Centrist GOP lawmakers push back against border wall funding
Two House Republicans want to water down plans to include funds to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall promised by President Trump in the spending package slated for a floor vote this week.

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas), whose district includes the largest section of the Mexican border of any House member, has long said building the wall would be impractical and ineffective.
House GOP leaders plan to add $1.6 billion to the spending package to begin construction on the border wall. The legislation will likely be blocked by Democrats in the Senate, but will serve as an opening salvo for the debate in September to avoid a government shutdown this fall.
Hurd has submitted an amendment that would prevent the use of funds to build any physical barriers, including walls or fences, along the border until the secretary of Homeland Security submits a comprehensive border security strategy to Congress.
Under Hurd’s amendment, the report would need to provide a justification for using a more expensive type of physical barrier or tool, as well as a cost estimate for protecting each mile of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) is so far the only other Republican to sign on to Hurd’s amendment. Like Hurd, Fitzpatrick is part of the House GOP’s centrist faction that represents a district expected to be targeted by Democrats in the 2018 midterm elections.
Three Texas Democrats who also represent districts along the U.S.-Mexico border have endorsed Hurd’s proposal: Reps. Vicente González, Henry Cuellar and Beto O’Rourke.
Rep. Filemon Vela (Texas), another border-district Democrat, told The Hill Tuesday he would not support Hurd's amendment because it lays out a path through which a border wall could eventually be funded.
"It's too much of a middle ground," said Vela.
But O'Rourke, who along with Vela has been one of the strongest opponents of the wall, said he would support any amendment opposing the wall, including Hurd's.
"It asks all the right questions," said O'Rourke, who is running for Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) seat in 2018. 
A spokeswoman for Hurd didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
The House Rules Committee is meeting Tuesday to determine which of the more than 300 amendments submitted to the spending package will be allowed votes on the floor.
The Rules panel is controlled by the majority party leadership and determines how legislation is considered by the full House.
All of the Republicans who represent part of the U.S.-Mexico border have expressed skepticism about building the wall as proposed by Trump. Like Hurd, Reps. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) and Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) have said the wall would be ineffective.
Pearce’s district is the only one along the Mexican border that Trump won in November.
In a statement back in January after Trump issued an executive order directing agencies to begin construction of the wall, Hurd said that it would be “the most expensive and least effective way to secure the border.”
“Each section of the border faces unique geographical, cultural, and technological challenges that would be best addressed with a flexible, sector-by-sector approach that empowers the agents on the ground with the resources they need,” Hurd said at the time.
The $1.6 billion for the border wall is expected to be added to the spending bill by the Rules Committee.
Rep. John Carter (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the Department of Homeland Security, has submitted an amendment allocating the $1.6 billion specifically for physical barriers in the Rio Grande Valley and in San Diego. It reflects the amount included in a Homeland Security spending bill advanced by the House Appropriations Committee last week.
The Rules Committee could grant Carter’s amendment a vote on the assumption it would be adopted on the floor. But the Rules panel could also decide to unilaterally include the amendment in the spending package before it hits the floor, which means there wouldn’t be a standalone vote on wall funding.
—Rafael Bernal contributed.

