The Democrat Party has had decades to fulfill its promises to black Americans, but all it’s delivered is crime-ridden cities bereft of economic opportunity. It’s time to shake things up.
In recent weeks, Americans have watched radical leftist anarchists and Antifa thugs engage in extreme violence and murder that will haunt many people for the rest of their lives.
Fifteen innocent civilians and two police officers were shot and killed, hundreds of civilians were savagely and brutally beaten, and more than 700 police officers were injured nationwide. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of property was destroyed as businesses and communities in more than 42 states were devastated by arson, looting, and mayhem that activists quickly followed with a call to defund the police.
The supposed justification for the rioting was the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, but in reality the rioters were just exploiting that cause for their own purposes.
Lost in all the savagery was the real life and memory of George Floyd.
With each passing day, both of us asked ourselves the same question: where are the governors and mayors of these cities who took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States and keep residents safe from harm? Instead of upholding law and order — also known as doing their jobs — they turned a blind eye to the violence while praising the demonstrations that the radicals were using as cover.
Is there truly systemic racism and brutality in our police departments? Are cops killing blacks at disproportionately higher rates than whites? One would have to think so based on the national outrage and calls for change by local, state, and federal political leaders and cultural elites. Surely, the 250 U.S. Fortune 100 corporations that have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter and other organizations to stop racial injustices must have real evidence of such widespread racial injustice? You would think so, but they don’t.
For clarity, we took a look at the Washington Post database that documents suspects shot and killed by the police. The database indicates that 1,003 people were shot and killed by the police in 2019. This occurred in a country of 328 million people, in a year during which police had approximately 30 million contacts with members of the public, and made approximately 10 million arrests — 600,000 of which were for violent crimes.
Of the 1,003 people killed by police last year, 405 were white, 250 were black, 163 were Hispanic, and 185 were recorded as other/unknown ethnicity. Only 55 of those 1,003 individuals were unarmed — 25 white suspects, 14 black suspects, 11 Hispanic suspects, and five others.
In another category that often gets a lot of attention from activist groups screaming about racial injustice, 29 of those killed by police in 2019 possessed a toy gun — 14 of them were white, 6 were black, 4 were Hispanic, and 5 were of unknown ethnicity.
To be clear, whether they were armed, or unarmed, or in possession of a toy that looked like a real weapon, in every single category, blacks were not killed more often than whites. Given the numbers — 14 unarmed blacks killed out of 10 million arrests, which equates to a rate of 0.00014 percent — this is NOT evidence of systemic racism.
The real systemic and deadly reality is that black men and women are being slaughtered in cities and communities of color around the country in numbers that can only compare to war zones in Iraq or Syria — and every single one of those cities has been run by Democrats, in some cases for as long as 40 years.
Recently in Chicago, 18 people were shot and killed within 24 hours, the deadliest day in the last 60 years. Another 21 people were shot dead in St. Louis over a recent weekend, and 7 people were shot and killed in Brooklyn in a matter of 10 minutes.
Between 2015 and 2018, Baltimore averaged 330 homicides per year in a city of 550,000. In 2019, there were 348 murders, and 2020 is already on pace to be equally deadly.
Many of the mayors and police chiefs in those cities are black, and their officers are representative of the communities they serve. However, the second that a black man dies in police custody, left-leaning activists and politicians begin calling for sweeping reforms to combat the bogeyman of racial inequality, even when they know perfectly well that the death does not reflect a systemic problem. If black lives truly mattered to liberals, they would be marching in Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, or any of the other cities with unacceptably high rates of violent crime and murder.
There are many pundits and politicians ignoring the glaring reality of mass black murders, because they are convinced it’s never going to change. However, we would urge them to look at the renaissance that took place in New York City under mayor Rudolph Giuliani, which taught us many lessons — the most important of which was that no one wants to go to school or live or work or visit a place where they do not feel safe.
When Giuliani took over New York City in 1994, it was the murder capital of the world. The streets were infested with filth and garbage, mothers put their babies to bed in bathtubs to protect them from random gunfire, and decent people lived in more or less constant fear.
Giuliani’s initial focus was not jobs, schools, or social welfare programs. His primary focus was crime reduction, but for every percentage point we reduced violent crime and murder in the city, we saw corresponding increases in economic development, real estate values, and tourism, along with encouraging reductions in the welfare rolls.
At the end of Giuliani’s eight years in office, we achieved a 63 percent reduction in violent crime and a 70 percent reduction in murder. In some of the most crime-infested areas of the city — many of which were communities of color — the murder rate dropped by close to 80 percent. Thousands of black lives were saved during those years, and that trend continued when Michael Bloomberg was mayor because Bloomberg maintained many of the most effective policies we had put in place.
