Wednesday, December 20, 2017



"During the same month that Schlafly had backed Trump for his “America First”


agenda, Nielsen’s committee released an ideologically-globalist report, promoting


the European migrant crisis as a win for big business who would profit greatly


from a never-ending stream of cheap, foreign migrants."

"He can’t get away with mostly cosmetic improvements like 

some extra fencing at the border, as Bush might have, as part 

of an amnesty giveaway."

Rep. Steve King: Trump ‘Negotiated Against Himself’ on DACA; Has ‘Mandate to Build a Wall’

“[President Donald Trump] has a mandate to build a wall [and] pass domestic [immigration] enforcement legislation,” said Rep. Steve King (R-IA) on Tuesday.

King advised Trump to work toward keeping his immigration- and border-related campaign promises during an interview with SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight.
King’s comments came in light of a Tuesday article at Politico regarding White House Chief of Staff John Kelly’s same-day meeting with “nearly a dozen senators” to negotiate “legal protections” for illegal immigrants targeted by Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive policy.
Offering presidential pre-approval of legislative amnesty for illegal immigrants — via proposed bills to codify DACA into law — in exchange for congressional legislative directives toward southern border security and internal immigration enforcement amounted to self-sabotage on Trump’s part, said King.
“Now the president has essentially negotiated against himself,” said King. “He has a mandate to build a wall. He has a mandate to pass domestic enforcement legislation and enforcement for immigration at the border and internally in this domestic scene. But instead, he’s saying, ‘Give me the enforcement and I’ll give you the DACA.'”
Trump has an “excellent chance to keep every single campaign promise,” said King, advising the president that doing so would yield “a tremendous legacy.”
Rejecting amnesty for illegal immigrants, said King, would help restore the rule of law in America: “If he will follow through and put an end to DACA, then he’s in a place to be the first presidential candidate in — who knows, our lifetime — to lay out promises on a campaign trail and have a chance to keep them all, and that would be a tremendous legacy. That, and restoring the rule of law are far more important and far more valuable to America than keeping people here who are here illegally.”
Lawlessness begets more lawlessness, warned King: “There are people who simply can’t step back and look at the implications of what they’re advocating for, here; but it’s this: if you reward law-breakers, you get more law-breakers.”
DACA’s passage would inevitably lead to the extension of citizenship to its targets, said King: “If the DACA recipients are granted a legal status, you can’t say to them, ‘You’re never gonna get to be citizens and vote.’ They will. It’s just the next card that’ll be played. It’ll be the next demand. And meanwhile, the next most sympathetic group gets brought forward by Dick Durbin and others.”
Congressional Democratic leadership has repeatedly called for a “pathway to citizenship” for foreigners illegally in America to whom they intend to extend amnesty.
Republicans such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), among others, support DACA-type legislation and the extension of citizenship to its targets.
Those who illegally entered and live in America, said King, made a choice to “live in the shadows”: “I want to end the DACA program. I don’t want to revive it for any reason.  I want to say to them, “You came here to live in the shadows. If that’s your objective, and as long as you’re in the shadows, we’re not going to be able to find you with law enforcement, so stay in the shadows. But if we encounter you with law enforcement, we have to do what the law calls for, and that is, you need to go back home.”
King rejected narratives framing DACA’s targets as primarily children: “They’re really not kids, they’re up to age 36, now. Many, many of them came in on their own knowing what they were doing, they just tell you otherwise.”
Breitbart News Tonight airs on SiriusXM’s Patriot channel 125 on weeknights from 9 p.m to midnight Eastern (6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Pacific).
Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter @rkraychik.

White House Pushing For A DREAM Amnesty In January?

So that’s why Schumer and Pelosi caved on tying a DREAM bill to this week’s government funding package. Why risk a shutdown over the issue when the White House is prepared to play ball with them next month?
Presumably it’s also Democrats who are responsible for this leak. The only way to turn down the heat from open-borders activists for caving on the shutdown is to give them reason to believe this issue will be settled very soon thereafter.
And hey, now we know what populists will be angry about to start the new year.
At a Tuesday afternoon meeting with nearly a dozen senators deeply involved in immigration policy, White House chief of staff John Kelly pledged that the administration will soon present a list of border security and other policy changes it wants as part of a broader deal on so-called Dreamers, according to people who attended the meeting. The plan could come in a matter of days, senators said…
“Our belief is that if this matter is not resolved this week — and it’s not likely to be resolved — that come the omnibus and the caps, that we have another chance to finally come up with a bipartisan package of things to include” by mid-January, said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who also attended the meeting. “The closer we get [to the March deadline], the more nervous I get, not to mention the way these young people feel. I’m sorry that it’s taken this long.”…
At the Tuesday meeting, Kelly and other administration officials went into detail about how much of the southern border is currently fenced and how much more the White House would want in exchange for a DACA deal, according to people who attended.
Most of the Senate’s amnesty all-stars (Durbin, Graham, Flake, etc) were in attendance to hear Kelly’s list of demands. Politico’s piece is ominously thin on details, though, only noting that the White House wants a beefier border. That’s great, but immigration hawks have largely moved past border security as their main concern. It’s not just about illegal immigrants anymore (and to the extent that it is, E-Verify is more important than the wall in deterring illegals from coming). It’s about rolling back legal immigration too. And that means, per Tom Cotton, David Perdue, and Trump himself, ending chain migration:

