Wednesday, October 2, 2019


Why Was "Chicago Man" Who Threw Woman On Train Tracks Not Still In Jail?
0000000000000weneedWhen CWB Chicago tweeted about this, Second City Bureaucrat tweeted back "lol the rap sheet."
The story is 11-year sentence for pushing woman onto Belmont Red Line tracks, CWBChicago, September 25, 2019.
The man who knocked a woman onto the Red Line tracks at Belmont in 2018 has been sentenced to eleven years in prison.
Melvin Doss pleaded guilty to attempted murder in a deal with prosecutors that resulted in the dismissal of several other felony counts.
After the incident, the victim told CWBChicago that she was on the northbound platform when she saw a man urinating nearby around 4 p.m. on June 1, 2018.
“I walked by him and said, ‘You can’t do that in a bathroom?’”
“He told me to f-ck off. I took a picture of him and he said, ‘I’m going to kill you, b-tch.’ I flipped him off and started walking away.”
Of course, any attempt to interfere in any way with black behavior is a violation of  the late Lawrence Auster's  Rules on How to Protect Yourself from Black Violence and White Political Correctness. If she had succeeded in having a cop arrest him, she would have seen herself on the internet as a Pee Police Patty, assuming she's white. (The story doesn't name her, because she's the victim, and it doesn't say what color she is.)
Doss punched the 48-year-old victim in the head, causing her to fall onto the L tracks below. Police said her head struck a rail and she broke her arm by trying to cushion the fall.
“I fell off the platform and landed headfirst on the tracks,” she said. “A bunch of people ran to the edge of the platform, motioning me to go over there so they could pull me up. I was really shaky and couldn’t get up on my own. A couple guys jumped down, helped me up and walked me to the platform.”
Here's what Second City Bureaucrat meant about the rap sheet:
Goss has a significant criminal history, according to state records, including four separate sentences for robberies. Most recently, he completed parole in October 2014 after receiving a 10-year sentence for aggravated robbery. His prison sentences include:
• Ten years for aggravated robbery in 2006
• Eight years for armed robbery-firearm in 2001
• 30 months for theft of more than $100,000 in 2000
• Three years for narcotics in 2000
• Four years for attempted robbery in 1997
• Four years for robbery in 1992
• Three years for receiving-possessing a stolen vehicle in 1992
The "lol" part about the rap sheet is that if you do the math, you get a number that says he was still supposed to be in jail when he committed each subsequent offence.
They just kept letting him out earlier. That's the Chicago Way. This time he's been sentenced to 11 years for an offence committed in 2018, and he may be out again before the end of Trump's second term.


