout. Many did so prematurely for fear that they would lose benefits under the new contract if they did not retire before the deadline to do so under the old contract. By demoralizing and starving these workers, the USW helped ATI downsize by getting rid of its most experienced workers, using the resulting shortage of manpower to justify its support for increased contracting.
As in the August offer, contractors are allowed during so-called “surge” maintenance and repair work. Specialized maintenance work can be contracted out under some conditions. The contract states that “the non-core work of janitorial, grounds-keeping, road maintenance services, and interior/exterior building construction/maintenance be contracted out as the number of current or incumbents performing such work is reduced by attrition...” [emphasis added]. In the August offer, the “be” was only a “may be,” meaning that the current language means more contractors, not fewer.
In exchange, the USW has added toothless provisions that the company train some workers in all maintenance tasks so that “the Company does not become completely dependent on contractors.”
Scheduling language is based on the August offer. The key content remains unchanged. “Management may require a work week consisting of non-consecutive workdays and/or workdays of more or less than 8 consecutive hours.” In these cases, which can occur with as little as 48 hours notice, workers will not be paid overtime, but will instead be paid an ambiguous “premium time” wage.
ATI is given free rein in its scheduling practices unless “[W]orkdays of greater than 12 consecutive hours, and work weeks in excess of 48 hours are regularly scheduled for 4 out of 6 weeks.” Notably, this section does not limit non-consecutive workdays, which the August proposal did. Workers can be forced to work up to 16 hour days with no notice under “emergency situations,” agreed upon by ATI and the USW.
In addition, ATI can impose “alternative work schedules” of 10-12 hours per day. This requires the approval of 60 percent of the affected workforce, which ATI and the USW will extort as needed.
As in the August offer, new hires are denied defined-benefit pensions and retiree health benefits, in favor of a grossly inadequate 401(k) account. Workers will receive retirement account benefits of $2.65 per hour worked, and $0.50 per hour to cover retirement health costs. This creates a two-tiered benefit system. Many current ATI workers see this for what it is: an attempt to create divisions between new hires and themselves to push through even deeper benefit cuts in the future.
In exchange for these concessions, the contract includes insulting incentives. The signing bonus, identical to ATI’s July offer, consists of $1,500 in March 2016, and $1,000 in 2019 and 2020. For workers looking to recover from six months on lockout, $1,500 is totally inadequate. What’s more, now that the USW has dropped its unfair labor practices suit against ATI, workers have no chance of receiving back pay to help recover.
The contract also includes a new profit-sharing agreement that aims to further tie workers’ living standards to company profits. A worker noted to the WSWS that when ATI introduced profit-sharing in a previous contract, workers received a check the first year, and never again, as ATI manipulated its books to conceal profits.
The USW is presenting this rotten contract as a victory. The contract summary begins with a hollow statement titled “How ATI’s Assault on Our Contract Imploded.” To the extent that the USW does acknowledge concessions in the contract, it blames them on “a flood of illegal imports.” In other words, the USW blames Chinese steelworkers for the ATI lockout. The solution to wage cuts, the USW claims, is to fight for a “major overhaul” of US trade policy. In other words, if workers want jobs, they should line up behind the corporations and the Democrats for a trade war against China.

The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes

The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes

visit judicial watch org for more on hillary's crimes and corruption


ALL HILLARY CLINTON DID AS SECRETARY of STATE, ARGUABLY ALL SHE DOES PERIOD, IS SUCK UP TO MUSLIM DICTATORS, OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS AND CRIMINAL BILLIONAIRE CRONYIES OF BILLARY.... SO SHE AND BILLARY CAN SUCK IN THOSE BIG BRIBES TO THEIR PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION!

OTHER THAN THE TENS OF MILLIONS IN BRIBES SHE SUCKED UP AS SEC. OF STATE, HER TENURE WAS AN UTTER DISASTERS AS WOULD BE ANOTHER WALL STREET BACKED CLINTON ADMINISTRATION!


The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes


The Hillary Clinton emails: A record of imperialist crimes

By Tom Hall


7 March 2016
Last Monday, the US State Department published the last batch of declassified emails from a private, unsecured server used by Democratic

presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during her tenure as secretary of state. This latest release draws to a close a year-long review by US intelligence agencies of 52,000 pages of Clinton emails, ostensibly motivated by concerns over possible leaks of classified material.

To date, more than 30,000 emails dating from Clinton’s four-year tenure as secretary of state have been released to the public. Clinton played a central role in the prosecution of aggressive wars in Afghanistan, Syria and Libya as well as the carrying out of drone assassinations and other
illegal actions in a number of additional countries, including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Yet in its extensive reporting of the email scandal, the American media has virtually ignored the actual content of these emails, which contain a wealth of information about the day-to-day functioning of the Clinton State Department.

A review of even a small sampling of the emails, which are available on the State Department’s web site, reveals the reason why: the emails are a damning indictment of the criminal activities of not only Hillary Clinton herself, but the entire imperialist state apparatus, with the corporate-controlled media in tow. The emails could easily serve as evidence in future war crimes trials of Clinton and other top US officials.

One particularly revealing email from 2010, cited by the Interceptn web site but not picked up by the national media, recounts the experiences of former ambassador Joseph Wilson (whose CIA agent wife
Valerie Plame was outed by the Bush administration in retaliation for his criticisms of the war in Iraq) during a recent trip to Iraq in his capacity as an executive for a US engineering firm. The Obama
administration, elected by exploiting mass anti-war sentiment, continued the US occupation of Iraq for three years during Obama’s first term in office, when Clinton was secretary of state, prolonging a conflict that claimed more than 1 million lives. Since then, US troops have returned to Iraq, ostensibly to fight ISIS, as part of the US war for regime-change in neighboring Syria.

Wilson’s email begins: “My trip to Baghdad (September 6-11) has left me slack jawed. I have
struggled to find the correct historical analogy to describe a vibrant,historically important Middle Eastern city being slowly bled to death.Berlin and Dresden in World War II were devastated, but they and their populations were not subjected to seven years of occupation.”

Describing the rampant racism and sadism among US occupation troops, Wilson writes, “Shirts with mushroom clouds [for sale at a gift shop on a US military base at the Baghdad airport] conveyed the Baghdad weather as 32,000 degrees and partly cloudy. Others referred to Arabs as camel
jockeys and those were the least offensive… The service people don’t see themselves there to bring peace, light, joy or even democracy to Iraq. They are there to kill the ‘camel jockeys.’”

Hundreds more emails deal with the US-led proxy war in Libya, in which Clinton played a
leading role. As a recent series of articles in the New York Times confirmed, Clinton was the leading advocate in the White House for the clandestine arming of “rebel” militias comprised largely of Islamic fundamentalists, which comprised the main fighting force against the regime of Muammar Gaddafi.