At a minimum, an amnesty for DREAMers should come with a prohibition on chain migration for their own extended family members. Would Democrats go along with that? Is Trump even asking for it? If he isn’t, he will be soon. Breitbart is already gearing up for a squabble over DREAM, replete with warnings about the importance of ending chain migration. This is where immigration is a double-edged sword for Trump: Yeah, it helped rally populists to him last year in the primaries, but running as an ostentatious border hawk means expectations are higher for him now that he’s president. He can’t get away with mostly cosmetic improvements like some extra fencing at the border, as Bush might have, as part of an amnesty giveaway. He needs something significant. I don’t know if Pelosi and Schumer will give it to him, knowing that DREAM is popular with the public and with Trump already having showed fear by postponing the end of DACA for six months. Why should they make any concessions? If worse comes to worst, Trump tearing up DACA might help them a bit with Latino turnout next fall.
One other odd note about the coming deal is the timing. The whole point of not doing DREAM this week by adding it to the package to fund the government is that neither party wants to risk a backlash if the package falls through because of it and a shutdown ensues. Neither side is sure whom the public will blame. Sure, DREAM is popular, which bodes ill for reluctant Republicans, but shutdowns are highly unpopular and it’d be Democrats in this case who are holding government funding hostage as leverage for unrelated priorities. The obvious thing is to do is to put DREAM on pause, get the government funded, then take it up independently next month. There’s just one problem: The funding package that passes this week will only fund the government … until January 19. They’re going to have another shutdown standoff in January, right around the time they’re supposedly coming to terms on DREAM. How’s that going to work? Is the idea to ram through amnesty the week before they start negotiating on a new round of government funding, just to get it off the table?
If so, as a matter of pure politics, would the GOP be better off holding out and making Dems attach DREAM to the next funding bill? Republicans are stuck here because they want to pass amnesty (Trump handed this issue off to them in the hope that they would) but they don’t want their base pissed off at them for it. Solution: Let Democrats hold the government hostage over it and then cave. Ryan and McConnell might whimper, “We didn’t want to pass DREAM but Schumer and Pelosi left us no choice! We can’t let people lose their government services!” I’m not sure if that argument would make things better or worse for them, though. Populists don’t want to see Republicans pass a DREAM bill enthusiastically, but they also sure as hell don’t want to see them behave as though they’re intimidated by Democratic threats. The GOP spent the Obama years arguing that shutdowns were no big deal, that they only affect seven percent of the federal government or whatever the number is, etc. Now suddenly when it’s a matter of passing amnesty or stopping it, shutdowns are the worst thing in the world and must be avoided at all costs? A GOP cave on DREAM under fiscal duress might actually play worse for them among Trumpers than a straightforward cave would.

The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”

DACA WITH STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS…. How many other laws did these Mex flag wavers break?

Experts: 44 Percent of DACA Illegal Aliens Worked Without Valid Social Security Numbers – JOHN BINDER

Mexicans cheat, distribute drugs, lie, forge documents, steal and kill as if it’s a normal way of life. For them, it is. Mexico’s civilization stands diametrically opposed to America’s culture. FROSTY WOOLDRIDGE

Whom Does Congress Work For?

By John Miano

CIS Immigration Blog, December 12, 2017

When Disney replaced 350 Americans with foreign workers, forcing them to train their replacements, did we see any Florida members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?

When Southern California Edison and the University of California replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any California members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?

When Toys "R" Us replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any New Jersey members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?

When Cargill and Best Buy replaced Americans with foreign workers, did any Minnesota members of Congress threaten to shut down the government unless it was stopped?