Former Dallas police officer found guilty in off-duty shooting of neighbor

On Tuesday morning a Dallas jury found former police officer Amber Guyger guilty of murder for killing her unarmed neighbor Botham Jean in his apartment in September of last year.
After coming off duty on the night of September 6, 2018, Guyger entered Jean’s apartment thinking it was her own, and fired two shots at the 26-year-old accountant, who was sitting on his couch eating ice cream, hitting him directly in the chest. The door to the apartment was unlatched, allowing Guyger to enter without turning her key in the lock. She opened fire almost immediately after walking in, giving Jean just enough time to scream out in surprise as someone armed with a gun walked into his apartment.
Guyger claimed she feared for her life, as she believed the 26-year-old accountant to be a burglar and that she was in her own apartment, since the floor plan was identical to her own apartment located just one floor directly below Jean’s.
The jury was not convinced and found her guilty of murder rather than the less serious charge of manslaughter. The conviction marks the first time a Dallas police officer has been found guilty of murder in more than four decades. That conviction came in 1973 after an officer shot and killed a 12-year-old Hispanic boy in the backseat of his squad car while seeking to extract a confession to a burglary.
The sentencing phase of the trial will begin soon, with Guyger facing 99 years to life in prison.
Her defense team claimed she was justified in using deadly force because Botham showed a grave threat. Guyger, who was still in uniform despite being off duty, claimed she ordered Botham to put his hands up but when he came toward her she fired twice, hitting him in the chest. Neighbors dispute that she ever gave any commands, as the shots were fired mere seconds after entering her downstairs neighbor’s home.
Guyger also testified that when she found the door unlocked, she believed someone had broken in and was still inside waiting for her. The prosecution argued that because she did not immediately call backup and step away from the door upon discovering an “intruder,” she ignored obvious signs of a mistake and in doing so became the aggressor.
“I was scared he was going to kill me,” Guyger told the jury when she took the stand to testify on her own behalf. Witnesses contradicted her claims that she made verbal commands, and the medical examiner testified that Botham was struck in the chest from an upward position, as if he was getting up or even “in a cowering position” when he was shot, not moving toward Guyger as she claims.
The jury reportedly asked for clarification regarding the so-called castle doctrine which has been used in the past to justify controversial shootings, including the so called “stand your ground” law used to justify the 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin by vigilante George Zimmerman.
The prosecution called this defense “absurd” as Guyger was not in her own home but in fact entering someone else’s home. “Botham Jean was never a threat to Amber Guyger, never,” prosecutor Jason Hermus told jurors during closing arguments on Monday. “Justice needs to happen in this courtroom today.”
The jury was not moved by Guyger’s claim that it was an honest mistake, as there were several signs, including a unique doormat outside the apartment, that would indicate she had the wrong house. Whatever motivations drove Guyger to shoot, it was clear she was never in danger and had every opportunity to realize her mistake and leave Jean alone.
The shooting and its aftermath immediately caused outrage, with many claiming that race played a major factor in Guyger not immediately being arrested at the scene. She is white and Jean was black. Weeks of protests were organized by Jean’s family and other activists outside the Police Headquarters and City Hall, leading to many arrests.
While Guyger was initially placed on administrative leave with pay, typical of the whitewashes which follow most police shootings, she was fired less than three weeks later and indicted on murder charges by the end of November. It only took the jury five hours to reach its conclusion that Guyger was guilty of murder.
When the verdict was announced there was cheering in the courtroom, as Botham’s mother Allison Jean lifted up her hands in joy. Lawyers representing Jean’s family raised the names of other unarmed black people murdered by police in recent years claiming the verdict as a victory for black civil rights and justice movements. Attorney Benjamin Crump said, “For so many unarmed black and brown human beings across America, this verdict today is for them.”
While racism was not mentioned explicitly during the trial and Guyger repeatedly claimed the shooting was caused by fear and not hate, the case was seized upon early on by Black Lives Matter and others in an attempt to shift the focus to race and away from the class reality and class function of the police under capitalism. The job of these armed bodies of men and women is to defend the ruling elite, and they operate with virtual impunity, brutalizing and killing for that purpose.
Since the murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, five years ago sparked popular protests against police violence, more than 5,000 people have been killed by the police across the United States, an average of three every day. While African-Americans are still disproportionately victims of police violence, the largest number of those killed are white. What the victims share in common is that they are overwhelmingly working class and among the most vulnerable members of society.
Despite the astounding number of killings and popular opposition, convictions as in the case of Guyger are exceptionally rare. Most killer cops are never charged, and so few are convicted as to be statistical anomalies. An analysis by NBC News found that since 2005 just 35 officers have been convicted in connection with an on-duty killing, often on the lesser charge of manslaughter. This is a conviction rate of just 0.25 percent out of approximately 14,000 killings in that time period.


Why is the Swamp Keeper and his family of parasites up their ar$es??



JOHN DEAN: Not so far. This has been right by the letter of the special counsel’s charter. He’s released the document. What I’m looking for is relief and understanding that there’s no witting or unwitting likelihood that the President is an agent of Russia. That’s when I’ll feel comfortable, and no evidence even hints at that. We don’t have that yet. We’re still in the process of unfolding the report to look at it. And its, as I say, if [Attornery General William Barr] honors his word, we’ll know more soon.

