THE DOCTRINE OF THE N.A.F.T.A. GLOBALIST DEMOCRATS IS TO SERVE THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS WITH ENDLESS WAVES OF INVADING 'CHEAP' LABOR SUBSIDIZED WITH WELFARE FUNDED BY TAXES ON MIDDLE AMERICA.
In many speeches, Mayorkas says he is building a mass migration system to deliver workers to wealthy employers and investors and “equity” to poor foreigners. The nation’s border laws are subordinate to elites’ opinion about “the values of our country,” Mayorkas claims.
Monday, February 4, 2019
PELOSI OUTRAGED! PENTAGON SENDS 3,750 TO NARCOMEX BORDER
Soldiers from the Kentucky-based 19th Engineer Battalion work in a public park in Laredo, Texas, where they are installing barbed and concertina-wire on Nov. 17, 2018. (Thomas Watkins/AFP/Getty Images)
Pentagon Sending Another 3,750 Troops to Mexico Border
WASHINGTON—The Pentagon is sending 3,750 additional troops to the southwest border with Mexico for three months to support border agents, the Department of Defense said on Feb. 3.
The deployment will raise the total number of active-duty forces supporting Customs and Border Protection agents there to about 4,350, it said.
U.S. Army soldiers from Ft. Riley, Kansas string razor wire near the port of entry at the U.S.-Mexico border in Donna, Texas on Nov. 4, 2018. (John Moore/Getty Images)
The Pentagon disclosed the official figure days after a Democratic lawmaker said about 3,500 extra troops would be deployed.
The Pentagon says the military will operate mobile surveillance cameras in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas, a mission scheduled to run through Sept. 30. Some of the additional troops will also string up 150 more miles of concertina wire.
President Donald Trump, who has called the situation at the border as a humanitarian crisis, is expected to talk about immigration and his proposal for a wall along the border with Mexico during the annual State of the Union address on Tuesday.
President Donald Trump on Feb. 1 said there is a “good chance” that he will have to declare a national emergency to secure funds for a border wall.
Asked if he will definitely declare a national emergency, the president said, “I think there’s a good chance we’ll have to do that.”
“I don’t want to say,” he added. “You’ll hear the State of the Union and let’s see what happens.”
Trump reached a deal with Democrats on Jan. 25 to reopen the government for three weeks so that lawmakers can negotiate a deal that includes funds for a border wall—the president’s landmark campaign promise.
With Caravans marching through Mexico and toward our Country, Republicans must be prepared to do whatever is necessary for STRONG Border Security. Dems do nothing. If there is no Wall, there is no Security. Human Trafficking, Drugs and Criminals of all dimensions - KEEP OUT!
On Jan. 31, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that Democrats will not include any money for a border wall in their proposed legislation.
The president and Democrats are at an impasse over Trump’s request for $5.7 billion in funds for border wall construction. The wall is part of a larger border security package requested by experts at the Department of Homeland Security.
President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting at the White House, Washington, on Jan. 31, 2019. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
The Pentagon first approved the high-profile deployment of active-duty troops to the Mexico border in October, before the November congressional elections. The move was embraced by Trump’s supporters, including fellow Republicans in Congress.
Marine Corps engineers from Camp Pendleton put up razor wire just east of the San Ysidro Port of Entry where trains pass from the United States into Mexico, and Mexico into the United States, to support Border Patrol on Nov. 6, 2018. (John Gibbins/The San Diego Union-Tribune via AP)
Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan approved the latest deployment on Jan. 11, according to the statement. But a figure was not disclosed until Thursday, when Democratic U.S. Representative Adam Smith, chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, said 3,500 additional troops were being sent.
The Epoch Times reporter Ivan Pentchoukov contributed to this report.
MULTI-CULTURALISM and the creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open borders.
“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR
Texas can make a border wall happen. Many worry that courts will block President Donald Trump from building a border wall with funds reprogrammed from other projects under a declaration of an emergency. However, Texas is in the more conservative Fifth Circuit, not the Ninth.
As an attorney who worked for Judicial Watch and more recently for Larry Klayman at Freedom Watch, this topic has prompted legal research by the author.
The border wall should be built exclusively in Texas at first, postponing California, Arizona, and New Mexico until after the Texas border is secure. That will keep lawsuits in the Fifth Circuit and out of the Ninth. Texas can make this happen.
Texas governor Greg Abbott should formally request that the president issue a declaration of an emergency.
Abbott should declare a state-level emergency.
Abbott should ask Texas officials to compile incidents of violence, gang activity, drug-smuggling, human-smuggling, sex-trafficking, etc. to document grounds for an emergency.
Abbott should make demand invoking Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution that the federal government "shall" protect Texas against "invasion" by armed gangs and criminals.
The Texas Legislature should pass a resolution invoking Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution that the federal government "shall" protect Texas against "domestic violence" spread from Mexico across the border, including armed gangs and criminals, drug-smuggling, human-smuggling, sex slavery, etc.