Yet when illegal aliens working under the DACA program are threatened with losing their jobs, members of Congress spring into action:

CBO Report: DACA Amnesty Would Cost American Taxpayers $26 Billion

Giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who are covered and eligible for the President Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program would cost American taxpayers a total of $26 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

The DREAM Act, which is the most expansive amnesty being considered in Congress, would give potentially 3.5 million illegal aliens who are shielded from deportation by DACA and those eligible for DACA a pathway to U.S. citizenship.
Such a plan, the CBO reports, would come with a costly price tag to American taxpayers:
In total, CBO and JCT estimate that changes in direct spending and revenues from enacting S. 1615 would increase budget deficits by $25.9 billion over the 2018-2027 period, boosting on-budget deficits by $30.6 billion and decreasing off-budget deficits by $4.7 billion over that period. Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the bill would affect direct spending and revenues. [Emphasis added]

Under the DREAM Act, Americans would have to pay for at least two million illegal aliens who would become eligible for federal entitlement programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as “food stamps.”
Newly amnestied illegal aliens under the DREAM Act would also be allowed to receive federal benefits to go to college, costing Americans a billion dollars just between 2018 through 2022, the CBO estimates.
CBO also estimates that providing higher education assistance for newly eligible people under S. 1615 would cost $1.0 billion over the 2018-2022 period; such spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
Breitbart News analysis conducted by John Carney previously found that the DREAM Act would cost American taxpayers an expensive $115 billion due the newly amnestied illegal aliens being able to receive immediate subsidies from the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare.”
The cost of DACA amnesty would be placed on top of the costs that Americans pay every year due to illegal immigration.
As Breitbart News reported, the most recent Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) report reveals that an illegal alien costs the American taxpayer approximately $8,075 each, totaling a burden of roughly $116 billion annually.
Researchers with FAIR said the finding was both a “disturbing and unsustainable trend,” as the cost of illegal immigration to taxpayers has risen nearly $3 billion since 2013, when illegal immigration cost $113 billion.
The study directly challenged research by libertarian think tanks and open borders organizations, which claim that illegal immigrants are net-gains for American taxpayers.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.




DACA Amnesty Chain Migration Would Exceed Four Years of U.S. Births

NEW YORK CITY, New York — The Democrats’ draft Dream Act amnesty would likely add as many chain-migration foreigners to the United States population as are added by the total number of Americans who are born in four years’ time.

As House and Senate Republicans, Democrats, the big business lobby, the cheap 

labor industry, and the open borders lobby 

have teamed up to push an amnesty for 

potentially millions of illegal aliens who are 

enrolled and eligible for the President 

Obama-created Deferred Action for 

Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, the 

impact the move would have on Americans 

would be likely unprecedented.
Under the current legal immigration system, immigrants who are given a pathway to U.S. citizenship are eventually allowed to bring extended family members, children, their parents, siblings, and extended family members to the country. This process, which makes up more than 70 percent of the current legal immigration, is what’s known as “chain migration.”
Research by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) reveals that under a DACA amnesty deal, between about 800,000 and 3.5 million illegal aliens could be eligible for legalization to permanently remain in the U.S. Of those, MPI notes that 1.5 million of the estimated 3.5 million would be allowed to obtain U.S. citizenship.
According to Princeton University researchers Stacie Carr and Marta Tienda, newly naturalized Mexican immigrants in the U.S. bring an average of six foreign relatives with them. Therefore, should all 1.5 million amnestied illegal aliens bring six relatives each to the U.S., that would constitute a total chain migration of nine million new foreign nationals entering the U.S.
If the number of amnestied illegal aliens who gained a pathway to citizenship under an amnesty plan were to rise to the full 3.3 million, and if each brought in three to six foreign family members, the chain migration flow could range from 9.9 million to 19.8 million foreign nationals coming to the U.S.
This chain migration flow triggered by a DACA amnesty — where an end to chain migration is not coupled with the plan — would be more than double the number of babies born in the U.S. every single year, which stands at about four million a year. Should a DACA amnesty trigger a chain migration flow of 19 million foreign nationals, it would be more than quadruple the number of American births every year.
The chain migration of a DACA amnesty would potentially outpace the populations of American cities like New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston.
Such a chain migration would boom the number of foreign-born residents in the U.S. to a historic high.
Currently, the foreign-born population is 

already at historic levels, reaching 44 

million this year with no end in sight as legal 

immigration reductions to give relief to 

America’s working and middle-classes are 

stalled in Congress.
Trump has previously stated that an amnesty deal for DACA illegal aliens would have to include an end on chain migration in order to stop surges of legal immigration to the U.S., though it remains unclear how many Republicans would be willing to break from their big business donors to help pass a law to end chain migration.
Most recently, a group of Senators released legislation known as the SECURE Act that would end chain migration — thus reducing legal immigration to 500,000 admissions a year to give relief to Americans — but couples the pro-American immigration reform with an amnesty for DACA illegal aliens.
Nearly 120,000 foreign nationals have been allowed to enter the U.S. since 2005, despite coming from countries designated as state-sponsors of terrorism, including Iran, Syria and Sudan, Breitbart News reported.
In total, about 9.3 million foreign nationals have entered the U.S. since 2005 because of chain migration, making it the largest driver of legal immigration to the country.
As Breitbart News reported, chain migration makes up more than 70 percent of all legal immigration — with every two new immigrants bringing seven foreign relatives with them.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder

STAGNANT WAGES and the Dem Party’s obsession with open borders, amnesty and no damned legal need apply!