“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and 

Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy 

approaching par with third-world hell-holes.  This 

is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---


PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES DONALD TRUMP: Pathological liar, swindler, con man, huckster, golfing cheat, charity foundation fraudster, tax evader, adulterer, porn whore chaser and servant of the Saudis dictators

VISUALIZE REVOLUTION!.... We know where they live!

“Underwood is a Democrat and is seeking millions of dollars in penalties. She wants Trump and his eldest children barred from running other charities.”

Opinion: Trump And Pompeo Have Enabled A Saudi Cover-Up Of The Khashoggi Killing

In the weeks following the death of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, President Trump spent more time praising Saudi Arabia as a very important ally than he did reacting to the killing.
Hasan Jamali/AP
Aaron David Miller (@aarondmiller2) is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former State Department Middle East analyst, adviser and negotiator in Republican and Democratic administrations. He is the author most recently of the End of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and Doesn't Want) Another Great President.
Richard Sokolsky, a nonresident senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, worked in the State Department for six different administrations and was a member of the secretary of state's Office of Policy Planning from 2005 to 2015.

It has been a year since Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi entered Saudi Arabia's Consulate in Istanbul where he was slain and dismembered. There is still no objective or comprehensive Saudi or American accounting of what occurred, let alone any real accountability.
The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's admission in a recent CBS interview that he takes "full responsibility," while denying foreknowledge of the killing or that he ordered it, sweeps under the rug the lengths to which the Saudis have gone to obscure the truth about their involvement in the killing and cover-up.

The administration's weak and feckless response to Khashoggi's killing was foreshadowed a year before it occurred. In May 2017, in an unusual break with precedent, Trump visited Saudi Arabia on his inaugural presidential trip; gave his son-in-law the authority to manage the MBS file, which he did with the utmost secrecy; and made it unmistakably clear that Saudi money, oil, arm purchases and support for the administration's anti-Iranian and pro-Israeli policies would elevate the U.S.-Saudi "special relationship" to a new level.
Predictably, therefore, the administration's reaction to Khashoggi's killing was shaped by a desire to manage the damage and preserve the relationship. In the weeks following Khashoggi's death, Trump spent more time praising Saudi Arabia as a very important ally, especially as a purchaser of U.S. weapons and goods, than he did reacting to the killing. Trump vowed to get to the bottom of the Khashoggi killing but focused more on defending the crown prince, saying this was another example of being "guilty before being proven innocent."
Those pledges to investigate and impose accountability would continue to remain hollow. Over the past year, Trump and Pompeo have neither criticized nor repudiated Saudi actions that have harmed American interests in the Middle East. Two months after Khashoggi's death, the administration, in what Pompeo described as an "initial step," imposed sanctions on 17 Saudi individuals implicated in the killing. But no others have been forthcoming, and the visa restrictions that were imposed are meaningless because none of the sanctioned Saudis would be foolish enough to seek entry into the United States.
What's more, the administration virtually ignored a congressional resolution imposing sanctions on the Saudis for human rights abuses and vetoed another bipartisan resolution that would have ended U.S. military assistance to Saudi Arabia's inhumane military campaign in Yemen.
The Saudis opened a trial in January of 11 men implicated in the killing, but the proceedings have been slow and secretive, leading the United Nations' top human rights expert to declare that "the trial underway in Saudi Arabia will not deliver credible accountability." Despite accusations that the crown prince's key adviser Saud al-Qahtani was involved in the killing, he's still advising MBS, has not stood trial and will likely escape punishment. A year later, there are still no reports of convictions or serious punishment.
Legitimizing Mohammed bin Salman
The Trump administration has not only given the crown prince a pass on the Khashoggi killing, but it has also worked assiduously to remove his pariah status and rehabilitate his global image. Barely two months after the 2018 slaying, Trump was exchanging pleasantries with the crown prince at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires and holding out prospects of spending more time with him. Then this past June, at the G-20 in Osaka, Japan, Trump sang his praises while dodging questions about the killing. "It's an honor to be with the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, a friend of mine, a man who has really done things in the last five years in terms of opening up Saudi Arabia," Trump said.
And you can bet that when Saudi Arabia hosts the G-20, scheduled to be held in its capital of Riyadh in November 2020, the Trump administration will be smiling as its rehab project takes another step in its desired direction.
What the U.S. should have done
Trump has failed to impose any serious costs or constraints on Saudi Arabia for the killing of a U.S. newspaper columnist who resided in Virginia or for the kingdom's aggressive policies, from Yemen to Qatar. In the wake of the Khashoggi killing, the administration should have made it unmistakably clear, both publicly and privately, that it expected a comprehensive and credible accounting and investigation. It should have suspended high-level contacts and arms sales with the kingdom for a period of time. And to make the point, the administration should have supported at least one congressional resolution taking the Saudis to task, in addition to triggering the Magnitsky Act, which would have required a U.S. investigation; a report to Congress; and sanctions if warranted.
Back to business as usual
The dark stain of the crown prince's apparent involvement in Khashoggi's death will not fade easily. But for Trump and Pompeo, it pales before the great expectations they still maintain for the kingdom to confront and contain their common enemy, Iran, as well as support the White House's plan for Middle East peace, defeat jihadists in the region and keep the oil spigot open.
Most of these goals are illusory. Saudi Arabia is a weak, fearful and unreliable ally. The kingdom has introduced significant social and cultural reforms but has imposed new levels of repression and authoritarianism. Its reckless policies toward Yemen and Qatar have expanded, not contracted, opportunities for Iran, while the Saudi military has demonstrated that, even after spending billions to buy America's most sophisticated weapons, it still can't defend itself without American help.
Meanwhile, recent attacks on critical Saudi oil facilities that the U.S. blames on Iran have helped rally more American and international support for the kingdom.
When it comes to the U.S.-Saudi relationship and the kingdom's callous reaction to Khashoggi's killing, the president and his secretary of state have been derelict in their duty: They have not only failed to advance American strategic interests but also undermined America's values in the process.