So the question today is, why are so many Democrat-run cities still facing rampant poverty, violent crime, and murder? Is it intentional, or is it incompetence? Either way, young black men and women are being slaughtered and nobody seems to be doing anything about it — nobody even seems to care.
America’s mayors and governors are coddling criminals, villainizing cops, and victimizing the thugs — and in the meantime, black lives are being lost.
President Trump issued an executive order implementing common-sense policing reforms, and the Republican-controlled Senate is drafting legislation to follow suit. The sad reality, however, is that until mayors and governors call out the thugs who are assaulting and attacking police officers, resisting arrest or interfering with an arrest, and committing acts of wanton violence and vandalism, the underlying problems in our cities will continue unabated. If the Democrats get their way and diminish or defund the police, then the ones who suffer most will be those who live in communities of color where the violent crime and murder rates are already out of control.
The Democratic Party has destroyed communities of color all over the country, and it’s long past time for new leadership. It’s time to give Republicans a chance — after all, what do we have to lose?
Bernard Kerik is the former police commissioner of New York City who was in command of the NYPD on September 11, 2001, and led the city’s response, rescue, recovery, and investigative efforts.
Ken Blackwell served as the mayor of Cincinnati, Ohio, the Ohio State Treasurer, the Ohio Secretary of State, and the ambassador to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. He currently serves on the board of directors for Club for Growth and National Taxpayers Union.
Biden
and the Immigration Trap
'Uncle
Joe' Agonistes
On Tuesday, the Washington Post ran an article detailing the struggles confronting
the campaign of presumptive Democratic nominee for president Joe Biden with
respect to immigration. There are a few things that the article leaves out, but
it is notable (and somewhat shocking) for what it contains. What it ultimately
shows is that the former vice president is boxed into an immigration trap.
Specifically, the article details
the competing forces that are pulling "Uncle Joe" on immigration as
he seeks to wrest the White House from Donald Trump (whose immigration stance,
the paper admits, helped propel him to the presidency in 2016).
On the one side is the
presumptive candidate's desire to capture the votes of white blue-collar voters
in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all won by Trump in the last
election), while on the other is his need to turn out the Hispanic vote,
particularly in Florida and Arizona. The article states that Latino voters
"are expected to become the country's largest nonwhite voting bloc this
fall."
Although the Post alludes to
Biden's immigration proposals (which
are somewhat out there, as I have described here , here , and here ), and discusses his more outré ideas, such as suspending
deportations for his first 100 days in office and then deporting only
felons (which would essentially nullify much of the Immigration and Nationality
Act), the Post simultaneously fails to note that those proposals would likely
not resound with much of the voting populace, while at the same time contending
that these policies don't go far enough for "significant segments of his
own party".
Those "segments" are,
the paper contends, clamoring for Biden to commit to "removing criminal
penalties for those who cross the border illegally, removing barriers from the
border [,and] abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement." There is
likely a reason that Biden does not want to talk about those ideas on the
campaign trail.
Polls don't show support for Biden positions
Polling from August 2018 — when the "Abolish ICE" fever was likely cresting — showed only 24 percent of voters
supported the idea, with Democrats, Republicans, and independents staking out
that position about equally. Some 40 percent disagreed, while 34 percent had no
opinion.
Not to say that Democrats wildly
supported the agency — 57 percent of Democrats had an unfavorable view of ICE,
with an equal percentage of Republicans in favor of it, and 46 percent of
independents took no view. Many of those opposed to abolition but who also
don't like ICE likely were concerned about the law of unintended consequences,
and by May 2019 Buzzfeed News reported: "'Abolish ICE' Was The Call Of
Last Summer. 2020 Democrats Have Moved On" .
Further, in July 2019, The Hill noted that a poll found "a plurality of voters,
41 percent, thought those crossing the border illegally should face criminal
punishment, while 32 percent said it should just warrant a fine." With
respect to independents, 36 percent favored criminal penalties, while "33
percent ... think it should be treated as a misdemeanor, with just a fine as
punishment."
I note that this response shows a
certain misapprehension of the current state of the law ( initial illegal entry is already a misdemeanor, with a
fine as an optional but rarely, if ever, imposed punishment, and most of those
prosecuted are sentenced merely to time served while awaiting prosecution),
suggesting that even those voters — if they knew the facts — would actually
want stricter punishment than most aliens who have entered illegally already
receive. No wonder the former vice president does not want to discuss the
issue, let alone make it a key point for his campaign.