The Democratic Party used to be the party of blue collar 

America- supporting laws and policies that benefited that 

segment of the U.S. population.  Their leaders may still claim 

to be advocates for American working families, however their 

duplicitous actions that betray American workers and their 

families, while undermining national security and public 

safety, provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of their 





Study Shows E-Verify's Effectiveness

By Preston Huennekens
CIS Immigration Blog, December 8, 2017

Their study indicates that E-Verify is one of the most important enforcement tools available to states that wish to reduce their illegal alien populations. Research shows that most illegal migration is for economic reasons, and that the adoption of E-Verify and other worksite enforcement measures effectively blocks illegal aliens from procuring employment, thereby preventing many from settling down in the United States. Faced with mandatory E-Verify, the study shows that many aliens either returned to their home countries or traveled to other states that did not have employment verification regulations.
. . .


“I have seen and heard a lot over the past two weeks,” he writes. “I met with many people barely surviving on Skid Row in Los Angeles, I witnessed a San Francisco police officer telling a group of homeless people to move on but having no answer when asked where they could move to, I heard how thousands of poor people get minor infraction notices which seem to be intentionally designed to quickly explode into unpayable debt, incarceration, and the replenishment of municipal coffers, I saw sewage-filled yards in states where governments don’t consider sanitation facilities to be their responsibility, I saw people who had lost all of their teeth because adult dental care is not covered by the vast majority of programs available to the very poor, I heard about soaring death rates and family and community destruction wrought by prescription and other drug addiction, and I met with people in the South of Puerto Rico living next to a mountain of completely unprotected coal ash which rains down upon them, bringing illness, disability and death.”