One email from February 2011, written by a veteran diplomat before the launching of the US-NATO war that ended with the murder of Gaddafi, lays out proposals for the construction of a future “post-Gaddafi” political order in Libya. The memo recommends the use of the United Nations to lend political legitimacy to the imperialist carve-up of the country.

“A UN ‘hat’ for multinational/international assistance efforts could be effective,” the author states bluntly. However, the extensive involvement of Italy, whose participation in the war marked a return to the scene of its bloody colonial occupation, should, the author recommends, be “kept relatively low-profile.” Another email chain discusses how to disburse the tens of billions of dollars of frozen Libyan assets stolen by the imperialist powers during the regime-change operation.

Many other emails concern the organization and coordination of the Obama administration's drone assassination program, which has killed thousands in Afghanistan and Pakistan alone. “Twenty-two of the emails on Mrs. Clinton’s server have now been classified as ‘top secret’ at the demand
of the CIA because they discuss the program to hunt and kill terrorist suspects using drone strikes, as well as other intelligence operations and sources,” the New York Times noted two weeks ago, prior to
the latest release. “The emails [also] contain direct and indirect references to secret programs,” the newspaper added obliquely.


One such secret program was the bribing of high-ranking officials in the Afghan government by the CIA. “[The US embassy in Afghanistan's] line has been and will be the standard approach--that we refrain from comment on stories discussing intelligence matters,” one embassy official
writes in a 2010 email, in response to an impending New York Times story revealing that Muhammad Zia Salehi, head of the Afghan National Security Council, was on the CIA payroll. Later reports by the Times revealed that former President Hamid Karzai for years received shopping bags full of cash from the CIA on a regular basis.


Dozens of emails document the collusion between the corporate-controlled media and the State Department in containing the fallout from the release of US diplomatic cables by Wikileaks. In one
2010 exchange, Washington Post writer Craig Whitlock reaches out to the State Department to request “a mechanism to receive [the] State [Department's] input” before running a series of articles based on cables revealing the existence of a secret US drone base in the Seychelles Islands, off the coast of Somalia.

The exchange demonstrates that the major newspapers, including the Washington Post and the New York Times, provided the State Department with advance printed copies of every cable about which they planned to write, along with drafts to the White House, to be redacted or censored at their discretion. In a conversation between Whitlock’s State Department handlers, they note approvingly
that the practice “was extremely helpful in preparing our redaction requests, as well as anticipating what damage control we’d need to do in diplomatic channels.” Another email describes an editorial by the Washington Post calling for the prosecution of Wikileaks editor Julian Assange and
Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning as “helpful,” adding, “We’ll try and get pickup in [the] international media.”

Clinton also received hundreds of emails via her private server from Sidney Blumenthal, a
former advisor in the Bill Clinton administration, who served as the head of Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign. Blumenthal, then an employee of the Clinton Family Foundation, functioned as a de facto back channel intelligence gatherer and advisor for Clinton, despite not
officially being a member of her staff. It was Blumenthal’s 2015 testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi, the Republican-controlled body set up for the purpose of torpedoing the
likely presidential run of Clinton, which revealed the existence of Clinton’s private email server.

Blumenthal sent Clinton a wide array of intelligence reports from foreign countries targeted by US
imperialism. In one email, he passes on concerns that Islamist militias in Libya might retaliate against the assassination of Osama bin Laden,using weapons obtained from the United States. In another, he recounts the furtive dealings between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian military to smother the Egyptian revolution, writing that the two will “continue to work together secretly in an effort to establish a stable government” and create “a secure environment throughout the country” for
investment.

In another email, Blumenthal advises Clinton on how to orchestrate the cover-up of the circumstances surrounding the assassination of bin Laden in a cross-border raid into Pakistan by US Special Forces. As a report by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh later made clear, the official version of bin Laden’s death was a collection of lies from start to finish.

“Show [the pictures of bin Laden’s body] to members of Congress in a special secure room,
something like when members were permitted to view Abu Ghraib pictures,” Blumenthal writes. “Each of them will emerge speaking to the national and local press on what they have seen… Having members of Congress testify to the reality of the photos will suppress any potential ‘Deather’ movement, that the administration has either fabricated the event or suppressed some aspect of it.”

What the ultimate out come of the Clinton email scandal will be is not yet clear. An FBI criminal
investigation into the emails is ongoing, with signs that the case might be headed to a grand jury. On Wednesday, a former employee of Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, Bryan Pagliano, who set up the private email server in Clinton’s home, was granted immunity by federal investigators as part of the investigation.


Hillary Clinton repeatedly claims that she is the champion of the little guy.  It has always been a risible claim, but if any of her supporters (including at the Post) are actually paying attention to the scoundrel, this latest gambit ought to disabuse them of the notion.  

The last refuge of the scoundrel Hillary

Samuel Johnson’s aphorism that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel doesn’t apply to Hillary Clinton in her email scandal, because nobody – not even her die-hard supporters – would believe her if she said that she set up the private email server in the interests of the United States.  Rather, the last refuge of this scoundrel is to blame everybody else she dealt with at the State Department, in the process impugning not only her own close aides, but career diplomats and other nonpolitical professionals who deserve better.  

This strategy is reflected in the campaign’s current mantra that “everybody,” including former secretaries Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, at one time or another sent emails that were later determined to be classified.  A recent Washington Post analysis of Hillary’s released classified emails demonstrates that she directly sent at least 104 to various aides and officials, and that they too, including the current secretary of state, John Kerry, occasionally sent out emails through nonsecure servers that were later deemed classified.  However, what the analysis also shows is that these government officials, when they did use unsecured servers, at least used government accounts, which provide a measure of security, not a private home-brewed server like Mrs. Clinton’s.
The Post’s news editors must be popping a lot of Thorazine, because their coverage of Clinton is increasingly schizophrenic.  As longtime readers of the paper know, the news operation is considerably more left-leaning than the editorial side (which occasionally takes a more centrist view).  News stories are routinely slanted to present the most favorable liberal perspective and mock or demean opposing outlooks.  This tendency is apparent in the Clinton case as well.  The Post has broken some important stories in the email scandal, like the recent revelation that the Justice Department granted former Clinton I.T. aide Bryan Pagliano immunity.  And the Post’s most heroic figures, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, have separately suggested that the Clinton scandal is the real thing.  But since Hillary is the Post’s gal, they seeded the Pagliano report with expert liberal analysis that suggested that the immunity deal is either nothing to get excited about (a weird way to promote a scoop) or actually a good thing for Clinton, while omitting contrary interpretations

The Post’s analysis of her emails follows the same pattern.  On the one hand, the news that Clinton herself personally authored over 100 classified items cuts against her chosen narrative that she got a lot of emails and that she can hardly have been expected to actually read and analyze them all for security issues as she received them or passed them on.  On the other hand, the article goes out of its way to suggest that this was an endemic problem at State.  And strangely again, the explanation is rather contradictory.  We are told that the sending and receipt of classified information was the result of poor security procedures that preceded Clinton’s arrival.  But we are also told (in line with claims made by Clinton and her campaign) that there is a culture of “over-classification” in the government.  So which is it?  Were officials at State too lax about security procedures or too anal?  If nothing else, one thing this controversy demonstrates is that the Clinton State Department was pretty much a mess. 