On barriers at the border, the
polling is a bit more mixed. In February 2019, Gallup reported that six in 10 Americans opposed a border
wall, but that poll was taken directly after a bruising government shutdown
that largely focused on the issue. I will note that last Monday, KXAN (the NBC affiliate in Austin, Texas) released a
poll showing that excitement for Donald Trump in Texas swamped enthusiasm for
Biden in the Lone Star State. Most significantly:
When broken down by party, 19.5% of Democrats said they
were extremely excited about Biden and 22.6 said they were "not that
excited." Meanwhile, 49.4% of Republicans said they were "extremely
excited" about supporting Trump and 9.5% reported they were not that
excited about him.
Texas and Arizona are currently the primary sites for new border wall
construction, and if Texans were that opposed to what is and has been the
president's key immigration proposal, it would likely be reflected in their
lack of enthusiasm. It does not seem to have moved the needle, however, or if
it did, it is in Trump's favor.
I will note that I spoke on the
issue in a debate in February before a largely liberal crowd, and opposition to
the wall was an applause point (from an audience that all but defined the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" on the issue), but a lot has changed in three
months. The Post itself reported on April 28 that 65 percent of Americans were in favor of a
temporary suspension in immigration during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic, with
34 percent opposed.
Polling found that 83 percent of
Republicans and 67 percent of independents were in favor of temporary
restrictions, and Democrats were split 49-49 on the issue. Significantly, 67
percent of whites, 61 percent of "nonwhites" (presumably including
Latinos), and a majority of 18- to 29-year-olds were in favor. Now again,
"temporary suspensions on immigration" and "border wall
construction" are two different things, but an influx of illegal entrants
during the (traditional) illegal travel season of
April to December while lockdowns are still in place could tie the two issues
in voters' minds, and gubernatorial inter-state travel
restrictions may have done so
already.
And voters stuck at home as a
result of Wuhan coronavirus restrictions could be only temporarily less
inclined to support the entry of aliens, legal or otherwise. That said,
the transit of the illness from China could give them pause to take a slightly more
charitable view toward Donald Trump's opposition to open borders.
Sound tough on China, or not?
Lest you think I am casting
aspersions with respect to the last point (I am not, and consider anyone who
blames any American — citizen or immigrant — for the virus to be an idiot), I
am really just channeling the former vice president. The Post article on Biden notes: "Some were alarmed when the
Biden campaign began airing an ad in battleground states that accused Trump of
having 'rolled over for the Chinese' amid the pandemic and 'let in 40,000
travelers from China.'" That is an apt description of the response to that
ad on the part of progressives.
Joe Biden's effort to outflank
President Donald Trump on China is leading to blowback from within his own
political base.
Some worry the rhetoric in a
new Biden campaign ad could spur anti-Asian bias already on the rise because of
the coronavirus pandemic. Others argue that Biden's effort to sound tougher on
China than Trump could backfire diplomatically in the long run.
...
"I acknowledge and understand the need and desire to
defeat and beat Trump, however, my question is 'Who is the Biden campaign
willing to sacrifice along that way?'" said Timmy Lu, executive director
of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Civic Empowerment.
So why did Biden release the ad?
Because he was in a box over his earlier statements criticizing the president
for his response to the Wuhan coronavirus the day that the White House
announced restrictions on travel from the People's Republic of China.
Specifically, Biden , campaigning in Iowa, stated: "This is no time for
Donald Trump's record of hysteria and xenophobia — hysterical xenophobia — and
fearmongering to lead the way instead of science." (Curiously, the YouTube link to the video of those comments states: "Video
unavailable, This video has been removed by the uploader." Hmmm.)
The Post notes that Biden has sought insight into handling
the issue of immigration as a candidate from, among others, Sen. Robert Casey
(D-Pa.). Casey fought off Republican Lou Barletta — an immigration hawk — in a
2018 challenge for Casey's senate seat, and:
He urged Biden to emphasize
the economic benefits of immigration while pledging to secure the southern
border to keep drugs and criminals out.
"You have to make it very
clear that you stand for border security — and not just that you stand for it,
but that you voted for it," Casey said, citing past measures that have won
Democratic backing.
But, at the same time, he said most voters want an
immigration system that is humane and fair. The separation of families at the
border was a wake-up call for some voters, Casey said.
I am not sure how that border
security advice squares with Biden's promise that
"the only deportations that will take place" under his administration
"are commissions of felonies in the United States of America"
(meaning that Mexican cartel members who enter illegally will not be deported,
for example), but for some reason the Post fails to mention the discrepancy.
That said, such advice is easier
given to the former vice president than it will be swallowed by the American
people, because of Biden's record.
I would posit initially that
recommendations like Casey's are likely the reason that Biden's immigration proposals begin:
It is a moral failing and a national shame when a father
and his baby daughter drown seeking our shores. When children are locked away
in overcrowded detention centers and the government seeks to keep them there
indefinitely. When our government argues in court against giving those children
toothbrushes and soap. When President Trump uses family separation as a weapon
against desperate mothers, fathers, and children seeking safety and a better
life.