The United States of Inequality

18 December 2017
Last week, as Congress rushed to pass a tax bill that will transfer trillions of dollars to the financial oligarchy, two separate teams of experts published damning reports documenting the growth of social inequality in the United States.
On Thursday, a group of leading inequality researchers, including Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, published its 2018 World Inequality Report, which shows that the United States is far more unequal than the advanced economies of Western Europe, as well as much of the rest of the world.
The researchers reported that the income share of the top 1 percent of US income earners rose from 10 percent in 1980 to 20 percent in 2016, while the income share of the bottom 50 percent fell from 20 percent to 13 percent over the same period. The bottom 90 percent controls just 27 percent of the wealth today, compared to 40 percent three decades ago.
Another graphic indictment of American society was offered by Philip Alston, the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, who argued in a report published Friday that the prevalence of extreme poverty amid unimaginable opulence in the US is a violation of basic human rights.
The fact that the United States 
has invaded, bombed and 
destabilized countries all over the 
world on the pretext of defending 
“human rights” is no doubt one of 
the reasons the corporate-
controlled media has chosen to 
bury both of these reports.
Alston writes of the “sewage filled yards in states where governments don’t consider sanitation facilities to be their responsibility,” of “people who had lost all of their teeth because adult dental care is not covered by the vast majority of programs available to the very poor,” and of “soaring death rates and family and community destruction wrought by prescription and other drug addiction.”
He notes that the extreme concentration of wealth has eroded the foundations of American democracy, writing: “There is no other developed country where so many voters are disenfranchised… and where ordinary voters ultimately have so little impact on political outcomes.”
In its Sunday edition, the New York Times published an editorial titled “The Tax Bill That Inequality Created.” The newspaper criticizes the bill being rammed through Congress for “lavishing breaks on corporations and the wealthy while taking benefits away from the poor and the middle class.” The editors add, “What many may not realize is that growing inequality helped create the bill in the first place.” A “smaller and smaller group of people” have become “in effect, kingmakers,” seeking to “bend American politics to serve their interests… rich families have supported candidates who share their hostility to progressive taxation, welfare programs and government regulation of any kind.”
The editors place the onus on Republicans, though they acknowledge that “donations from Wall Street and corporate America have… pushed many Democrats to the center or even to the right on issues like financial regulation, international trade, antitrust policy and welfare reform.”
There is a striking disconnect between the Times’ portrait of American society and its prescription, which, in the end, is to support the Democratic Party. The editorial concludes by hailing the election of right-wing Democrat Doug Jones in Alabama as proof that “inequality in America does not have to be self-perpetuating.”
The Times does not see fit to mention that in the 2016 elections it wholeheartedly backed a candidate, Hillary Clinton, who is completely beholden to “Wall Street and corporate America.” Nor does it recall that just last month it published an editorial declaring its full support for corporate tax cuts, the heart of the Republican tax plan. The Times wrote, “If Republicans worked with Democrats, they could reach a compromise to lower the top corporate tax rate.”
Entirely absent from the Times account is any explanation of why and how the United States has come to this point, or what the colossal levels of social inequality imply for the future of American society. This is because to do so would mean raising the question of the capitalist system itself, which the newspaper fervently supports.
The present situation did not arise from nowhere. Nor is it simply the product of the nefarious operations of one party. The emergence of oligarchic forms of rule, or “kingmakers,” is the product of a long historical evolution.
The ideological foundations of 20th century American capitalism—the “American Dream,” the idea that the development of American capitalism would “lift all boats,” that each generation would be better off than the last—are now a distant memory.
During the first part of the last century, the American ruling class responded to the eruption of class conflict and the threat of socialist revolution, represented above all by the Russian Revolution, with social reforms—Roosevelt’s New Deal (including Social Security), increases in taxes on the wealthy, and the Great Society programs of the 1960s (including Medicare and Medicaid).
These measures, however, were implemented within the framework of preserving a social and economic system based on private ownership of the banks and corporations. Moreover, they were premised on the strength of American capitalism and its dominant position in the world economy.
The shift in ruling-class strategy corresponded with a shift in the position of American capitalism. Over the past half-century, the ruling class has sought to offset the decline in its economic position externally through military aggression and internally through the upward redistribution of social resources from the great mass of the population to the financial oligarchy. The results can be seen in the curve of social inequality, which shows the top one percent steadily amassing a greater share of wealth and income.
The trajectory has continued under both Democrats and Republicans. The Times editorial refers to the enormous growth of inequality over the past three decades. However, during this period Democrats occupied the presidency for 16 years (two terms for Clinton, two terms for Obama), compared to 12 years for Republicans (one term for Bush Sr, two for Bush Jr.). The processes of deregulation and financialization and the slashing of social programs have continued unabated, regardless of the political party controlling the White House and Capitol Hill.
All the institutions of American society have had their role to play in this social counterrevolution. The trade unions have transformed themselves into appendages of corporate management, relinquishing all claim to being “workers’ organizations.” During the 1980s, they isolated and suppressed every single strike or struggle against the onslaught of the rich. Today, they serve as cheap-labor contractors and industrial police for the ruling class, while providing comfortable sinecures for the upper-middle class functionaries that control them.
The Trump administration and its tax bill, far from being an aberration, are the continuation of this class policy.
The state of American society—to which ruling classes around the world look as a model—is a confirmation of Marxism. Capitalism is characterized by an irreconcilable conflict between the working class, the vast majority of humanity, and the ruling elite. The state is not a neutral arbiter, but an instrument of class rule. The working class must organize itself independently, with the aim of restructuring social and economic life.
The Democrats are no less terrified of this prospect than the Republicans. Hence the endless attempts to divert and disorient—from the anti-Russia campaign to the current hysteria over sexual harassment being promoted by the New York Times, among others.
When the Workers League in the US took the decision to form the Socialist Equality Party 22 years ago, it noted that the dominant feature in political life was “the widening gap between a small percentage of the population that enjoys unprecedented wealth and the broad mass of the working population that lives in varying degrees of economic uncertainty and distress.”
This analysis has been confirmed over the subsequent two decades. Just as the meteoric rise of social inequality is the inexorable outcome of the capitalist system, so too is the socialist transformation of society the only means to rid American and world society of the scourge of social inequality and the domination of the financial oligarchy, whose grip over social and economic life has become the principal obstacle to human progress.
Andre Damon