But besides the country itself, which is now enduring yet more Clintonian malfeasance in the midst of a critical election, are many individuals that Clinton is cold-bloodily demeaning in an attempt to exonerate herself with the “everybody did it” canard.  This rests on the weak premise that other government officials – aides, ambassadors, career officials – occasionally misidentified information as innocuous or insufficiently sensitive to merit security classification.  There is little doubt this happened, and continues to happen, as government employees do their best to protect sensitive information but not bog the government down in layers of unnecessary security protocol.  But none of the officials identified in the Post analysis did this deliberately by establishing a private home-brewed email system to avoid State Department classification procedures entirely – and this no less, by the head of the State Department itself. 

The Post article anonymously quotes one poor soul (identified as a former senior official) whose good name has now been impugned as a careless operator: “I resent the fact that we are in this situation – and we’re in this situation because of Hillary Clinton’s decision to use a private email server.”      

Hillary Clinton repeatedly claims that she is the champion of the little guy.  It has always been a risible claim, but if any of her supporters (including at the Post) are actually paying attention to the scoundrel, this latest gambit ought to disabuse them of the notion.  

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/the_last_refuge_of_the_scoundrel_hillary.html#ixzz42F4IlYvd

 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


NEW YORK MAYOR BILL de BLASIO VOWS TO GET ILLEGALS TO VOTE FOR LA RAZA HILLARIA - WILL SHE HAND THEM OBAMA'S IMPERIAL AMNESTY ALONG WITH MILLIONS MORE OF OUR JOBS AND BILLIONS MORE IN WELFARE? ........... You bet!

 HILLARY CLINTON CRONY, NEW YORK MAYOR BILL de BLASIO SAYS GET ILLEGALS VOTING FOR MORE WELFARE!


Monday, March 07, 2016
Mayor Bill de Blasio has proposed allowing illegal immigrants to vote for mayor and other top city officials in New York City. But voters continue to strongly oppose allowing illegal immigrants to vote at all and adamantly reject a plan like de Blasio’s in their hometown.

Seventy-one percent (71%) of Likely U.S. Voters oppose letting illegal immigrants vote for local officials in the area where they live. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 19% favor such a proposal, while 10% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Sixty-seven percent (67%) say illegal immigrants should not be allowed to vote even if they can prove that they live in this country and pay taxes. That’s up from 60% when Rasmussen Reports first asked this question in May of last year. Twenty-six percent (26%) still believe tax-paying illegal immigrants should be permitted to vote, down from 35%.

Republicans (80%) and voters not affiliated with either of the major political parties (70%) are even more opposed to illegal immigrants voting than there were last year. But now most Democrats agree. Last May, Democrats by a 53% to 42% margin were in favor of allowing tax-paying illegal immigrants to vote. Now, those numbers are reversed, with voters in President Obama’s party opposed by a 52% to 39% margin.

Most voters across the partisan spectrum also oppose de Blasio’s proposal, although again Republicans (86%) and unaffiliated voters (71%) are more strongly opposed than Democrats (57%) are.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on March 2-3, 2016 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Most voters still think their fellow Americans need to prove their identity before voting and don’t believe photo ID laws discriminate against some voters.

Majorities of voters across nearly all demographic categories oppose letting illegal immigrants vote, especially in the area where they live.

Women and those under 40 are more supportive of allowing illegal immigrants to vote than men and older voters are.

Interestingly, most black and other minority voters oppose allowing illegal immigrants to vote for local officials where they live, but they’re almost evenly divided when it comes to the idea of illegal immigrants in general voting. Roughly three-out-of-four whites are opposed in both cases.
Among those who believe voters should be required to show photo identification before casting their ballot, 77% oppose allowing illegal immigrants to vote. Just 47% of those who oppose a photo ID requirement agree.

Thirty percent (30%) of all voters think it’s already too easy to vote in the United States, while just 19% say it’s too hard. A plurality (46%) thinks the level of difficulty is about right. Just over half of voters oppose an automatic voter registration plan for their state like one recently proposed in Maryland.

Most voters continue to favor stricter border control over granting legal status to those already here illegally and believe amnesty will just encourage more illegal immigration.

Most also still believe the federal government is not interested in stopping illegal immigration, and support for state rather than federal enforcement of immigration laws is now at its highest level in several years.


BEEN TO MEXIFORNIA LATELY?

IT IS A LA RAZA-OCCUPIED COLONY OF MEXICO!

LOS ANGELES HAS 15 MILLION PEOPLE. MOST ARE MEXICANS. THE ILLEGALS DRIVE WITHOUT LICENSE OR INSURANCE. THEY NEED ONLY A STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER TO GET AN AMERICAN JOB. THEY CONTRACT ILLEGALLY, AND YET THERE ARE STILL THOSE THAT BELIEVE THERE ARE NO ILLEGAL VOTING.

MORE ON LOS ANGELES/L.A. COUNTY:

THE COUNTY HANDS OUT ONE BILLION DOLLARS TO OCCUPYING MEXICANS FOR THE DEM PARTY'S ANCHOR BABY BREEDING PROGRAM FOR 18 YEARS OF WELFARE.

NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED TO HAND A BILLION TO THE MEX FLAG WAVERS!

THE CITY OF L.A., WHICH IS THE WESTERN GATEWAY FOR THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS, SPENDS NEARLY $10 MILLION PER YEAR FOR MEX GRAFFITI ABATEMENT. 

OF THE 200 MOST WANTED CRIMINALS IN L.A. (MURDER, RAPE) 186 ARE MEXICANS. MOST OF THE REST ARE RUSSIAN OR ARMENIANS.

MORE THAN 90% OF ALL MURDERS IN L.A. ARE COMMITTED BY MEXICANS.

THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 2,000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY MEXICANS THAT FLED BACK OVER THE BORDER TO NACROMEX.

FOR EIGHT YEARS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER HAVE ATTEMPTED TO SABOTAGE THE VOTING PROCESS TO EASE MORE ILLEGALS INTO OUR VOTING BOOTHS. THEY BY LA RAZA WITH MILLIONS OF OUR JOBS AND BILLIONS IN WELFARE!

VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY? VOTE FOR HISPANDERING HILLARIA. SHE'S ALREADY TOLD THE ILLEGALS IDs WILL NOT BE AN ISSUE!!!