The Obama-Biden administration's record
Again,
easily said. It will, however, be very difficult for Biden to distance himself
from some very similar policies enacted under the "Obama-Biden
administration".
There
is likely a reason why Biden does not (directly) fall back on the "kids in
cages" trope that has become a standard for tendentious discussions
of immigration by political
hacks .
As I have previously noted:
Snopes
(not exactly a Trump-friendly outlet) examined the following fact: "The
Obama administration, not the Trump administration, built the cages that hold
many immigrant children at the U.S.-Mexico border." They deemed that
statement "true", explaining:
Pictures of children
behind chain-link fencing were captured at a site in McAllen, Texas, that had
been converted from a warehouse to an immigrant-detention facility in 2014.
Social media users who defended Trump's immigration policies also shared a 2014
photograph of Obama's Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, touring a
facility in Nogales, Arizona, in 2014, in which the fencing could be seen
surrounding migrants there as well. That picture was taken during a spike in
the number of unaccompanied children fleeing violence in Central American
countries.
That
said, there is a direct line from "children ... locked away in overcrowded
detention centers and the government [that] seeks to keep them there
indefinitely", who cannot access "toothbrushes and soap" and the
decisions of the previous administration to erect fencing in Border Patrol
processing centers to protect unaccompanied alien children (UACs). One that
Biden would likely prefer to be forgotten.
And
a direct line to the Obama-Biden administration's 2014 "blanket policy to
detain all female-headed families, including children, in secure, unlicensed
facilities for the duration of the proceedings that determine whether they are
entitled to remain in the United States," which prompted Judge
Dolly Gee of
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to find President
Obama's Department of Homeland Security in breach of the Flores settlement
agreement in July 2015.
Plus,
as I have previously
noted ad
nauseam , the fact that UACs were stuck in the conditions Biden describes
had everything to do with Congress's (and especially congressional Democrats')
failure to provide funding Trump and his acting Homeland Security secretary had
sought for more than a month, and nothing to do with a volitional decision by
the administration to keep them there.
These
facts may have been elided by a compliant press (the Post did not mention
them at all in its Biden immigration piece), but I doubt that they will escape
notice during a presidential campaign when the president and independent
interest groups can throw money at ads highlighting them.
Pandering to Latino voters
Then,
there is the pandering by Biden and his surrogates themselves. Much of Biden's
outreach to Latino voters appears to focus on immigration, but is that really
the most important issue to those voters?
In
a June 2019 survey by Unidos
US ,
"jobs and the economy" was the most important issue an ideal
candidate would address (23 percent) for 1,854 eligible Latino voters in
Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, and Texas, followed by
"healthcare" (17 percent) and then "immigration" (15
percent). "Gun violence" (8 percent) and "climate change"
(7 percent) together equaled that total.
BLOG:
OBAMA FUNDED AND OPERATED LA RAZA 'The Race" NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOSUS
FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. IT IS A MEX FASCIST ANTI-AMERICAN POLITICAL MOVEMENT FOR
SURRENDER OF AMERICA TO MEXICO.
Unidos
US ,
for those who are not familiar, is the current incarnation of the "National
Council of La Raza", which bills itself as "the nation's largest
Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization". Hardly a MAGA front
group.
A recent Latino
Decisions poll reveals a clear enthusiasm gap among Latinos for both Biden and
the 2020 election itself, with only 49 percent of registered voters currently
committed to choosing Biden over Trump, and just six out of 10 planning to go
to the polls in November.
That
article focuses on Biden's initial reluctance to distance himself from what the
outlet deems "the controversial immigration policy of the first two years
of the Obama administration" (perhaps too good a sales job by a president
whose rhetoric on removals did not match his actions), and Biden's inability to
present himself to Hispanic voters due to the current pandemic.
Speaking
of which, Slate notes that: "According to the Latino Decisions poll,
almost half of all respondents approve of Trump's handling of the coronavirus
crisis, with 47 percent saying Trump was delivering 'clear and helpful'
information about the pandemic." Again, showing that
"immigration" is not the only concern of Hispanic voters.
Back
to the pandering, however. The Post notes that
Biden's "wife Jill, who is learning Spanish while stuck at home by the
pandemic, has begun meeting weekly with small groups of Latino members of
Congress, taking notes on a range of issues to share with her husband" (I
don't have the heart to tell her they speak English), and the article is
accompanied by a photo of Biden "at a campaign stop at King Taco in Los
Angeles, with Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti".
The
paper also reports that "Biden campaign officials have promised to
significantly increase outreach to Latinos and further diversify the staff now
that they have raised more money, although," the Post notes, "they
declined to provide target numbers."