Decision-makers need to stop viewing this topic as one single step or as mutually exclusive with other actions. Trump should declare a national emergency while still negotiating with Congress for appropriations. It is not "either-or." He can reprogram funds in a later, separate step.
Section 4, Article 4 of the U.S. Constitution commands the U.S. government – unconditionally – as follows (emphasis added):
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take all actions the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate to achieve and maintain operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States, to include the following[:] ... (2) physical infrastructure enhancements to prevent unlawful entry by aliens[.]
The law further mandates that "operational control" means "the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband."
Notice "entire" border. Notice "prevention of all unlawful entries." The act requires "all" of the border to be 100% secure, not just 700 miles, as people say. The secretary of DHS has to decide what type of barrier is best in various sections. But the result must – with no discretion – prevent "all" unauthorized entry.
However, Congress never appropriated sufficient money to fund the construction authorized by the Secure Fence Act. It was yet another lie by politicians. Yet under an emergency, any president can repurpose funds under the authority of 33 U.S. Code §2293.
President Trump's declaration of a national emergency would be unassailable in the courts if backed by a declaration of a state-level emergency; a request from Texas for a declaration of a national emergency; the legislative command of the Secure Fence Act of 2006; and a constitutional command of Article IV, Section 4.
Attorney General Greg Abbott – now governor – sent several letters to President Barack Obama calling for action. One letter responded to bullets fired from Ciudad Juárez, Mexico that struck City Hall in El Paso, Texas on June 30, 2010. See Texas Capitol Report, El Paso Times, June 30, 2010.
Dear Mr. President,
Deadly violence from drug cartels and transnational gangs in Mexico is knocking on the United States' door with ever increasing frequency. Yesterday, gunfire from the cartels pierced that threshold and struck City Hall in El Paso. Fortunately no one was injured or killed. But that good fortune was not the result of effective border control – it was mere luck that the bullets struck buildings rather than bodies.
Luck and good fortune are not effective border enforcement policies. The shocking reality of cross border gunfire proves the cold reality: American lives are at risk. As the attached news article notes: "More than 1,300 people have been murdered in Juárez this year as a war continues relentlessly between the Juárez and Sinaloa drug cartels." Americans must be protected as this deadly war bulges at our border.
Law enforcement officials with the Texas Department of Public Safety and your own U.S. Customs and Border Protection will reveal the hard truth. Our state is under constant assault from illegal activity threatening a porous border.
The time for talk has passed. The time for action is now. The need is urgent. Each day that passes increases the likelihood that an American life will be lost because of the federal government's failure to secure the border.
This threat demands immediate and effective action by your Administration to secure our border. As the Attorney General of Texas, I urge you to make border security your top priority so that no more innocent lives are lost to border violence.
A 48-year-old woman shopping in El Paso was struck in the leg by bullets that flew across the border from Ciudad Juárez while pushing a stroller on a busy downtown El Paso street (Fox News, February 22, 2012).
On October 8, 2015, The Daily Mail reported: "[A] gang of drug traffickers tried to hide from US border patrol agents next to [Olissa's] home. ... Olissa, of McAllen, Texas, lives two blocks from the border, and her home is less than a mile from the most dangerous Mexican border city, which has a higher murder rate than many war zones."
Abbott should immediately order a meticulous update of survey data of the whole border, even requesting LANDSAT satellite images. Texas could upgrade roads and muster mobile housing for workers to move along the border as work progresses, water trucks, stockpiles of food, and cargo trucks.
Texas should immediately acquire 1,000-foot easements along the border by eminent domain where needed. Under Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), lawsuits cannot stop eminent domain, only squabble after the fact over payments. The correct approach is for only an easement, not the "designed to fail" approach of taking entire ranches whole to artificially drive up the cost.
If Trump starts in the Fifth Circuit, opponents can delay the project. But they cannot stop it. The sooner we start, the sooner we will get it finished.
According to the nonpartisan Center for
Immigration Studies, the deportations occurred between October 2008 and
February 2015. The three counties with the most deportations during this
period were Los Angeles County, Calif.; Maricopa County, Ariz.; and Harris
County, Texas.
*
Heather Mac Donald of the
Manhattan Institute has testified before a Congressional committee that in
2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for
illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County jail inmates were
illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest street gang, the
18th Street gang, were illegal aliens.
*
ILLEGALS CLIMBING CALIFORNIA’S BORDERS FOR JOBS AND WELFARE:
SAN DIEGO … Mexicans (unregistered democrat anchor baby
breeders (1,877).