The numbers tell a story, and you can draw the obvious conclusions. Because the mainstream media certainly won’t.  Keep this statistic in mind the next time some progressive tries to claim voter fraud is not a serious problem. Political...

Dem turnout and voter ID: The dirty little secret

The numbers tell a story, and you can draw the obvious conclusions. Because the mainstream media certainly won’t.  Keep this statistic in mind the next time some progressive tries to claim voter fraud is not a serious problem.
Political Wire quotes the HuffPo:
 Huffington Post: “Eight out of the 16 states that have held primaries or caucuses so far have implemented new voter ID or other restrictive voting laws since 2010.

Democratic turnout has dropped 37 percent overall in those eight states, but just 13 percent in the states that didn’t enact new voter restrictions. To put it another way, Democratic voter turnout was 285 percent worse in states with new voter ID laws.”
Left unsaid: despite the “burden” of obtaining voter ID, GOP turnout was up.

Hat tip: Glen Reynolds, Instapundit

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016

/03/dem_turnout_and_voter_id_the_dirty_little_secret.html#ixzz429lKJCRK
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

MORE HERE ON THE MEX THAT TURNED L.A. INTO A LA RAZA DUMPSTER:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/03/03/exclusive-antonio-villaraigosa-k/



AMNESTY FOR 40 MILLION LOOTING MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS.... 

VILLARAIGOSA AND CLINTON HAVE PROMISED THE MEX OCCUPIERS OBAMA'S AMNESTY! THEY ALREADY GET OUR JOBS, WELFARE AND FREE WHATEVER ELSE THEY VOTE FOR!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/02/amnesty-for-40-million-mex-flag-wavers.html


Romney unloads on Trump: Con man, fake, phony, fraud:

 Mitt Romney warned Thursday that picking Donald Trump as the Republican nominee for the presidency would doom Republicans and greatly reduce the chances of American prosperity in the future. Let me put in very plainly, he said in a much-touted and stinging public speech at the University of Utah. If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished. There is plenty of evidence that Mr. Trump is a con man, a fake, he said. Mr. Trump has changed his positions not just over the years, but over the course of the campaign. Romney, speaking for the GOP establishment, tore apart Trump's character, and said voters should watch to see how Trump reacts to his speech as proof. Will he talk about our policy differences, or will he attack me with every imaginable low-road insult? Romney asked as the audience laughed. This may tell you what you need to know about his temperament, his stability, and his suitability to be president.

AMNESTY: IT'S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED AND THERE'S NO DEM POLITICIAN OR FREAKING BILLIONAIRE THAT DOESN'T WANT OBAMA'S AMNESTY HOAX TO LEGALIZE MEXICO'S LOOTING!!!


Think Trump Will be Tough on Immigration? Consider His Company's Use of Guestworkers

By David Seminara

CIS Immigration Blog, February 26, 2016
. . .
I combed through the government databases detailing H-2B petitions and here are some observations regarding the Trump Organization's use of H-2B guest workers:

* In petitioning for workers, employers are supposed to prove that their hiring need is "seasonal" and "temporary", yet Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club has sought to import guest workers year after year, including right now. (Their most recent petition was filed in July 2015 and the workers are on contract at the resort until May 31, 2016.)

* Trump maintained at the debate on Thursday night that the jobs he had filled with guest workers were hard to fill because they were only for 90 or 120 days. But in fact, the duration of the petitions was never just three months. The work period for Mar-a-Lago's guest workers, according to the petitions, is nearly always October 1 to May 31, which is 8 months. On other occasions, his company petitioned for even longer periods. For example, in 2009, the Trump National Golf Club petitioned for guest workers for the period January 26 through November 20.

* I note that even during the height of the recession, this and other Trump properties were petitioning for workers.

* In 2009, again, during the height of the recession, the Trump Organization used an H-2B broker called Más Labor to import workers. Más Labor extols the benefits of Mexican workers on their website, which allows employers to add guest workers to their online shopping carts. "You'll never wonder if your workers are going to show up on Monday morning and make it through a full work week," it reads. "MAS H2 workers are dedicated to their families, their work and their employers. They'll be there, ready to work hard for you. ... The only thing an H2 worker can do legally in the U.S. is work for their specified employer. ... For Mexican workers, seven to nine dollars an hour is about ten times what could be earned in most jobs at home."
. . .
http://www.cis.org/seminara/think-trump-will-be-tough-immigration-consider-his-companys-use-guestworkers


Aliens and Money: Let's Look at the Big Picture

By David North

CIS Immigration Blog, February 26, 2016
. . .
The other stack of money, some $50 billion-plus, is the sum of all the remittances currently flowing out of our country every year. Much of this is untaxed earnings. With some rather minor public policy adjustments, a significant fraction of those funds, say $5-10 billion, could be caused to stay in America.
. . .
Virtually all the attention paid to these two topics is focused on the little EB-5 program — including two congressional hearings in the last few weeks.

Meanwhile, we can be grateful to Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) for calling our attention to the huge outflow of remittances. Most of these person-to-person transfers of money are from migrants, legal or illegal, to relatives in the homeland. There are also transfers of criminal moneys mixed in with these remittance flows. The latter angle is an important public policy subject, but one I leave to others.

I wrote recently about the isthmus in southern Mexico through which virtually all the Central American illegal migrants flow and which offers enforcement opportunities. There is a similarly narrow channel for the outward flow of remittances; it is through controllable bank and wire transfers. The relatively tiny sums that can be carried, or mailed, in cash or jewels or gold can be safely be ignored in a conversation about remittances.

There are two obvious ways to reduce the outflow of tens of billions of dollars from our economy, but the administration has no interest in reducing remittances by shrinking the size of the illegal alien population. The other way to reduce remittances is to use the wire and banking systems to discourage them and to tax them. But before we discuss the mechanics of such a program, let's return to Sen. Vitter's contribution.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/aliens-and-money-lets-look-big-picture


How About a Wall in Mexico That We Pay For?
By David North

CIS Immigration Blog, February 24, 2016
. . .
The suggestion is to construct a fence along an existing railroad, now nearly abandoned, built by dreamers a little more than 100 years ago who thought that they could entice ocean-to-ocean traffic away from the about-to-be built Panama Canal and across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec instead. The dream became a nightmare when it became apparent that using the canal was cheaper and faster than unloading freight at the Gulf of Mexico end of the little railway, shipping it by rail, and then re-loading it on ships at the Pacific end of the line. One website calls it the "UnPanama".