One year after Khashoggi murder, US CEOs flock to Saudi Arabia

Today marks one year since the savage assassination and dismemberment of dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi at Saudi Arabia’s consulate in Istanbul.
The crime, characterized by its extreme brutality and utter brazenness, has yet to be fully investigated, while its principal authors, first and foremost Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, have gone unpunished.
Bin Salman used an interview with the CBS news program “60 Minutes” broadcast on Sunday as a vehicle for whitewashing his culpability in the assassination. He is anxious to clean up the Saudi monarchy’s sordid image as Riyadh prepares to welcome a flock of US banking and corporate CEOs to an event dubbed “Davos in the Desert” scheduled in a few weeks.
The crown prince denied that he had ordered the killing, but added, “I take full responsibility as a leader in Saudi Arabia, especially since it was committed by individuals working for the Saudi government.” He went on to dismiss the suggestion that the assassination had hurt Riyadh’s relations with Washington, insisting: “The relationship is much larger than that.”
Indeed, the relationship is “much larger.” Saudi Arabia has served as a historic lynchpin of reaction and US imperialist domination in the Arab world, under both Democratic and Republican administrations alike, for three-quarters of a century. It now functions as an ally of both the US and Israel in an anti-Iranian axis that is pushing the region toward a catastrophic war. It is also far and away the biggest purchaser of US arms, with Trump using his first trip abroad to fly to the kingdom and sign a weapons deal touted as worth $110 billion.
This special relationship is between Washington and what is unquestionably one of the most reactionary regimes on the face of the planet. An absolute monarchy based on the most reactionary strain of Islam, Wahhabism, the Saudi regime labels its critics as “terrorists” and punishes them with beheading. More than 130 such barbaric executions have taken place this year alone, including of children arrested for the “crimes” of supporting protests and posting material critical of the regime on social media. In some cases, the victims’ corpses have been crucified and their heads exhibited on pikes to intimidate the population.
Washington’s indifference to this savage repression—as well as its active support for the near genocidal four-year-old war in Yemen, whose death toll is expected to reach 233,000 by the end of this year, according to the UN—gives the lie to all of US imperialism’s attempts to promote its predatory interests under the filthy banner of “human rights.” It also explains why bin Salman believed he could act with impunity in murdering Khashoggi.
Thus far, no one has been punished for the killing of the journalist, a former insider who edited pro-regime newspapers and served at one point as an aide to the long-time Saudi intelligence chief and former ambassador to the US, Prince Turki bin Faisal. Khashoggi fled the kingdom in the midst of a so-called “anti-corruption” crackdown in 2017 in which prominent Saudi figures were abducted, imprisoned and tortured in a hotel and shaken down for money. Obtaining residence in the US, he was offered a column in the Washington Post to criticize bin Salman, largely from the standpoint of the interests of rival factions within the monarchy.
As is well known, Khashoggi was murdered after going into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to obtain divorce papers he needed to marry a Turkish woman. With the appointment set up well in advance, he was met by a 15-member death squad comprised of Saudi air force officers, intelligence operatives, leading members of the monarchy’s elite personal guard of the Saudi monarchy and a forensics expert, who came equipped with a bone saw.
In the run-up to the first anniversary of the assassination, two investigators who listened to tapes recorded on listening devices covertly placed in the consulate by Turkish intelligence have provided hideous new details about the crime.
Helena Kennedy, a British lawyer who participated in the UN investigation into the killing, recounted to the BBC’s “Panorama” news program broadcast Monday night that the assassins referred jokingly to Khashoggi as the “sacrificial animal.”