I
suppose that a Spanish-speaking spouse, an ethnically diverse staff, and a
documented hankering for regional cuisine may win Biden some votes, but the
fact is he is stuck in an immigration box.
If
he ties himself to the "Obama-Biden" administration on the issue, it
appears that he will alienate both immigration activists and those who favor
the Trump administration's reversal of those policies. But, if he panders to those
activists, he will likely turn off many of the voters in swing states who
supported Trump in 2016 (and especially those who were swayed by the
now-president's promises of border security and immigration limitations).
A January
article in
the Post contained a list of "Bidenisms", folksy aphorisms that the
candidate uses on the stump. One is: "My dad had an expression ... 'Joey,
don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative.''' Most voters
already know that the president has his flaws and imperfections, but once
voters get to know Biden's immigration record and his proposals, they may pull
the level for Trump as the better alternative.
Pollak:
Barack Obama Himself Was the Threat to the Rule of Law
10 May 20203860
2:47
Former President Barack Obama warned Friday that the “rule of
law is at risk” because former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn will no
longer be prosecuted.
Obama’s remarks, leaked from a
private conference call with members of something called the “Obama Alumni
Association,” show a breathtaking lack of self-awareness.
Obama himself was the threat to the rule of
law, both during his presidency and as it ended.
As Breitbart News has
previously noted , Obama routinely violated the Constitution’s separation of
powers, challenging America’s constitutional foundation in a way no president
before him had done in peacetime.
“I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a
phone,” Obama said ,
threatening to use — and abuse — his executive power — rather than allow the
constitutional process of legislation to proceed.
Here are just a few of Obama’s
more egregious violations:
Refusing to submit the Iran deal to the
Senate for ratification
Declaring the Senate in recess when it
was not ( struck down , later, in a 9-0 Supreme
Court decision)
Defying the courts when
told to renew oil and gas activity in the Gulf of Mexico, or to stop giving amnesty to illegal aliens
Threatening the Supreme Court
after Citizens United ,
and before the Obamacare decision
Altering Obamacare’s
statutory deadline unilaterally
Creating the Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans
(DAPA) programs after admitting it
was unconstitutional
Trying to wipe out the coal industry
Moreover, the Flynn investigation
itself undermined the rule of law by targeting a man the government knew was
innocent of any crime. Similarly, Obama’s own effort to
protect Hillary Clinton, and his administration’s attempt to undermine Trump
through false allegations of “Russia collusion,” also violated the rule of law.
Last week it emerged that it was
Obama himself who told then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates about
Flynn’s lawful conversation
with the Russian ambassador, which set the investigative wheels in motion.
Obama’s phony protest suggests he is
feeling desperate as attention turns, finally, to his own role in the affair.
Joel B.
Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday
evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His new book, RED
NOVEMBER , is available for pre-order. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert
Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak .
Biden’s
Coronavirus Plan: Catch and Release Border Crossers into U.S.
508 David McNew/Getty Images
1 May 2020 1,989
3:45
Presumptive 2020 Democrat
presidential nominee Joe Biden is suggesting a restart of the nation’s “Catch
and Release” program in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. The policy would
ensure thousands of border crossers are readily released into the United
States.
This week, during an interview with
Florida local media, Biden suggested a return to
the previous, decades-long policy of catching and releasing border crossers
into the U.S. as they await their asylum hearings despite public health
concerns over the coronavirus.
“You’ve never seen a time where
someone seeking asylum has to seek it from another country,” Biden said when
asked about his immigration plan in the middle of the coronavirus crisis.
“You’ve never seen a circumstance where we put people in cages. We have to take
stock of where we are.”
Biden’s plan would ensure that
thousands of border crossers who have arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border since
President Trump’s shutdown of the region
would be released into the country while they await their asylum hearings — the
majority of which take years to hold.
Today, Trump’s “Remain in Mexico”
policy coupled with the border shutdown has allowed federal immigration
officials to swiftly return border crossers to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes . The policy means
border crossers from Mexico and Central America are processed and immediately
returned to Mexico without setting foot in the U.S. interior.
As Breitbart News reported, federal
immigration officials have said that as of April 10 , Trump’s policy
had successfully returned 10,000 border crossers to Mexico.
Analysis conducted by the Center
for Economic and Policy Research shows a continued flow of border crossers
being returned to their native countries in recent weeks.
From March 15 to April 24, ICE Air
appears to have made 21 deportation flights to Guatemala; 18 to Honduras; 12 to
El Salvador; six to Brazil; three each to Nicaragua, Ecuador, Haiti, and the
Dominican Republic; and one each to Colombia and Jamaica…
…
Over the last 12 weeks, it appears
that ICE has used 22 unique charter planes for 232 likely deportation flights.
Of those planes, 15 participated in confirmed ICE Air deportation flights
between October 2018 and May 2019, the most recent data compiled by UWCHR.