How many politicians got seven-figure jobs in the private sector after having pushed the project along? No one will ever know.
US squanders billions on new aircraft carrier
25 July 2017
In yet another massive squandering of public resources, the United States on Saturday commissioned the USS Gerald Ford, the country’s 11th supercarrier, at the cost of some $13 billion.
The combined price tag of the ship and its air wing of F-35c fighters, at $30 billion, is roughly equivalent to what the United Nations estimate for the annual cost of ending world hunger.
No doubt many defense contractor executives assembled to watch the ship’s christening had their private jets and country club memberships paid for with this monstrosity, which came in some $3 billion above budget. How many politicians got seven-figure jobs in the private sector after having pushed the project along? No one will ever know.
The Gerald Ford is just part of a major expansion of the US Navy, which was underway even before Trump announced his plans to increase US military spending by $54 billion each year and expand the size of the Navy by 75 ships. Over the next decade, the US military plans to field not only a new set of carriers, but a brand new class of ballistic missile submarines, destroyers, fighters, long-range bombers and nuclear missiles.
This expansion of military spending, under both Obama and Trump, has been met, on the part of the media, with either enthusiastic approval or silence.
By the time the carrier is operational in some three to four years, it will already be obsolete. When the United Kingdom commissioned its latest aircraft carrier, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, the Royal United Services Institute noted that the vast ship was largely defenseless against the current generation of anti-ship cruise missiles fielded by Russia, China and other countries.
“Missiles costing (much) less than half a million pounds a unit could at least disable a British aircraft carrier that costs more than £3 billion,” it said.
Commenting on the report, the Russian Defense Ministry joked that the British aircraft carrier was “merely a large convenient naval target.” The same epithet could be applied to the Gerald Ford. This steel bathtub, housing some 4,300 sailors, airmen and officers, could be sunk within minutes if it wandered within 400 miles of the coast of Kaliningrad, Syria or, for that matter, China.
And yet, America has eleven of these dinosaurs, together with eight helicopter carriers that are as big as the aircraft carriers of other countries. With 5 percent of the world’s population, the US fields three quarters of the world’s carrier tonnage.
At Saturday’s commissioning ceremony, US President Donald Trump delivered a blustering, delusional speech, full of wild threats, in which he presented a picture of the United States arming itself to the teeth. He called the ship a “message to the world” that “American might is second to none, and we’re getting bigger, and better, and stronger every day.”
“Our enemies will shake with fear because everyone will know that America is coming,” he declared. Who these enemies are (one assumes they are not Islamists armed with Kalashnikovs) was never specified.
Trump added, “This ship also ensures that if a fight does come, it will always end the same way: we will win, win, win. We will never lose. We will win.”
In a clear breach of the principle of civilian rule over the military, he appealed to the sailors and officers gathered at the event to demand that the government expand military spending.
Summing up, the former real estate speculator said, "When it comes to battle, we don’t want a fair fight. We want just the opposite. We demand victory, and we will have total victory.”
Trump’s speech, showing the influence of his fascist-minded advisors Stephen Bannon and Stephen Miller, did not invoke the word “democracy,” or even the principle of “self-defense,” within which the operations of US imperialism have traditionally been couched. All that was left was naked military force, threats and coercion.
While there exist significant differences between Trump and elements of the US military/intelligence apparatus, the US president, in his belief in violence as a solution to historical problems, exemplifies the thinking that pervades American policy circles, which seek to maintain US global dominance through the expansion of military power.
The USS Gerald Ford is the physical embodiment of the idea that the long-term historical decline of American capitalism can be offset by more guns, more ships, more wars and more deaths.
The “American Century” has been characterized by the overwhelming superiority of US air power. Despite the fact that the United States has been continuously at war since 1991, not a single US soldier has been attacked by enemy aircraft for over six decades.
And yet, as the US moves into increasingly sharp conflict with Russia, China and even its European allies, it is becoming increasingly clear that its most advanced weapons systems, including aircraft carriers and “stealth” aircraft such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2, would see substantial losses in the event of a shooting war with Russia, China or even some lesser, regional power such as Iran.
In recognition of this reality, Gen. Mark A. Milley noted that the US needs to prepare for conflicts in which “the levels of violence… would be immense and it would be the likes of what the world hasn’t seen since the Second World War.”
Despite the vast scale of US arms spending and the breathtaking scope of its military operations all over the world, it is increasingly undeniable that the period of US military, economic and geopolitical hegemony is coming to an end.
This was the conclusion of a study published by the US Army War College late last month, which asserts that American political hegemony is “not merely fraying,” but “collapsing.”
The report goes on to state that the order that “first emerged from World War II” was “transformed to a unipolar system with the collapse of the Soviet Union." It continues: "The 17-year period after the Cold War... was a unique time when American power was essentially unchallenged,” but “we have been moving into a new era.”
With the rise of “revisionist” powers like China and Russia, the United States has been so weakened that “it no longer can—as in the past—automatically generate consistent and sustained local military superiority at range.”
This is in line with an assessment by historian Alfred W. McCoy, who declares in a soon-to-be released book: “All available economic, educational, technological data indicate that when it comes to US global power, negative trends are likely to aggregate rapidly by 2020, and could reach a critical mass no later than 2030. The American Century, proclaimed so triumphantly at the start of World War II, may already be tattered and fading by 2025, and, except for the finger pointing, could be over by 2030.”
But the relative decline of the United States is, in some ways, the least of the US military’s worries. The Army War College report notes that, beyond the collapse of the US-dominated world order, “[A]ll states and traditional political authority structures are under increasing pressure.” It adds, “The fracturing of the post-Cold War global system is accompanied by the internal fraying in the political, social and economic fabric of practically all states.”
It cites an earlier report that warned of the "increasing chasm between governments and their governed over the basic right to rule.” It adds, “Today, all states are experiencing a precipitous decline in their authority, influence, reach and common attraction,” as populations are presented with “myriad alternative sources of political alignment or allegiance.”
It concludes that states “now all wrestle with one another over competing interests while standing on quicksand—threatened” not only by national rivals, but “the fragile and restive social order they themselves rest on.” In this case, the quicksand is a metaphor for the growth of popular opposition to war, social inequality and capitalism itself.
Confronting crisis at home and abroad, the US is lashing out everywhere simultaneously: against Russia, China, Iran, and now even its NATO allies. The same weekend that Trump commissioned his aircraft carrier, the House of Representatives reached a deal on a bill that would sanction European companies for economic dealings with Russia, a move that, according to a leaked EU memo, would bring retaliatory measures by the EU “within days.”
All of this presents a warning to the working class: The US ruling elite, faced with economic stagnation, geopolitical decline and a crisis of legitimacy at home, sees war, no matter how bloody and disastrous, as the solution to its problems. 
Andre Damon