UN rapporteur “shocked” by deep 

poverty in US

By Eric London
18 December 2017
On Friday, United Nations Special Rapporteur Philip Alston published a report on poverty and democratic rights in the United States titled “Statement on Visit to the USA.”
In 1831, the French intellectual and diplomat Alexis de Tocqueville traveled to the United States and compiled notes on what he saw, publishing an optimistic report titled Democracy in America. One hundred and eighty six years later, Alston, an Australian academic and New York University professor, traveled through a country in the throes of a social catastrophe. His report might well be titled Destitution in America .
Alston recently concluded his trip through California, Alabama, Georgia, Puerto Rico, West Virginia and Washington DC, visiting working-class neighborhoods and talking with experts and local officials.
“I have seen and heard a lot over the past two weeks,” he writes. “I met with many people barely surviving on Skid Row in Los Angeles, I witnessed a San Francisco police officer telling a group of homeless people to move on but having no answer when asked where they could move to, I heard how thousands of poor people get minor infraction notices which seem to be intentionally designed to quickly explode into unpayable debt, incarceration, and the replenishment of municipal coffers, I saw sewage-filled yards in states where governments don’t consider sanitation facilities to be their responsibility, I saw people who had lost all of their teeth because adult dental care is not covered by the vast majority of programs available to the very poor, I heard about soaring death rates and family and community destruction wrought by prescription and other drug addiction, and I met with people in the South of Puerto Rico living next to a mountain of completely unprotected coal ash which rains down upon them, bringing illness, disability and death.”
His concludes that the government does not recognize “rights that guard against dying of hunger, dying from a lack of access to affordable health care, or growing up in a context of total deprivation.”
Forty million Americans live below the official poverty line, with 18.5 million living in deep poverty. The US infant mortality rate is the highest in the developed world. Obesity is rampant. The US is 36th in the world in access to water and sanitation. Its incarceration rate is the highest in the world. Youth poverty is nearly double the rest of the industrialized world. “Neglected tropical diseases” are “increasingly common.”
Hookworm is spreading in poor areas of Alabama as sewage flows openly through homes and streets. The US is 35th out of 37th among all industrialized countries in terms of inequality and poverty.
The UN report suggests that poverty and inequality are the product of the domination of the political system by a corporate oligarchy. “Successive administrations, including the present one, have determinedly rejected the idea that economic and social rights are full-fledged human rights,” Alston notes.
His statement begins:
“My visit coincides with a dramatic change of direction in US policies relating to inequality and extreme poverty. The proposed tax reform package stakes out America’s bid to become the most unequal society in the world, and will greatly increase the already high levels of wealth and income inequality between the richest 1 percent and the poorest 50 percent of Americans. The dramatic cuts in welfare, foreshadowed by the president and Speaker Ryan, and already beginning to be implemented by the administration, will essentially shred crucial dimensions of a safety net that is already full of holes.”
The report notes that at the federal level, proposals to cut Medicare will be “disastrous.” Underfunding the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) will “have devastating [effects] on the health of millions of poor children.” If funding for the Federal Qualified Health Centers (FQCHs) is eliminated, “9 million patients could lose access to primary and preventative care.”
Alston describes a situation where the police, courts and public agencies treat impoverished workers like criminals. “In many cities and counties the criminal justice system is effectively a system for keeping the poor in poverty while generating revenue to fund not only the justice system but diverse other programs,” he writes.
Over 730,000 people are in jail, “of whom almost two-thirds are awaiting trial, and thus presumed to be innocent.” The government sets bail at extremely high levels, “which means that wealthy defendants can secure their freedom, while poor defendants are likely to stay in jail.”
Intrusive policing policies for welfare, food stamps and other public benefits include forcing workers to undergo drug tests, in-home inspections and other humiliating procedures.
“Calls for welfare reform take place against a constant drumbeat of allegations of widespread fraud in the system,” Alston writes. “The contrast with tax reform is instructive. In that context, immense faith is placed in the good will and altruism of the corporate beneficiaries, while with welfare reform the opposite assumptions apply.”
Alston rejects the notion that poverty is primarily a racial issue. “The poor,” he says, “are overwhelmingly assumed to be people of color, whether African Americans or Hispanic ‘immigrants.’ The reality is that there are 8 million more poor Whites than there are Blacks… The face of poverty in America is not only Black or Hispanic, but also White, Asian and many other colors.”
Child poverty is widespread across races: “Contrary to the stereotypical assumptions, 31 percent of poor children are White, 24 percent are Black, 36 percent are Hispanic and 1 percent are indigenous.”
Conditions for Native Americans, ignored by Black Lives Matter and other identity politics groups, are particularly deplorable. At the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, conditions are “comparable to Haiti... Nine lives have been lost there to suicide in the last three months, including one six-year-old. Nevertheless, federally funded programs aimed at suicide prevention have been de-funded.”
The growth of inequality has “steadily undermined” democratic forms of rule, Alston writes. In fact, democracy is incompatible with the ruling class’s efforts to expand and protect its wealth at the expense of the working class. This process is not accidental, but the product of the policies implemented by both major capitalist parties, whose aim over recent decades has been to eviscerate all benefits and protections won by the working class through more than a century of social struggle.
The corporate-controlled media is complicit in the growth of inequality and poverty. This shocking and disturbing UN report, which speaks frankly of the immense levels of economic inequality and destitution in America, reflecting the stark class divide that dominates US social and political life, has barely been reported by the establishment broadcast and print media. Meanwhile, the same media outlets are devoting endless coverage to allegations of sexual harassment made for the most part by wealthy and privileged women against prominent figures in the worlds of entertainment, the arts and politics.