The Turkish bugs also recorded the Saudi forensics expert telling his cohorts, “I often play music when I’m cutting cadavers. Sometimes I have a coffee and a cigar at hand.”
He went on to complain: “It is the first time in my life that I’ve had to cut pieces on the ground—even if you are a butcher and want to cut, he hangs the animal up to do it.”
Kennedy also said that the tapes made clear that the man directing the operation was Maher Abdulaziz Mutreb, one of the most prominent members of bin Salman’s security detail.
The UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings who investigated the Khashoggi case, Agnes Callamard, states that the journalist, in terror, asked his abductors whether they were going to give him an injection, to which they say “yes.”
“The sound heard after that point indicates that he is being suffocated, probably with a plastic bag over his head,” she recounts. “His mouth was also closed—violently—maybe with a hand or something else.”
Afterwards, Kennedy states, the bugs recorded someone saying: “He’s a dog, put this on his head, wrap it, wrap it.” She added, “One can only assume that they had removed his head.”
No one has been punished for this grisly murder, and the Saudi authorities have never even revealed the fate of Khashoggi’s remains.
Only 11 of the 15 death squad members have been criminally charged in Saudi Arabia. Their protracted trial is being held in secret. Among those not charged is Said al-Qahtani, formerly bin Salman’s most influential adviser. The CIA has identified him as the ringleader in the killing, one of many carried out under his direction. It also established that he exchanged 11 messages with bin Salman immediately before and after the murder. Turkish intelligence has reported that al-Qahtani made a Skype call to the Istanbul consulate in order to insult Khashoggi and order his death squad to “bring me the head of the dog.”
The horrific character of this crime notwithstanding, one year after Khashoggi’s assassination, US banks and big business are prepared to put it behind them and grasp the bloody hand of bin Salman.
At least 40 US executives are preparing to attend the annual Future Investment Initiative (FII) conference, dubbed “Davos in the Desert,” at the end of this month. Many of them bailed out of last year’s event, held just weeks after Khashoggi’s killing, sending subordinates to represent them in order to avoid being seen as openly endorsing the murderous methods of the Saudi monarchy.
Casting such qualms aside this year, senior executives from Wall Street’s top financial firms—Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and BlackRock—are all listed as coming, according to a report Monday in the Washington Post .
BlackRock’s CEO Larry Fink told the Post that he believed “corporate engagement and public dialogue can help” the Saudi regime “evolve.”
Who does he think he is kidding? The only “evolution” that BlackRock is interested in is that of Saudi Arabia’s state-owned oil company, ARAMCO, into a privatized and publicly traded corporation out of which Wall Street can extract hefty new profits. The monarchy has indicated that an initial public offering (IPO) covering as much as 5 percent of the company could come in the next several months.
Also included on the list of those attending is Citigroup’s CEO Michael Corbat and JPMorgan’s head of global banking, Carlos Hernandez.
Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, is expected to lead a delegation of US officials.
In the immediate aftermath of the brutal murder of Khashoggi one year ago, the World Socialist Web Site warned that the assassination was: “emblematic of a sinister shift in world politics, in which such heinous crimes are becoming more and more common and accepted. It recalls the conditions that existed in the darkest days of the 1930s, when fascist and Stalinist death squads hunted down and murdered socialists and other opponents of Hitler and Stalin throughout Europe.”
The list of attendees at this year’s “Davos in the Desert” expresses not only the profit grubbing of America’s parasitic financial oligarchy, but also their acceptance and approval of such methods in dealing with opponents of existing governments and the capitalist order they defend. If Khashoggi’s high-level connections failed to protect him, clearly the threat to working class and socialist opponents of capitalism is all the greater.