are by Mex gangs, and 93% of murders in La Raza-Occupied Los Angeles are by 


“In Mexico, a recent Zogby poll declared that the vast majority of Mexican citizens hate Americans. [22.2] Mexico is a country  saturated with racism, yet in denial, having never endured the social development of a Civil Rights movement like in the US--Blacks are harshly treated while foreign Whites are often seen as the enemy. [22.3] In fact, racism as workplace discrimination can be seen across the US anywhere the illegal alien Latino works--the vast majority of the workforce is usually strictly Latino, excluding Blacks, Whites, Asians, and others.”


An American immigrant is not someone supported by government funds in a "relocation" center; flown over here at government expense; given a cash allowance, free housing, and medical care; and then eased onto local public assistance: Section 8 rental grants, food stamps, WIC, AFDC, clothes from one government-sponsored charity or another, Medicaid, and public schooling, with free lunch and breakfasts and even help with furniture. That's not an immigrant.  That's a future Democrat voter.  ----- RICHARD F. MINITER – AMERICAN THINKER         COM


Amnesty would add 100 million more illegals and cost Legals trillions!







Immigration Court Backlog:
Causes and Solutions

WASHINGTON, D.C. (July 24, 2017) – With 600,000 pending cases, the backlog in the immigration court system has become a matter of some urgency. A new report by the Center for Immigration Studies examines the reasons for its rapid growth and possible solutions.

Contrary to the claims of advocates, the backlog is not caused by an increase in cases. Andrew Arthur, the Center's resident fellow in law and policy and author of the report, pointed to data from a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report showing that the "total case receipts" in 2015 was about the same as in 2006. But the number of cases actually completed declined 31 percent even as the number of immigration judges grew 17 percent.

View the full report at: https://cis.org/Massive-Increase-Immigration-Court-Backlog-Its-Causes-and-Solutions

Arthur identified a number of reasons that cases are taking so much longer to resolve, including:
  • Resources. There are too few judges and support staff to do the job adequately. 