The railway bears the Spanish initials FIT (Ferrocarril del Istmo de Tehuantepec). It runs from sea to sea in a seamless line, though not in a straight line, so it's about 190 miles long. There is a gap in the mountains at this point, which made the rail line easier to build and to maintain. Since the Isthmus is running east and west at this point, the railroad runs roughly north (the Gulf of Mexico) to south (the Pacific).
. . .
The relative ease of the construction of a fence along the FIT railway, as opposed to along the U.S. southern border, is hard to overemphasize. Here is a relatively level land route in which the railway already owns all the real estate needed for the fence. The railway itself gives instant access to the area where the fence is to be built. Construction costs in Mexico are much lower in Mexico than in the States. There would be not be ranches along the border, as there are on some segments of our southern border, where part of the land would be one side of the fence, and part on the other. The railway follows a much straighter line than the Rio Grande, and so forth.

Above all, the total length would be just one-tenth the length of our border with Mexico. This is not to suggest that we abandon efforts to strengthen our own southern border, but the FIT fence would be an extremely valuable tool in the American enforcement arsenal.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/how-about-wall-mexico-we-pay-for


BLOG: CAN'T AFFORD TO EDUCATE YOUR KIDS? JUST CLAIM THEY'RE ILLEGALS!!!


Court: DACA Aliens Can't Sue Georgia for In-State Tuition

By David North

CIS Immigration Blog, February 24, 2016
. . .
According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, several DACA beneficiaries sued the board of regents of Georgia's state university system over this issue. They were turned down by the board, by the trial court, by the appeals court, and ultimately by the state's supreme court.

The supreme court said, unanimously, that the DACA beneficiaries could not sue the sovereign state of Georgia without its own consent, deciding the case on that issue, rather than on the legal status of the aliens.

According to the NCSL this is the current status of in-state tuition for illegals:
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/georgia-court-rules-out-state-tuition-daca-aliens


CBP Pressies Would Rather Talk about Hoverboards Than Illegal Aliens

By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, February 22, 2016
. . .
The hoverboard incident was one of many noted in CBP releases, and the news of drug seizures seems to account for a large majority of these press items. If you read the whole set of them you will find that there are many different ways to try to smuggle drugs into the country, such as hiding them in the panels of trucks, putting them in tightly sealed bags within gas tanks or inside spare tires, and tucking them into clothing. If is often the drug-sniffing dogs that get the credit for the seizure.

Sometimes when an illegal alien who has also committed a violent crime is located CBP writes about it, but rarely the significant work it does in apprehending and/or turning back illegal aliens at the border.

From my experience I know that when a government agency releases a news item, it is something that the political leadership wants discussed. So it is clear that the DHS leadership is not interested in the detection of illegal immigration — otherwise its pressies would tell us about it.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/cbp-pressies-would-rather-talk-about-hoverboards-illegal-aliens


Ambassador: U.S. Paying to Support Cuban Illegals in Costa Rica

By Kausha Luna

CIS Immigration Blog, February 24, 2016
. . .
How much is the monetary contribution being made by the U.S. government for the attention of Cubans who have not yet left Costa Rica?
I would say it is significant.
So, while the Cuban illegal aliens themselves had to pay for their transportation to the Rio Grande, the U.S. government helped pay for their accommodations while in Costa Rica and then looked on as foreign nations worked together to complete their smuggling journey north. Then, once in the U.S., they are given immediate status under the obsolete Cuban Adjustment Act, including full access to welfare benefits.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/luna/ambassador-us-paying-support-cuban-illegals-costa-rica


Mexican Tourists Working on California Marijuana Farms

By Kausha Luna

CIS Immigration Blog, February 22, 2016

Mexican professionals and students are coming to the United States on tourist visas to work on marijuana farms and make quick money.

An article printed in the Excelsior, a Mexican newspaper, describes a "new migratory trend towards the United States." This new trend is an unprecedented flow of English-speaking Mexicans, aged 24 to 34, who travel to the United States on a tourist visa to take advantage of the marijuana harvest season in the "Emerald Triangle". The Emerald Triangle is in Northern California, made up of Medocino, Humboldt, and Trinity counties, and is the largest cannabis-producing region in the United States and the world.
. . .
The quick money comes with risks, however. Firstly, how much money one earns depends on the demand for labor; if one isn't working then he or she is only spending money. Secondly, migrants searching for jobs on these marijuana farms are compromising their security as they trek into the mountains with people they just met, due to a job offer that may not be real. Thirdly, when it is time to get paid, it is common to be held at gunpoint and thrown off the property, or be threatened with calling the police. Finally, organized crime is starting to get a grip on this area, including Mexican cartels.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/luna/mexicans-tourists-working-california-marijuana-farms


San Francisco Puts Sanctuary Before Funding

By Debra J. Saunders

Townhall.com, February 28, 2016
. . .
The Republican Congress is not of like mind. The new chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees the Department of Justice, Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, is poised to use Congress' power of the purse to withhold federal law enforcement funds from sanctuary cities. He told me, "There will be no more Kate Steinle murders, if I can help it."

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is on board. Wednesday she told the subcommittee that the Bureau of Prisons will transfer released federal inmates who are undocumented and due for deportation directly to ICE -- not to sanctuary cities, unless the sanctuary agrees only to release the inmate to ICE. Culberson had nothing but praise for Lynch "for doing the right thing."

Center for Immigration Studies Policy Director Jessica Vaughan is less impressed. She sees "a very narrow response to what went wrong in the Steinle case" that doesn't address the real problem: state and local policies of obstruction. "Most criminal aliens are in state and local custody instead of federal prison."
. . .
San Francisco stands to lose about $170,000 from the alien assistance program alone. As a believer in the rights of local governments, Culberson told me, he supports San Francisco's right to abstain from ICE enforcement. But if San Francisco chooses to release "illegal aliens" and turn them loose on the streets, "don't even ask for SCAAP funding."
. . .
That's not to say San Francisco pols don't believe in rules. When undocumented immigrant Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno, 31, announced that San Francisco police had referred him to ICE after he reported his car stolen, the force launched an investigation -- on the police, not Figueroa-Zarceno, who was facing a 2005 deportation order and was convicted of drunken driving in 2012. "It's absurd that the city is investigating the cop who did the right thing," quoth Vaughan, "instead of the illegal alien, who's here in defiance of the law."
. . .
http://townhall.com/columnists/debrajsaunders/2016/02/28/san-francisco-puts-sanctuary-before-funding-n2125386



Hillary vs. The Donald

By Patrick Buchanan

Townhall.com, February 26, 2016
. . .
On immigration, where are the polls that show Middle Americans enthusiastic about increasing the numbers coming? Where is the majority demanding amnesty or open borders?

The elites of Europe are as out of touch as America's.

Angela Merkel, Time's Person of the Year in 2015, is at risk of being dumped in 2016 if she does not halt the next wave of Middle Eastern refugees who will be arriving on Europe's shores when the seas calm in the spring in the Aegean and the Mediterranean.