Biden’s plan, though, would reverse
such measures, halting deportations except for convicted felon illegal aliens
and allowing those arriving at the border to await their asylum hearings in the
U.S. interior with the hopes that they show up to court.
The plan proposed by Biden comes
even as public health concerns have circulated around border crossers arriving
at the southern border. This week, an illegal alien from India tested positive for
coronavirus after he snuck across the border into California with a group of
Mexican nationals.
Likewise, data from Guatemalan
officials have said about 50 to 75 percent of all migrants returned to
Guatemala from the U.S. have tested positive for
coronavirus.
Under Biden’s plan, each of these
border crossers would be in a federal immigration facility or already released
into the U.S. interior.
Trump’s Remain in Mexico policy has
decimated asylum fraud. In the first few months of its implementation, the
policy ensured that zero of 1,200 total border
crossers ineligible for asylum in Mexico had been released into the U.S.
interior. Most recent reports have
indicated that the Remain in Mexico policy has a less than one percent
asylum-grant rate.
John
Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
Obama:
DACA Illegal Aliens Deserve Amnesty During Coronavirus Crisis
Former President Barack Obama says the time is now, during the
Chinese coronavirus crisis, to provide amnesty to about 3.5 million illegal
aliens who are enrolled and eligible for the Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) program.
While about ten million Americans have
filed for unemployment in just three weeks, Obama took to Twitter to call for
an amnesty for DACA illegal aliens in the midst of the coronavirus crisis.
“Dreamers have contributed so much to our country, and they are
risking their lives fighting on the frontlines of this pandemic,” Obama said. “They
deserve permanent immigration status and a pathway to citizenship—as they are
Americans in every way but on paper.”
Center for Immigration Studies
Research Director Steven Camarotta has noted that DACA illegal aliens make up about 0.2 percent of the
nation’s nearly 15 million healthcare workers. In New York, where a staggering
number of DACA illegal aliens reside, they still only account for about 0.2
percent of the state’s healthcare workers, according to Camarotta.
Obama’s lobbying for a DACA amnesty
in the middle of the coronavirus crisis comes as House Democrats — including
Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Joaquin Castro (D-TX), Rep. Zoe Lofgren
(D-CA), and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — have sent a letter to the Trump administration demanding DACA illegal aliens
have their work authorizations extended.
“Support of DACA recipients during the current pandemic is
particularly critical as over 200,000 DACA recipients are in occupations and industry
groups that render them ‘essential critical infrastructure workers,’ according
to DHS guidance,” the House Democrats wrote in their letter.
A DACA amnesty would put more
citizen children of illegal aliens — known as “anchor babies” — on federal welfare,
as Breitbart News reported ,
while American taxpayers would be left potentially with
a $26 billion bill.
Additionally,
about one-in-five DACA illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while
at least one-in-seven would go on Medicaid.
Any plan to give amnesty to DACA illegal aliens that does not
also include provisions to halve legal immigration levels — the U.S. admits
about 1.2 million legal immigrants a year at the expense of America’s working
and middle class — would give amnestied illegal aliens the opportunity to bring
an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country.
At the southern border, a DACA amnesty has the potential to
trigger a border surge that could triple the number of illegal aliens pouring
through the border. Since DACA’s inception, more than 2,100 recipients of the
program have been kicked off because they were found to either be criminals or
gang members.
John Binder is a reporter for
Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
JAMES WALSH
THE OBAMA-BIDEN HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA… first ease millions of illegals over our borders and into our voting
booths!
How the Democrat party
surrendered America to Mexico:
“The watchdogs
at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama
administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices
Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington
Times
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the
Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN,
belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and
California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers
via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!
The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney
General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of
migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per
year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials
only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators,
Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.
“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.”
Obama Quietly Erasing Borders (Article)
WIKILEAKS EXPOSES THE OBAMA CONSPIRACY TO
FLOOD AMERICAN WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS
“The watchdogs
at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama
administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices
Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington
Times
Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of
LA RAZA “The Race”… now calling itself UNIDOSus.
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the
Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN,
belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and
California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers
via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!
Previous
generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to
Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica , by Jose Vasconcelos,
Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to
this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal
State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards,
blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack
enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is
replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD
BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
*
GLOBALIST BARACK OBAMA
AND NANCY PELOSI’S CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY AND KEEP AMERICA
FLOODED WITH DEM VOTING ILLEGALS
"Along with Obama, Pelosi and
Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the
eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY
“One of the most disgusting things to come out of the Obama administration
was "Operation Fast and Furious," where members of the Department of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) allowed illegal gun sales to go
through – commonly referred to as "gun walking" – in order to track
buyers and sellers they believed were connected to the Mexican drug cartels.