  • The "Surge". The growing number of Central American families and unaccompanied alien children (UACs) both swelled dockets and led to IJs being reassigned from already scheduled hearings to handing these expedited cases. Those surge cases were also more complicated than cases involving single adult males, requiring more courtroom time (and continuances) per case. 

  • Case Law. Recent federal court decisions have complicated IJs removal decisions, slowing proceedings and requiring additional continuances. 

  • Obama Administration Policies. Policies instituted in the last administration led to numerous continuances, as aliens sought counsel and applied for relief or discretionary closures, release, or termination based on those policies.
Trump administration policies will, if properly implemented and supported by congressional appropriations, ease and begin to reduce the backlogs:
  • The attorney general has stated that he will hire significantly more IJs in the next two years, and streamline the hiring of IJs. 
  • Changes in border enforcement policies will limit the number of new cases that are added to the immigration courts' dockets. 
  • Changes to interior enforcement policies will reduce the incentives for aliens to remain in the United States and fight meritless cases. 
  • Rescission of Obama-era policies will also reduce the incentives for aliens to remain in removal proceedings.
There is more that the administration can do, however:
  • The attorney general must use his certification authority to set stricter standards for IJs to follow in granting continuances. 
  • The Department of Justice must vigorously litigate cases in the federal circuit courts to provide the IJs with more "bright-line" rules to follow in deciding cases, and to limit variations in the law among circuits.


President of Latino group: ‘La Raza’ name was 'a barrier to our mission'

BY RAFAEL BERNAL - 07/18/17 06:50 PM EDT 77

© Getty
Janet Murguía, the president and CEO of UnidosUS, said Tuesday that the Latino advocacy organization made a tough decision to better reflect its mission last week when it dropped “La Raza” from its name.
The influential Latino civil rights organization changed its name to UnidosUS from the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) at its 49th annual conference.
Murguía told The Hill the decision was made after three-and-a-half years of research, interviews and surveys on the organization's image.
"We really wanted to make sure what we were hearing was reflective of most of our community," she said.
"We knew this step would be a big one and that not everybody would be fully supportive, but it’s hard to ignore the data and the changes that have occurred in our community," Murguía added.
The NCLR name had come under criticism from groups on the right, who pointed out that "la raza" means "the race” in Spanish, a reference that was interpreted by some as having racist undertones.
The organization got its original name in 1968 as the Southwest Council of La Raza, a reference to an academic concept put forth by Mexican intellectual José Vasconcelos in the 1930s
Vasconcelos's original idea of "la raza" was meant to unite the multi-ethnic and multi-cultural peoples of Latin America as part of one post-colonial identity group.
But Murguía says that image no longer represents Latinos in the United States.
"We’re not the same Hispanic or Latino community we were in 1968," she said. "We are a younger community — six in ten [Latinos] are millennials or younger -- and we’re a more diverse Latino community."
Murguía said the old name "appeared to be outdated" and "to have no resonance with our community."
"More than anything, our name appeared to be a barrier to our mission," she said. 
UnidosUS is the country's largest Latino civil rights organization, with interests in political advocacy and research on issues like tax reform, healthcare, housing and immigration. 
Murguía said the organization and the Hispanic community as a whole have achieved real gains over time in many of those areas. 
"Real progress is achievable, but it takes sustained engagement and it happens not in a moment, but over time," she said.
She pointed at issues like the Affordable Care Act, which extended insurance coverage to nearly four million Latinos who previously didn’t have health insurance, and the earned income tax credit as tangible wins for Hispanics.
But Murguía said that progress is under threat.
"There’s no question that the stakes are very high for our community right now and we’re dealing with a very challenging environment," she said. 
The short-term priorities for Latinos, Murguía said, include protecting those policies and counteracting the Trump administration's immigration policies.
"We want to make sure we can block the funding for a mass deportation force that Trump has called for, we can block the funding for a wall that is a waste of precious resources that will accomplish very little," she said.
"Right right now there’s no question that 'Dreamers' appear to be in the crosshairs of the Trump administration," she added, referring to so-called “Dreamers,” recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
The program, which protects from deportation nearly 750,000 people who were illegally brought to the United States as children, is facing legal challenges from Texas and nine other states. 
The Trump administration has not yet said whether it will defend the program through the Justice Department. 
"There’s a real risk because we’re seeing more and more that this decision making is not in the hands of the president, but also in the Attorney General [Jeff Sessions] and he’s been antagonistic to any efforts around immigration reform or any efforts to try to promote long term relief for Dreamers and others," she said.
Ultimately, Murguía said, the challenge for Hispanics will be to encourage greater political participation to reap the demographic rewards as the country's largest minority group.
Roughly one million Latinos turn 18 every year, and Hispanics are a key voting bloc in states like California, Texas and Florida. Still, voter participation has traditionally been low in the community.
"We have got to continue to build on the rolls of voters, continue to encourage anyone who’s eligible to continue to vote. Beyond that, we have to make sure there are efforts underway for those eligible to become citizens to naturalize," said Murguía.
Murguía said Latino voters, widely expected to "surge" in the 2016 election, did just that, only to be "outsurged by others."
More Latinos voted in 2016 than ever before, but participation rates remained somewhat stagnant. Still, with consistent participation rates and natural demographic growth, Latinos played an important role in states like Arizona and Colorado.
"The stakes are extremely high for our community. For those of us who maybe didn’t understand how bad things could get before the election, now we know. The truth is they could get worse," she said.
"We have to take what we’ve learned and now use our ability to participate, to mobilize, to vote, very seriously, and we need to come together as we do that," Murguía said.