If we believe the immigration issue Trump has seized upon is explosive here, look to Europe. In the Balkans and Central Europe, even in Austria, the barriers are going up and the border guards appearing.

Mass migration from the Third World to the First World is not only radicalizing America. It could destroy the European Union. Anger over any more migrants entering the country is among the reasons British patriots now want out of the EU.

America is crossing into a new era. Trump seems to have caught the wave, while Clinton seems to belong to yesterday.

A note of caution: This establishment is not going quietly.
. . .
http://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2016/02/26/hillary-vs-the-donald-n2124785/page/2


By Attacking Trump on ‘H’ Visas Will Be Difficult for Candidates Who Support ‘H’ Visas

By Fred Bauer

National Review Online, February 25, 2016
. . .
Still, even if the hypocrisy charge might be a bit muddled, Trump’s rivals could still try to attack him on this issue. However, that task will be harder if these rivals themselves support guest-worker programs in their current state and, especially, if they support expanding them. Many proponents of guest-worker programs argue that such programs do not hurt the American worker and are good for economic growth as a whole. Thus, when attacking Trump for using guest workers, a supporter of guest-worker programs finds himself in an odd position: Mr. Trump, you’re such a hypocrite for hiring guest workers instead of Americans — but no big deal because you actually helped the American economy grow and ended up not displacing any American workers at all.

That argument falls even flatter if someone supports the expansion of guest-worker programs: Mr. Trump, you’re such a hypocrite for hiring guest workers instead of Americans. When I’m president, it will be a top priority to make it even easier for employers to do what you just did.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/431921/donald-trumps-h-visa-problem-difficult-attack-candidates-who-support-h-visas


Donald Trump Thinks American Workers Aren’t Good Enough for the Trump Organization

By Ian Tuttle

National Review Online, February 25, 2016
. . .
Apparently, the first leg of the project was too important to entrust to American workers. In a lawsuit filed in Manhattan Federal Court, members of House Wreckers Local 95 alleged that, to avoid paying union employees their pension and welfare benefits, Trump (and the contractor he used for the job, Kaszycki & Sons) brought in some 200 undocumented Polish workers to demolish the Bonwit Teller building that then occupied the site of the future Trump Tower.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431933/donald-trump-foreign-workers-american-workers-arent-good-enough


Marco Rubio’s Immigration Dilemma

Can he persuade conservatives that his immigration bill is really a reform?

By John Fonte

National Review Online, February 24, 2016
. . .
Chris Crane, the head of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) union, told Breitbart News that Schumer–Rubio was actually “weaker” than current law. There were over 1,000 waivers, which gave the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the power to bypass enforcement. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, which represents 12,000 federal employees, denounced Schumer–Rubio, declaring: “It was deliberately designed to undermine the integrity of our lawful immigration system.”

Further, the ICE Officers Council stated: “The 1,200-page substitute bill before the Senate will provide instant legalization and a path to citizenship to gang members and other dangerous criminal aliens.” Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office declared that S-744 would not stop most illegal immigration. The CBO forecast that Schumer–Rubio would reduce illegal immigration by only one-third to one-half. And the bill would almost double legal (overwhelmingly low-skilled) immigration. This is a much larger increase than under Kennedy–McCain.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431799/marco-rubio-immigration




Water Amnesty for Illegal Aliens in Flint, Michigan

Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicle, February 26, 2016
. . .
This one involves the widely reported water situation in Flint, which is located about 66 miles northwest of Detroit. Last year researchers discovered that the city’s drinking water was contaminated with lead from decaying old pipes. The problem arose after a switch in 2014 in the city’s water source to save money. Soon complaints mounted that the water smelled and looked strange and academic researchers discovered that it was toxic. This all occurred after a 7-1 vote by the Flint City Council to stop buying Detroit water and join a new pipeline project, according to a local news report.

Now there’s a state of emergency and the feds have stepped in, supplying the area with free bottled water and special filters to install at home until the local water supply is clean. For weeks immigrant rights groups complained that residents had to show identification to receive their free goods from the government and illegal aliens were being left out. National Spanish-language media outlets blasted the Obama administration for discriminating against illegal aliens. One reported that undocumented immigrants weren’t getting help for fear of being deported, instead opting to drink contaminated water or pay out of pocket to buy some. Another major Spanish-language newspaper wrote that illegal immigrants and their children suffered lead poisoning and couldn’t get clean emergency water because they didn’t have identification cards. “When the National Guard went door to door distributing potable water, many were scared to open because they feared the uniformed persons were immigration agents who would deport them,” the paper wrote.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which claims to combat bigotry and protect civil rights for all, joined the cause expressing “horror” and “indignation” that the government denied undocumented immigrants free water and filters because they couldn’t provide a photo ID or Social Security number. In a Spanish-language statement the group’s Michigan chapter referred to news reports that Flint-area fire department stations distributing water were requiring identification. But even in places that aren’t requiring ID, illegal immigrants are scared to come out and get their potable water out of fear that they will be deported, the ADL stresses in its announcement. “We are calling on the National Guard to order all fire departments and other centers distributing supplies that no one be rejected.”
. . .
https://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/02/water-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens-in-flint-michigan/


Talking Head Twit of the Year Contest

By Ann Coulter

Human Events Online, February 24, 2016
. . .
After Trump’s huge victory in New Hampshire and then in South Carolina, did it occur to TV bookers to call any of the people who got it right?

Alex Marlow, editor in chief of Breitbart News, explained everything that was about to happen in this race back on the Sept. 14 edition of CNN’s Erin Burnett show.

While all the other “strategists” gibbered about Trump losing the Hispanic vote, Marlow said: “Trump is growing the big tent. ... Trump’s policies are appealing to blacks. There are even some polls out there, like a survey USA poll, saying Trump is actually doing fine with Latinos.”

In the Nevada primary on Tuesday, Trump not only won the Hispanic vote; he not only won 17 points more of the Hispanic vote than his next closest rival; but his Latino vote nearly matched that of the two Latino candidates combined.

In one of the few times you might have heard this point expressed on television airwaves, Marlow said that the No. 1 issue for Breitbart News’ 20 million readers, “has consistently been — since last year — immigration.They are looking for someone who is going to seal the border and prioritize border security as No. 1.”

Obviously, Marlow was right about everything. According to Nexis, that was the last time he appeared on TV.
. . .
http://humanevents.com/2016/02/24/talking-head-twit-of-the-year-contest/


Mr. Trump: More Specifics About Mexico Paying for the Wall

By Silvio Canto, Jr.

American Thinker, February 24, 2016
. . .
Mr. Trump wants to build a fence on the border. Frankly, I'm OK with that, although it's hard to see how beneficial a border fence would be in the open and desolate areas of Arizona and Mexico. I would rather see a military presence in the open areas, because it is cartels, who use these routes. Also, let's remember that many illegal immigrants are simply flying in and overstaying their tourist visas.