Nearly 2,000 firearms were sold and were eventually found throughout the United
States and Mexico. Two of them were used to k ill Border Patrol Agent Brian
Terry.” BETH BAUMANN
The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney
General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of
migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per
year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials
only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two
pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.
Jose
Angel Gutierrez, professor, University of Texas, Arlington and founder of
La Raza Unida political party screams at rallies: "We have
an aging white America. They are d ying. They are s hitting in their
pants with fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate the g ringo, and what
I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to k ill him!"
Previous
generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to
Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica , by Jose Vasconcelos,
Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to
this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal
State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards,
blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack
enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing
them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD
BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
Joe
Biden: ‘Absolutely Bizarre’ to Suggest Limit on U.S. Capacity to Absorb
Immigrants
LAS VEGAS, Nevada — Former Vice President Joe Biden campaigned
inside a Chinese restaurant on Tuesday evening, telling supporters it was
“bizarre” to suggest a limit on immigration to the U.S.
Biden promised to expand immigration to the U.S. if elected
president.
“Folks, look — the idea that there’s some limitation on the
capacity of anyone who — on the immigrants in this country is absolutely
bizarre! It’s absolutely bizarre.”
Biden, speaking to a packed crowd inside the Harbor Palace
Seafood Restaurant on the eve of the next Democratic debate, addressed members
of the Asian-American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) community, urging them to
turn out the vote ahead of Saturday’s caucuses.
Last month, the AAPI Victory
Fund super PAC endorsed Biden for president, citing his ability to defeat
President Donald Trump and his experience working with immigrant communities
from South Asia, East Asia and the Pacific generally.
Though the AAPI immigrant community is politically diverse, it
has trended Democratic in recent years.
Last year, Breitbart News reported,
another local AAPI organization in Las Vegas expressed opposition to President
Trump’s proposed merit-based system for legal immigration.
On Tuesday, Biden promised, if elected, to allow family
reunification visas.
“We should be able to increase, to three million people, the
people who could come for family reunification. Period, period, period,
period.”
He called the idea that the U.S. could not “reunite” more
families “absolutely bizarre.”
Biden also reminded his audience that Latinos were not the only
beneficiaries of President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) program, which applied to those brought to the country
illegally as children.
He said there were “thousands and thousands of AAPI ‘Dreamers'”
who had benefited from DACA as well.
Afterwards, Biden greeted attendees, some of whom proceeded to
the Chinatown Mall to cast early votes before the polling place there closed.
Biden hopes to finish in the top three in Nevada, and to win
South Carolina on Feb. 29, to make the case that he is still a top contender
for his party’s nomination. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) now leads national
polls, as well as Nevada polls.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large
at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental
Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law
School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship.
He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution , which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter
at @joelpollak .
ICE ignores California laws and arrests illegal aliens at the
courthouse door
In 2018, California implemented the California Values Act , which gave special protection to illegal
aliens by mandating that California law enforcement agencies cannot cooperate
with federal immigration authorities. Last week, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (“ICE”) thumbed its nose at California and arrested two people in
Sonoma County Superior Court.
BLOG: CALIFORNIA HAS 15 MILLION
ILLEGALS!
California has lots of reasons to hang
onto its roughly 2.2 – 3.5 million illegal immigrants. They provide cheap,
easily-exploited labor. They swell the state’s population, which matters for
electors and congresspeople, as well as the distribution of certain federal
funds. As illegal immigrants are fed into the system, they provide reliable
(legal or illegal) Democrat votes. And they make Californians feel virtuous
even as they allow corrupt Latin American states to continue exploiting their
own citizens and destroying their economies by relying on remittances from
people illegally in America.
For these reasons, California enacted the
pompously named “California Values Act.” Although the act refers to
“immigrants,” it’s obviously intended to affect only illegal aliens because the
Act’s entire purpose is to use the agencies of the state to prevent ICE from
gaining access to people illegally in California – including people who have
committed crimes in California. This is the type of law that could only come
from legislators and other virtue signalers ensconced in comfortable middle-
and upper-middle-class enclaves unaffected by felonies that would never have
happened but for open borders and sanctuaries.
Throughout the Obama administration,
sanctuary cities and states were able to get away with these policies because
the Obama administration, despite Obama’s sworn obligation to upload the laws
of the United States, approved of open borders. Trump promised to change all
that.
During the first three years of his
administration, rather disappointingly, Trump was able to have little effect on
illegal immigration or on deportation. However, Trump was just getting his
ducks in a row. He was hampered by a reluctant Republican Congress, which was
superseded by a violently resisting Democrat House. He also had to deal with
“resistance” judges who blocked every immigration initiative he made.