are by Mex gangs, and 93% of murders in La Raza-Occupied Los Angeles are by



“In Mexico, a recent Zogby poll declared that the vast majority of Mexican citizens hate Americans. [22.2] Mexico is a country  saturated with racism, yet in denial, having never endured the social development of a Civil Rights movement like in the US--Blacks are harshly treated while foreign Whites are often seen as the enemy. [22.3] In fact, racism as workplace discrimination can be seen across the US anywhere the illegal alien Latino works--the vast majority of the workforce is usually strictly Latino, excluding Blacks, Whites, Asians, and others.”


An American immigrant is not someone supported by government funds in a "relocation" center; flown over here at government expense; given a cash allowance, free housing, and medical care; and then eased onto local public assistance: Section 8 rental grants, food stamps, WIC, AFDC, clothes from one government-sponsored charity or another, Medicaid, and public schooling, with free lunch and breakfasts and even help with furniture. That's not an immigrant.  That's a future Democrat voter.  ----- RICHARD F. MINITER – AMERICAN THINKER         COM


Aliens Die in Smuggling Operation

By Andrew R. Arthur
July 24, 2017
On Sunday it was revealed that nine aliens died, and several more were in "dire condition", after they were discovered in the back of a "sweltering tractor-trailer" in a Walmart parking lot in San Antonio, Texas. Seventeen of the 39 aliens rescued were reported to be in "critical condition".

At one point, it was reported, "more than 100 people" may have been packed into the truck, which was believed to have picked up its passengers on the U.S. side of the border with Mexico. According to the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Tom Homan, "[f]our of the survivors appeared to be between 10 and 17 years old."

This is not the first such tragedy, or even the first in Texas. Early in the morning of May 14, 2003, a "milk trailer, piled with bodies" was discovered near Victoria, Texas, abandoned at a truck stop. Press reports stated that 19 died and 55 aliens were rescued in that incident; a five-year-old child was the first to succumb, and the driver eventually received a 34-year sentence for his role in that crime.
Nor was this the only incident that involved transported aliens in San Antonio this weekend. According to press reports:

15 people were detained at a home located at the 100 block of Westhaven Place on the West Side [of San Antonio] Sunday evening. Law enforcement sources tell us that those detained are believed to be human trafficking victims.