Mr. Trump also wants Mexico to pay for the fence. It is one of his most popular lines. Unfortunately, he has not explained how exactly Mexico will do that.

A Trump supporter told me recently that he plans to tax "remittances," currently about $25 billion. How do you determine whether Jose sending money to his mother is illegal or not? My point is that there are a lot of Mexicans here legally who send money to their families. Is Western Union going to be requiring documents before wiring money? Is 7-11 going to require documents when someone buys a $100 pre-paid Visa? My point is that this is very difficult to do.

Mr. Trump is talking about "Mexico ripping off the U.S.," another popular line. Where is that happening? According to the latest info available, U.S.-Mexico trade is rather substantial:
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/_mr_trump_more_specifics_about_mexico_paying_for_the_wall.html


Why is Everything Amnesty?

By Silvio Canto, Jr.

American Thinker, February 26, 2016
. . .
Who is pardoning any group or letting people stay here without consequences?

The GOP should be for an immigration solution that enforces the law against employers and protects the border. At the same time, what is wrong with offering some of those here a chance to stay here? It would go like this:

1) The illegal immigrant would be given a chance to apply for a work visa supported by an employer's letter that a job actually exists;

2) He or she would undergo a full criminal background check including fingerprints. We will also check with the home country to verify that the applicant is not married here and back home;

3) The applicant will pay a fine for violating the law and or not filing tax returns;

4) He or she will be under a period of probation where the person could be deported in case of any violation of law;

5) No path to citizenship or green card will be available to this person; and,

6) Employers will be harshly punished, including jail time, for hiring someone without papers.

How is that amnesty? Who is getting off free for violating the law?
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/why_is_everything_amnesty.html


Immigration or an iPhone

We don’t have an encryption problem; we have a Muslim immigration problem.

By Daniel Greenfield

FrontPageMag.com, February 25, 2016
. . .
Terrorists adapt to the terrain. They use the native population as protective coloration. They can find a way to transform a shoe, a tube of toothpaste or instant messaging on a game console into a terror tool. Just as the left can 'politicize' everything, Muslim terrorists can 'terrorize' everything. When everything is a potential terrorist tool, then there can be no such thing as privacy or civil rights.

Muslim immigration is forcing us to constantly choose between our lives and our civil liberties. It's a Catch 22 decision with no good choices. Terrorists push governments toward totalitarianism so that their own alternative totalitarian state starts to seem like a less terrible alternative. But the refusal to fight terrorism also makes the totalitarian state of the terrorists more viable.
. . .
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261941/immigration-or-iphone-daniel-greenfield


Hypocrisy Watch: Trump Hired Hundreds of Foreign Workers For Jobs Americans Wanted

By John Merline

Investors Business Daily, February 25, 2016
. . .
A Reuters report from last summer found Trump’s various companies had “sought to import at least 1,100 foreign workers on temporary visas since 2000.” One of the companies applied for temporary work visas for 250 fashion models.

Trump told the Times that the only reason those Americans didn’t get jobs at the Palm Beach resort was because “they weren’t qualified, for some reason. There are very few qualified people during the high season in the area.”

He went on to say that “Certain areas, in really successful areas, where we can’t get help, many people do that,” meaning they import workers. “That’s a good thing. Otherwise, you hurt your business.”

From a free-market perspective, Trump is absolutely right to say this. Businesses should be free to hire whomever they want to get a job done, at prices they can afford, even if those workers have to be imported

But that’s not what Trump has been telling his audiences on the campaign trail over the past eight months.

Instead, he routinely blasts businesses that import foreign workers for jobs that Americans can do, saying they are guilty of “job theft,” and he promises to punish companies that engage in such behavior.
. . .
http://www.investors.com/politics/capital-hill/hypocrisy-watch-trump-hired-hundreds-of-foreign-workers-for-jobs-americans-wanted/


Will Trump's Wall Protect or Imprison?

By Alan Keyes

WorldNetDaily.com, February 25, 2016
. . .
Indeed, Donald Trump’s promised border wall effectively illustrates the prudence of Washington’s admonition. Mr. Trump says the wall will be used to keep illegals out. But a wall once divided Berlin, Germany. It symbolized an imprisoned people. It would be ironic if our failure to stop the elitist interests Trump really represents results in an elitist tyranny that turns the border wall we intend for our security into an instrument of control intended to bar our posterity from escaping it.

Don’t get me wrong. I favor, and worked with others to support, the construction of appropriate obstacles along our borders, including walls, fences and electronic surveillance, as appropriate. I did so while Mr. Trump was decrying people like us as “mean-spirited” and maybe even funding or applauding people who ridiculed and hated us. But where liberty is concerned, our real security is not just in walls and fences. It is in the loyal hearts and decent will of the guardians who police them. If Donald Trump is the man his actual record suggests, we have every reason to beware of any wall he erects – for when it serves the interest of his factional allegiance, his true persona will prevail in the use of it, even though it be against our rights and liberty.
. . .
http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/will-trumps-wall-protect-or-imprison/


Trump’s Brilliant 30 Second Indictment of an Open Borders Policy

By Kevin Collins

CoachIsRight.com, February 22, 2016
. . .
Trump has been in contact with Jamiel Shaw-the victim’s father-and is helping him tell the story of his son’s death.

The story is so powerful that Trump should use this spot over and over throughout the whole campaign. It is NOT just an appeal to Blacks; it is an appeal to all Americans with a clear message: illegal aliens must be stopped and kicked out.

Trump arranged to have Shaw address the crowd at a recent rally in Los Angeles. This is what he said: “To see somebody, especially a billionaire, come out. I can’t even get a neighborhood politician to come out, that’s why it’s so surreal to me...”

Shaw continued: “People are looking at immigration as just an immigration issue, but people are dying. It’s a fact. What good is the economy, healthcare, going to school, if people are dying? Trump is doing things he doesn’t have to do. He can buy a whole island and get away from crime…. This was the first time I thought everything’s really gonna be all right. To me, he was sent from God.”
. . .
http://www.coachisright.com/trumps-brilliant-30-second-indictment-open-borders-policy/


Solving The H-1B Visa Problem

By Tom Giovanetti

TechCrunch.com, February 20, 2016
. . .
How shall we break this impasse and make progress on what should be one of the easiest incremental reforms in the immigration reform debate? A bipartisan commission likely to end in gridlock? Raw political “we won, you lost” power? Further inaction, which just exacerbates the problem?

Here’s a better idea — a market mechanism that would determine once and for all not only who is right, but what the market-clearing price for skilled immigrant labor actually is, thus informing future immigration policy formation.