Finally, though, things are changing.
Trump was able to squeeze money out of Congress for his wall and, even more
importantly, with help from Mitch McConnell, he’s changing the judiciary:
With a judiciary that believes in
interpreting the law, not making it, Trump’s administration is able to act in
accordance with the Supremacy Clause (Constitution, Art. VI, Clause 2):
This
Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in
Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the
Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or
Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
In other words, when there’s a direct
conflict between state laws and federal laws, federal laws prevail.
Because the critical mass of judges is no
longer deliberately inserting itself as an obstacle between federal laws and
illegal immigrants, ICE is beginning to carry out its duty as written under the law:
U.S. immigration
agents arrested two people at a Northern California courthouse, including a man
detained in a hallway on his way to a hearing, flouting a new state law
requiring a judicial warrant to make immigration arrests inside such
facilities.
Immigration
and Customs Enforcement agents made the arrests Tuesday at Sonoma County
Superior Court, prompting an outcry from criminal justice and court officials
who said the action undermines local authority and deters immigrants who are in
the country illegally from participating in the U.S. justice system.
ICE said
California's law doesn't supersede federal law and “will not govern the conduct
of federal officers acting pursuant to duly-enacted laws passed by Congress
that provide the authority to make administrative arrests of removable aliens
inside the United States."
“Our officers
will not have their hands tied by sanctuary rules when enforcing immigration
laws to remove criminal aliens from our communities," David Jennings,
ICE's field office director in San Francisco, said in the statement.
At long last, in Trump’s America, the rule
of law matters again. The reliability of law is one of the essential
ingredients of a just and successful civilization. In that context, if you
don’t like the law, you change it through the democratic process, not through
illegal and unconstitutional resistance.
Surge in Illegal Aliens,
500% Increase in Some U.S. Ports of Entry
Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles, December 30, 2015
The agency’s
own statistics certainly contradict that, showing that the southern border
region is as porous and vulnerable as ever. Other entry ports that saw large
hikes in Central American illegal immigrants during the first two months of
this fiscal year include Del Rio, Texas (269%), El Centro, California (216%)
and Rio Grande Valley, Texas (154%). The Border Patrol breaks the stats down by
“family unit” and illegal immigrants under the age of 18, referred to as
“Unaccompanied Alien Children” or UAC. The Rio Grande Valley port of entry
topped the list in both categories with 8,537 family units and 6,465 UACs
during the two-month period. In all, the nation’s nine southern border
crossings saw an average of 173% increase in family units and a 106% increase
in minors during the short period considered.
Some of the illegal immigrants are Mexican nationals, but the overwhelming
majority comes from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The government records
show that somehow 4,450 family units from El Salvador evaded our topnotch
border security and entered the United States in a period of only two months.
Guatemala and Honduras had 3,934 and 3,203 respectively. Mexico had 538 family
units. Of interesting note is that, during this period, the Border Patrol
reports 35,234 apprehensions in the region of foreigners labeled by the
government as “Other Than Mexican” or OTM. This is a term used by federal
authorities to refer to nationals of countries that represent a terrorist
threat to the U.S.
. . .
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2015/12/surge-in-illegal-aliens-500-increase-in-some-u-s-ports-of-entry/
Concrete Evidence of the Continuing Plunge in Both Civil and
Criminal Immigration Enforcement
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, January 23, 2016
Two recent reports from Syracuse University's Transactional
Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) reflect the continued erosion of
immigration enforcement under the Obama administration.
On January 20, TRAC reported that criminal prosecution for immigration offenses
fell 22.3 percent from November 2014 to November 2015, and more than 36 percent
over the course of five years, excluding magistrate court (which deals
exclusively with petty offenses).
The following day, TRAC announced that "ICE [Immigration and Customs
Enforcement] Detainer Use Stabilizes Under Priority Enforcement Program".
The Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) is the replacement to the Secure
Communities Program mandated by Homeland Security Security Jeh Johnson as a
part of the president's "executive actions" on immigration. It
significantly restricts the ability of immigration agents to file detainers
against aliens arrested by police on criminal charges.
I have no idea what TRAC means by "stabilizes". A quick look at
Figure 1a of their report shows a more accurate state of affairs, if one
considers the number of detainers being filed over the course of five years,
from a high in April 2011, when Secure Communities became fully effective
nationwide and kicked into high gear, versus October 2015. I would use other
phrases: "plummeted" or "Dropped like a stone". Or, as my
colleague Jessica Vaughan has noted, particularly in relation to detainers
filed at county jails, where the lion's share of criminals of any stripes are
held after being booked for offenses small and large: "a stunning free
fall".
http://www.cis.org/cadman/concrete-evidence-continuing-plunge-both-civil-and-criminal-immigration-enforcement
No comments:
Post a Comment