There are two important points that these cases underscore. The first is that smugglers are bad people. I am an educated man, and could use more flowery language, or more clinical terms, to make this statement, but that would be gilding a noxious lily. No evil compares to slavery, but if there were any group of individuals who would come close in their wretchedness to slavers, it would be smugglers. Their stock in trade is human flesh, and their hook is the human misery of those who are caught up in their predations. They objectify their customers, and are usually more than willing to cut and run, leaving their victims to their fates.

The second point is that smugglers are aided and abetted by well-meaning individuals in the United States. Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick placed part of the blame for the Walmart incident on so-called "sanctuary cities", stating:

Sanctuary cities entice people to believe they can come to America and Texas and live outside the law. Sanctuary cities also enable human smugglers and cartels. Today, these people paid a terrible price and demonstrate why we need a secure border and legal immigration reform so we can control who enters our country. We continue to pray for the families and friends of the victims.

This may seem to be a cruel statement to some, but in my 25-years of immigration experience, it is 100 percent true. Such laws are likely enacted with the intent to "protect" those aliens who have already entered illegally, but they also send a signal to all who foreign nationals would come to the United States illegally that this country is not serious about its immigration laws, and that once an alien enters illegally, he or she will be "home free". It is not boastful to state as an American that we have a higher standard of living, better schools, and better healthcare than most of the world, and certainly those countries from which most illegal aliens come. These are strong inducements to take dangerous risks.

The same is true of other incentives provided to those aliens who have entered illegally. In-state tuition and driver's licenses for aliens here unlawfully send the same message. And, at the end of the day, for nine people in San Antonio, and 19 in Victoria, it is at the end of the day a cruel one.