Right now, H-1B visas are issued on a first come, first served basis, for a flat fee, and the number is arbitrarily capped. Such a system tells us nothing about how much an H-1B visa (and thus a skilled immigrant worker) is actually worth to an employer. And because the number is capped and the fee low, the system actually encourages a lottery or jackpot approach — in other words, employers would apply for as many visas as possible, hoping to get enough. This is an irrational system.

It would make much more sense to allocate H-1B visas via an auction process. If H-1B visas were auctioned to employers each year in a sealed-bid process, with the bids allocated from highest to lowest until the available permits were exhausted, supply and demand would establish the market-clearing price for the right to hire a skilled immigrant worker.
. . .
http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/20/solving-the-h-1b-visa-problem/


The Trump Surge: It's All About Security

By Marguerite Creel
American Thinker, February 28, 2016
. . .
By summer 2015, there was no candidate, except Trump, who had even begun to galvanize the base. But even at this late date, GOP leadership and financiers seem reluctant to put their personal economic interests on hold. Moreover, Trump identifies with Americans who recognize the realpolitik black hole that threatens their homeland. Traditional Americans want to vote for a high-energy candidate whose campaign reaffirms the Republican Party as the protector of security and the American way of life.

The political insiders' failure to consolidate behind a solid closed-border candidate led to a vacuum on the pre-eminent issue of illegal immigration. It was in this void that Trump's candidacy evolved. His genius media campaign proved to dovetail nicely with commonsense conservative positions such as middle-class tax relief, veterans' health care and fair trade policies with China.
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_trump_surge_its_all_about_security.html


Will DOJ Push For Illegal Alien Voting in 2016 Fall Flat in Court? 

By Robert Romano
Conservative Review, February 28, 2016
. . .
But if the injunction is granted by Judge Leon and the new federal voter registration form is removed, then Alabama, Georgia and Kansas would have to begin processing federal applications to the state voter rolls once again even if there is no proof of citizenship.

This therefore is an attempt by the Justice Department to settle this case and invalidate the application of the states’ laws without even a fair hearing of including the state requirements on the federal form.

Fortunately, Judge Leon may be seeing through this façade. Time will tell. But clearly the stakes in the case could not be higher.
. . .
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/02/will-doj-push-for-illegal-alien-voting-in-2016-fall-flat-in-court


Fighting Illegal Alien Voting

By John Velisek

CoachIsRight.com, February 25, 2016
. . .
Advocacy groups made up of academics, law professors, local and federal politicians of the progressive Democrat party and groups that advocate through the socialist La Raza and Soros’ Open Society have filed a lawsuit against the states of Arizona, Georgia and Kansas. These and a number of other states supported a decision by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission allowing only legal citizens to register to vote. The states are requiring a satisfactory form of proof of citizenship to assure only citizens will be voting.

Incredible, though understandable, is the fact that the Obama Justice Department has joined with the advocacy groups rather than defending one of its own agencies. The Justice Department has gone so far as to take away all authority from the EAC, the only federal agency working to protect the states from voting by illegal aliens.
. . .
http://www.coachisright.com/fighting-illegal-alien-voting/



Good Fences

By Clarice Feldman

American Thinker, February 21, 2016
. . .
Robert Frost wrote in “Mending Walls” that “good fences make good neighbors”, and this week it appears that people in this country and the UK are chock full of citizens who agree. As I explain, the immigration crises both here and in Europe have underscored growing anger at the arrogance and incompetence of unelected bureaucrats and their rules.

The big election kerfuffle of the week was the Pope’s ill-considered attack on those who want to limit illegal immigration from Mexico by building a wall at the border. To many it seemed an attack on Donald Trump whose campaign against illegal immigration struck a receptive chord with voters. Many noted the hypocrisy of such a statement coming from the head of the Vatican state which is itself surrounded by a wall erected in the ninth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries to protect against pirates and invaders.
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/good_fences.html


Conservatism Inc. “Experts” Wrong Again: Exit Polls Show Trump’s Success IS About Immigration

By Washington Watcher

VDare.com, February 26, 2016
. . .
But the fact that the vast majority of voters back the Muslim moratorium, which virtually no public figure other than Trump will support, shows how salient the issue is. Moreover, immigration is a much more specific issue than “the economy” or “national security,” and so it’s not surprising “immigration” is not the top issue. Given that most GOP candidates have the same positions on national security and the budget, immigration can still be the deciding factor for many voters who did not list it as their favorite.

What about Amnesty, i.e. a path to legalization? On its face, the results are a bit disappointing. However, it’s worth noting that the question is phrased in a misleading fashion.

It gives a binary choice between legal status (though not citizenship, which the Gang of 8 proposes) and deportation, without giving increased enforcement as an option. As the Center for Immigration Studies has shown, if you give the option for increased enforcement (rather than massive deportations] vs. Amnesty, Americans will overwhelmingly choose enforcement [Rigged Polls That Bolster the Case for Amnesty, by David Seminara, November 26, 2013].
. . .
http://www.vdare.com/articles/conservatism-inc-experts-wrong-again-exit-polls-show-trumps-success-is-about-immigration


Obama Changes Law: Allows Immigrants with Blistering STDs and Leprosy into US

By Jim Hoft

Gateway Pundit, February 23, 2016
. . .
In his first year in office, President Obama lifted an entry ban on foreigners with HIV.

Most U.S. cases of leprosy occur in people who traveled to the United States from areas of the world where the bacterial infection is endemic.

It’s not clear how this new rule benefits Americans.
The Washington Examiner reported:
. . .
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/obama-changes-law-allows-immigrants-with-blistering-stds-and-leprosy-into-us/


Obama Embraces Illegals with STDs... SEND THE MEDICAL BILLS TO THE STUPID LEGALS!


By Jeannie DeAngelis

American Thinker Blog, February 27, 2016
. . .
n 2009, the president pulled HIV from the list of diseases that bar immigrants from coming to the U.S. Now, according to a report issued by the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies, Obama’s Health and Human Services has publicly stated that the cost of handling and treating immigrants with STDs does not impact taxpayers in a significant way.

Moreover, even though, by nature, venereal disease is contagious, the Obama administration has also decreed that specific communicable diseases are no longer “of public health significance.” Unfortunately, that opinion only applies to those who are thankfully not among the victims sexually abused by one of the 2,000 illegals in Texas, who, with or without a sore on their private parts, were deported because of sex crimes.

That “not…in a significant way” guarantee comes from the same government that had a virtual non-response when undocumented workers illegally employed in places like Chipotle passed along pathogens, which sorry to say, were likely transported into customer’s intestines via Crispy Corn Tacos contaminated with human feces.

So, if having an oozing genital sore does not prohibit a person entry into the U.S., how is the Obama administration going to ensure that immigrants, who tend to gravitate toward food service, diligently follow proper hygiene protocol after manhandling their genitalia?