Americans Spent More on Taxes in 2018 Than on Food, Clothing and Health Care Combined

Listen to the Article!

Terence P. Jeffrey
By Terence P. Jeffrey | October 2, 2019 | 5:06 AM EDT

A grocery shopper in Los Angeles on July 24, 2019. (Photo by Mark RALSTON/AFP/Getty Images)
Americans on average spent more on taxes in 2018 than they did on the basic necessities of food, clothing and health care combined, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey.
The survey's recently published Table R-1 for 2018 lists the average "detailed expenditures" of what the BLS calls "consumer units."
"Consumer units," says BLS, "include families, single persons living alone or sharing a household with others but who are financially independent, or two or more persons living together who share major expenses."
In 2018, according to Table R-1, American consumer units spent an average of $9,031.93 on federal income taxes; $5,023.73 on Social Security taxes (which the table calls "deductions"); $2,284.62 on state and local income taxes; $2,199.80 on property taxes; and $77.85 on what BLS calls "other taxes."
The combined payments the average American consumer unit made for these five categories of taxes was $18,617.93.
At the same time the average American consumer unit was paying these taxes, it was spending $7,923.19 on food; $4,968.44 on health care; and $1,866.48 on "apparel and services."
These combined expenditures equaled $14,758.11.
So, the $14,758.11 that the average American consumer unit paid for food, clothing and health care was $3,859.82 less than the $18,617.93 it paid in federal, state and local income taxes, property taxes, Social Security taxes and "other taxes."
I asked the BLS to confirm these numbers, which it did while noting that the "Pensions and Social Security" section of its Table R-1 included four other types of payments (that many people are not required to make or that do not go to the government) in addition to the average of $5,023.73 in Social Security taxes that 77.21% of respondents reported paying.
"You asked us to verify the amounts for the total taxes and expenditures on food, apparel/services, and healthcare," said BLS. "Based on table R-1 for 2018, your definition for food, apparel, and healthcare matches the BLS definition and the total dollars. Your dollar amounts for federal, state, and local income taxes and for property taxes are correct, as is the amount for Social Security deductions. For the combined pension amount [$6,830.71] that we publish however, in addition to the $5,023.73 for Social Security, there is an additional amount for government retirement deductions [$135.11], railroad retirement deductions [$2.85], private pension deductions [$608.22], and non-payroll deposits for pensions [$1,060.79]."
That Americans are forced to pay more for government than they pay for food, clothing and health care combined has become an enduring fact of life.
A review of the BLS Table R-1s for the last six years on record shows that in every one of those years, the average American consumer unit paid more in taxes than it paid for food, clothing and health care combined.
In 2013, the average American consumer unit paid a combined $13,327.22 for the same five categories of taxes cited above for 2018, while paying a combined $11,836.80 for food, clothing and health care.
In 2014, the average American consumer unit paid $14,664.13 for those same taxes and $12,834.34 for those same necessities.
In 2015, it was $15,548.36 versus $13,210.83. In 2016, it was $17,153.30 versus $13,617.60. And, in 2017, it was $16,750.20 versus $14,489.54.
Even when all the numbers for the last six years are converted into constant December 2018 dollars (using the BLS inflation calculator), the largest annual margin between the amount paid in taxes and the amount paid for food, clothing and health care was last year's $3,859.82.
The margin was so great last year that you can add the $3,225.55 Table R-1 says the average consumer unit paid for entertainment to the $14,758.11 it paid for food, clothing and health care, and the combined $17,983.66 is still less than the $18,617.93 it paid for the five categories of taxes.
You get a similar result if you add the combined $2,903.50 that the average consumer unit paid in 2018 for electricity ($1,496.14) and telephone services ($1,407.36).
Yes, Americans on average paid more in taxes last year than they paid for food, clothing, health care, electricity and telephone services combined.
Was the government you got worth it?
(Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of