Senators, White House Lay Groundwork For DREAMers Deal

At a Tuesday afternoon meeting with nearly a dozen senators deeply involved in immigration policy, White House chief of staff John Kelly pledged that the administration will soon present a list of border security and other policy changes it wants as part of a broader deal on so-called Dreamers, according to people who attended the meeting. The plan could come in a matter of days, senators said.
About a half-dozen senators have been negotiating a bipartisan package prompted by Trump’s decision to kill the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an Obama-era executive action that granted work permits to nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants who came here as minors. Yet the senators could not fully flesh out a deal before they knew what Trump was willing to sign.
“We couldn’t finish this product, this bill, until we knew where the administration was,” Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who has been negotiating a DACA compromise for weeks, said in an interview after the meeting with Kelly. “And that’s why this meeting was so important.”


Chain migration exemplifies wrong approach to immigration system.

The failed terror attack on December 11, 2017 has called attention to “chain migration.”
We will consider chain migration momentarily, but first we need to consider the entire immigration system as a chain.
It has been said that a chain is as strong as its weakest link.  Today the immigration system is comprised of extremely weak links and all must be addressed because failures of each and every element of the immigration system leave America and Americans vulnerable to the threat of terrorism and crime.
I addressed these concerns in an article awhile back, Immigration and the Terrorist Threat.
America’s immigration laws have nothing to do with race, religion or ethnicity but about national security, public health and public safety as well as the livelihoods of American workers.
Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens is a section of law that is contained within the Immigration and Nationality Act and enumerates the grounds for excluding aliens from the United States.  The categories includes aliens infected with dangerous communicable diseases, suffer from extreme mental illness and are prone to violence, aliens who are criminals, human rights violators, war criminals, spies or terrorists. Finally that list also includes aliens who would likely become public charges or displace American workers. There is nothing in that list that relates to the race, religion or ethnicity of these aliens.
Every time there is a terror attack the focus turns to the specific visa under which the terror suspect may have entered the United States.  This piecemeal approach is ineffective in understanding the true nature of the threats we face.
All categories of visas are problematic.  Effective vetting is often not as effective as we would want it to be.  
Young people may not have created a track record that could be uncovered during the course of the visa issuance process.  
Our officials are forced to rely on watch-lists and databases that may not be complete or where translating names from one language to another further complicates the process as does our reliance of information furnished by foreign governments.
Sanctuary Cities attract aliens who seek to evade detection for a multitude of reasons- none of them in America’s best interests.  
On July 13, 2011 the Washington Times published a truly disturbing article, “Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”
The likelihood is that any aliens who are evading immigration law enforcement are hiding in Sanctuary Cities.
Today the issue gaining the attention involves “Chain migration” and the underlying principle of “Family Reunification” are emblematic of what is utterly wrong with America’s immigration system, yet those two pillars of the immigration system have been in place for more than a half-century.
In point of fact, President Trump is the first president in decades who understands this very important principle as does Attorney General Jeff Sessions who, prior to becoming the Attorney General, chaired the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest. 
Consequently, Chain Migration was already in the crosshairs of the Trump administration as he and Attorney General Jeff Sessions work to change the immigration system to address national security, public safety and the livelihoods of American workers and their struggling families.
On December 11, 2017 the issue of Chain Migration was thrust onto the front page of newspapers across the United States and the “A Block” of news programs when a 27 year old lawful immigrant from Bangladesh attempted to create mass carnage under the streets of Times Square in a terror attack inspired by ISIS and an abject hatred for America and Americans.
The following day the Justice Department issued a press release that announced, “Akayed Ullah Charged With Terrorism and Explosives Charges in Connection With the Detonation of a Bomb in New York City.”
Ullah, reportedly a citizen of Bangladesh had been admitted into the United States in 2011 as a lawful immigrant because of “chain migration.”  
While it is reasonable and certainly makes sense for lawful immigrants to bring members of their nuclear families to the United States, there is no reasonable justification for bringing their extended families to the United States as lawful immigrants in their own right.
Nevertheless, under current immigration laws, an alien who becomes a United States citizen may petition the government to grant immigrant visas to all of his/her adult brothers and sisters and their respective spouses and children.
Large families are common in Third World countries and it is not unusual for a family to have a more than a half-dozen children.  It is not uncommon for the children of those large families to have as many children as well.  One new citizen can literally bring in dozens of new immigrants.