There will always be immigration laws in the United States. Our institutions and social-welfare systems would collapse without them, crime would increase, and groups and nations that are adverse to our government and people would exploit open borders to harm us and our way of life.
And, as long as we have immigration laws, there must be only one immigration policy, set by the federal government pursuant to the Constitution. States can't have a different policy, and cities can't either. Although the best argument for such a system is the rule of law, it is not the only one. Divergent policies create false hope, and encourage aliens to take the risk of placing their lives in the hands of the worst of criminals.
 American nightmare: Nine immigrants suffocate to death in trailer left in Texas parking lot
24 July 2017
As President Donald Trump boasted of “American pride and prestige” in a speech to sailors in Virginia on Saturday, an American nightmare was playing out in San Antonio, Texas.
Nine immigrants are dead and 19 are in critical condition after being locked in a sealed semitruck trailer for 24 hours. The trailer was parked in the sun in a Wal-Mart parking lot in 100-degree weather.
Shortly before 12:30 am Sunday morning, one of the trapped immigrants managed to break out of the trailer to ask a Wal-Mart worker for water. The worker brought water and called 911 for help.
Police and immigration officials arrived at the scene and detained the immigrants as they stumbled out of the trailer and into the parking lot. Once those still alive had been captured, police dragged out the bodies of the eight who died of heat stroke or dehydration, including two children. Another individual died at the hospital on Sunday.
As investigators studied the scene in the parking lot Sunday, the Wal-Mart store remained open .
It is difficult to imagine the hell the migrants experienced, gasping for air in the stifling heat as death encircled them. San Antonio Fire Chief Charles Hood told the press that the survivors “were very hot to the touch.” Their heart rates were all above 130 beats per minute.
Amid reports that some of the migrants had fled the parking lot, police and immigration authorities launched a manhunt, searching the surrounding area for escaped immigrants to arrest and jail. A helicopter shone a searchlight in nearby woods and continued its search for hours as dawn broke.
Only the bodies of the dead will be allowed to stay in the United States, for burial. The survivors will be thrown into detention centers and promptly deported, most likely without the right to appear before a judge to plead their case.
Thomas Homan, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), delivered the following statement:
“The horrific crime uncovered last night ranks as a stark reminder of why human smuggling networks must be pursued, caught and punished… These networks have repeatedly shown a reckless disregard for those they smuggle… The men and women of ICE are proud to stand alongside our law enforcement partners” to “protect the public and those who would fall victim to their dangerous practices that focus solely on their illicit profits.”
This statement will serve as a key exhibit in a future trial for crimes against humanity. Prosecutors will point out that, yes, what took place was a horrific crime. Furthermore, it is true that the criminals, driven by their drive for profit, display a reckless disregard for the lives of their victims.
However, it is not the “smuggling networks” that are primarily responsible for what took place in San Antonio. It is ICE, Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), and the bipartisan policies of the US government that are to blame. Like the recent Grenfell fire in London which killed dozens, the San Antonio tragedy is a case of social murder, for which the ruling class is guilty.
In the 1990s, under President Bill Clinton, Democrats and Republicans enacted programs like “Operation Gatekeeper” and “Operation Hold-the-Line,” the aim of which was to militarize urban crossing zones and force migrants to cross in the uninhabitable deserts.
In 2006, under the Bush administration, Congress passed the Secure Fences Act, which facilitated the construction of hundreds of miles of border barriers and further militarized the border. Those voting “yes” for this law included then-Senators Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain and Charles Schumer. In 2010, Obama signed legislation that deployed a fleet of drones to the border and 1,500 National Guard soldiers to block or arrest immigrants. Thousands have been killed attempting to cross as a result of these policies.
Donald Trump is living up to his pledge to “unshackle” ICE and CBP and has hired fascist and white supremacist advisors to key positions in the immigration agencies. The Trump administration has already arrested over 60,000 immigrants in the first six months of 2017, roughly 40 percent more than Obama, who was known among immigrants as the “deporter-in-chief.”
The tragedy in San Antonio has gone practically unnoticed by the political establishment. The Democratic Party response consisted of statements denouncing the smugglers, including the declaration of Joaquin Castro, U.S. Congressman from San Antonio, who said, “The smugglers responsible for the incident, who showed no regard for the lives of the people they were transporting, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
The fact that so many migrants still embark on such dangerous journeys is a testament to the depth of the social crisis in Mexico and Central America. Devastated by a century of imperialist exploitation and military intervention, countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua have never recovered from the imprint left by US-backed dictatorships and death squads.

ICE chief praises Trump, plans to send more agents to sanctuary cities

9th Circuit Court's Agenda Doesn't Shy From Trump
Autoplay: On | Off
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Thomas Homan on Tuesday said he plans to further crack down on undocumented immigrants by sending more resources and agents to sanctuary cities.
Homan told Washington Examiner on Tuesday that he plans to address "ludicrous" sanctuary cities.
"In the America I grew up in, cities didn't shield people who violated the law," Homan told the publication. “What I want to get is a clear understanding from everybody, from the congressmen to the politicians to law enforcement to those who enter the country illegally, that ICE is open for business."
"We’re going to enforce the laws on the books without apology, we’ll continue to prioritize what we do,” Homan continued. “But it’s not OK to violate the laws of this country anymore, you’re going to be held accountable.” 
During his interview with the Examiner, Homan also praised the Trump administration, saying it has "taken the handcuffs off law enforcement," allowing them to address immigration more thoroughly.
"You can like President Trump, not like him, like his policies, not like his policies, but one thing no one can argue with is the effect they've had," said Homan.
According to Homan, illegal border crossings have decreased by 70 percent under Trump and arrests inside the country have increased by 40 percent.
The 30-year immigration agency veteran also said he has gotten a green light to hire 10,000 new immigration agents, who will work to arrest illegal criminals sheltered in sanctuary cities and elsewhere.
Sanctuary cities are jurisdictions with policies limiting cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration agents and include cities such as New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Austin.
President Trump campaigned on cracking down on illegal immigration and stepping up border security.



President of Latino group: ‘La Raza’ name was 'a barrier to our mission'