Los Angeles County Pays Over a Billion in Welfare to Illegal Aliens Over Two Years


In 2015 and 2016, Los Angeles County paid nearly $1.3 billion in welfare funds to illegal aliens and their families. That figure amounts to 25 percent of the total spent on the county’s entire needy population, according to Fox News.
The state of California is home to more illegal aliens than any other state in the country. Approximately one in five illegal aliens lives in California, Pew reported.
Approximately a quarter of California’s 4 million illegal immigrants reside in Los Angeles County. The county allows illegal immigrant parents with children born in the United States to seek welfare and food stamp benefits.
The welfare benefits data acquired by Fox News comes from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services and shows welfare and food stamp costs for the county’s entire population were $3.1 billion in 2015, $2.9 billion in 2016.
The data also shows that during the first five months of 2017, more than 60,000 families received a total of $181 million.
Over 58,000 families received a total of $602 million in benefits in 2015 and more than 64,000 families received a total of $675 million in 2016.
Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation senior fellow who studies poverty and illegal immigration, told Fox the costs represent “the tip of the iceberg.”
“They get $3 in benefits for every $1 they spend,” Rector said. It can cost the government a total of $24,000 per year per family to pay for things like education, police, fire, medical, and subsidized housing.
In February of 2019, the Los Angeles city council signed a resolution making it a sanctuary city. The resolution did not provide any new legal protections to their immigrants, but instead solidified existing policies.
In October 2017, former California governor Jerry Brown signed SB 54 into law. This bill made California, in Brown’s own words, a “sanctuary state.” The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the State of California over the law. A federal judge dismissed that suit in July. SB 54 took effect on Jan. 1, 2018.
According to Center for Immigration Studies, “The new law does many things: It forbids all localities from cooperating with ICE detainer notices, it bars any law enforcement officer from participating in the popular 287(g) program, and it prevents state and local police from inquiring about individuals’ immigration status.”
Some counties in California have protested its implementation and joined the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state.
California’s campaign to provide public services to illegal immigrants did not end with the exit of Jerry Brown. His successor, Gavin Newsom, is just as focused as Brown in funding programs for illegal residents at the expense of California taxpayers.
California’s budget earmarks millions of dollars annually to the One California program, which provides free legal assistance to all aliens, including those facing deportation, and makes California’s public universities easier for illegal-alien students to attend.
According to the Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers 2017 report, for the estimated 12.5 million illegal immigrants living in the country, the resulting cost is a $116 billion burden on the national economy and taxpayers each year, after deducting the $19 billion in taxes paid by some of those illegal immigrants.

New data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that more than 22 million non-citizens now live in the United States.