These immigrants need not possess any specific skills or education and often wind up competing with American and lawful immigrants for scarce jobs.
Similar attention was focused on another flawed element of the immigration system, the Diversity Visa Lottery when a terrorist a 29-year-old citizen of Uzbekistan, Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, used a truck as a weapon of mass destruction to attack pedestrians and bike riders on October 31, 2017 on the west side of Manhattan, leaving eight people dead and a dozen injured.
Shortly after that deadly terror attack I wrote about the vulnerabilities of this visa category referring to it as A Game of Russian Roulette.
The December 2, 2015 deadly terror attack in San Bernardino, California focused attention on the K-1 (fiancee) visa program.
In following up on that attack, on April 28, 2016 ICE issued a press release, “3 people tied to shooter in San Bernardino terrorist attack arrested on federal conspiracy, marriage fraud and false statement charges.”
The deadly terror attack at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, by the Tsarnaev brothers, called attention to failures of the system by which applications for political asylum are adjudicated.
With a new budget crisis looming just weeks from now the Democrats are pushing for a permanent “solution” to the approximately 800,000 illegal aliens who had been given a temporary reprieve from deportation under DACA by the Obama administration.
These hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients were not interviewed.  No field investigations were conducted to verify the information contained in their applications.  To qualify they only had to claim that they had entered the United States before they turned 16. 
At the time that DACA was implemented by Obama those aliens could be as old as 31 years of age.  Some may now therefore be as old as 36.
DACA could represent the tip of a huge immigration iceberg.  If these aliens are provided with lawful status, they could become naturalized United States citizens who, under current law, have the absolute right to petition the federal government to provide immigrant visas to each and every one of their siblings and their siblings’ family members.  
Meanwhile the United States continues to admit approximately one million new immigrants each and every year.  By law these aliens may seek to naturalize after they are present in the United States for five years (three years if they are married to a United States citizen spouse).
The system is operating at a level that makes effective screening problematic, to say the least.
Each year USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) the division of the DHS that adjudicates applications for various immigration benefits such as conferring lawful immigrant status and United States citizenship upon aliens, processes upwards of 6 million applications.
What is not generally known is that it only takes minutes to approve an application but may take days or weeks to deny an application.  Beleaguered adjudications officers are overwhelmed by applications and the only way to keep up with the work flow is to approve as many applications as possible.
Immigration fraud was identified by the 9/11 Commission as the key embedding tactic of terrorists.  That was the principle behind my article Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill.
Effective enforcement of our immigration laws are America’s first line of defense and last line of defense in this particularly perilous era.
At the conclusion of my prepared testimony before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on March 20, 2013 on the topic, “Building an Immigration System Worthy of American Values” I noted that one of the key problems with the U.S. government’s approach to the immigration crisis was that our government has prioritized the needs and demands of aliens over the citizens of the United States.
To quote from that final paragraph of my testimony:
Back when I was an INS special agent, I recall that Doris Meissner, who was at the time the Commissioner of the INS, said that the agency needed to be ‘‘customer oriented.’’ Unfortunately, while I agree about the need to be customer oriented, what Ms. Meissner and apparently too many politicians today seem to have forgotten is that the ‘‘customers’’ of the INS and of our Government in general are the citizens of the United States of America.
The misplaced loyalty of all too many of our political leaders to aliens over citizens, and to globalist special interest groups who see in America’s border impediments to their wealth, undermines America’s sovereignty and with it national security and public safety.
Putting the best interests of Americans first is in America’s best interest.


We spent eight months and did over a hundred interviews to try to bypass the usual rhetoric and get to the bottom of what really happened when undocumented workers showed up in one Alabama town. Pictured: Albertville “Miss Chick” 1954.

“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals  were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR





In 2013, California lawmakers passed legislation that allowed illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses if they can prove to the Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) their identity and state residency. The plan was one of the largest victories to date by the open borders lobby.… JOHN BINDER –

STAGNANT WAGES and the Dem Party’s obsession with open borders, amnesty and no damned legal need apply!


The Democratic Party used to be the party of blue collar America- supporting laws and policies that benefited that segment of the U.S. population.  Their leaders may still claim to be advocates for American working families, however their duplicitous actions that betray American workers and their families, while undermining national security and public safety, provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of their lies…. MICHAEL CUTLER …FRONTPAGE mag