In just the month of October 2017 CBP Border Patrol San Diego
border sector reportedapprehension of
individuals from Bangladesh (12), Brazil (1), Camaroon (3), Chad (1), China
(16), El Salvador (76), Eritrea (7), Gambia (4), Guatemala (178), Honduras
(54), India (101), Iran (1), Mexico (1,877), Nepal (31), Nicaragua (1), Pakistan (13), Peru (1), Somalia
(1), and “Unknown” (1) — a total of 2,379 individuals. These numbers
are similar to volumes seen in this sector for October since 2012. MICHELLE
MOONS
The Internet once seemed poised to utterly destroy the establishment media. In an era where everyone with a phone and a social media account could reach an audience of millions, the need for professional journalists gatekeeping information seemed pointless.
Yet journalists have savagely fought back against the social media companies that once threatened to displace them. Today, one angry email from a left-wing journalist is enough to get a tech giant to frantically manipulate its algorithms — or even create manual blacklists — to appease them.
The journalists at BuzzFeed have become masters of this tactic. Recently, they launched an investigation into “misinformation” and “hyper-partisan” content on YouTube. A day after the publication of BuzzFeed’s report, YouTube announced it would adjust its algorithms to tackle “misinformation”. The outlet led the media pressure campaign to have Alex Jones booted from Twitter. Anti-censorship comedian Michael Meecham (aka “Count Dankula”) says it was BuzzFeed that made YouTube demonetize his channel, effectively firing him.
For another example, look at Breitbart News’ latest scoop on YouTube, which caught the company red-handed altering search results for “abortion” mere hours after a Slate writer complained about the prominence of pro-life content on the platform.
Increasingly, Silicon Valley seems to be governed by a Mafia-like cycle of shakedowns imposed by the mainstream media. It usually follows the same pattern.
First, a relentless wave of negative coverage, aimed at causing outrage about the success of the mainstream media’s competitors on social media. Words like “misinformation,” “hate,” and “conspiracy theories” usually feature in such reports. Example: BuzzFeed – We Followed YouTube’s Recommendation Algorithm Down The Rabbithole.
Having seen how easy this game is, other journalists follow suit, taking aim at their personal favorite targets — whether its search results on YouTube or the criticism of progressive activists on Twitter. Silicon Valley might consider the advice of Rudyard Kipling — once you pay the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane.
Whereas the alternative media’s main criticism of Silicon Valley is its increasing censorship and favoritism, the objective of the mainstream media seems to be the artificial elevation of its own content on these platforms, and, in true Dane-geld fashion, even extracting payment from the tech giants.
Consider the following examples.
YouTube adjusted its search algorithm to raise the ranking of “authoritative sources” in search results for “abortion” and “abortions” after a left-wing journalist complained.
In the same story, we learned that YouTube gave the same treatment for search results related to “David Hogg” — videos critical of the anti-second amendment activist were a frequent complaint of journalists.
The same story revealed that YouTube is even protecting search results for Maxine Waters, a Democratic congresswoman — the party most favored by the mainstream media.
YouTube has also announced a push to downrank independent media sources (this is what they mean when they promise to tackle “misinformation”) in its recommended searches.
In the short-term, this followed criticism from BuzzFeed News about “hyper-partisan” content in recommended videos.
Facebook launched a crackdown against U.S.-focused independent media and grassroots political pages, banning approximately 800 of them just weeks before the midterm elections in November.
When Twitter initially failed to follow other social media platforms by banning Infowars and Alex Jones last year, a relentless intensely negative media attentionagainst the platform followed. Twitter eventually caved in and banned Jones.
When journalists and progressive celebrities embarked on a barrage of violent threats against MAGA hat-wearing high school kids (on the basis of widely promoted fake news smears by the mainstream media), Twitter failed to deverify or ban the majority of them.
This isn’t a left or right issue, by the way. When Facebook purged independent media pages in November, plenty of left-wing anti-establishment pages were affected too — especially if they leaned libertarian and anti-war.
In other news that should alarm the anti-establishment of both the left and right, Microsoft recently installed the “NewsGuard” browser extension on its mobile Edge browser by default. Founded by two neoconservative ex-journalists, the extension grants a green “trustworthy” or red “untrustworthy” rating to all news sources the user encounters.
Another fun fact about NewsGuard — the journalist-run project that seeks to restore “trust and accountability” to the media is funded by an advertising corporation whose D.C.-based subsidiary spins positive press coverage for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Sounds trustworthy!
Journalists complaining about recent layoffs want you to think that their entire profession is at risk. And maybe it was, at one point. But those same journalists now receive hundreds of millions of dollars from both national governments and tech giants, special favors in the latter’s algorithms, and the regular banning of their competitors. An industry on the verge of extinction? Not while the protection money keeps flowing.
Adios, Sanctuary La Raza Welfare State of California A fifth-generation Californian laments his state’s ongoing economic collapse. By Steve Baldwin American Spectator, October 19, 2017 What’s clear is that the producers are leaving the state and the takers are coming in. Many of the takers are illegal aliens, now estimated to number over 2.6 million. The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that California spends $22 billion on government services for illegal aliens, including welfare, education, Medicaid, and criminal justice system costs.
BLOG: MANY DISPUTE CALIFORNIA’S EXPENDITURES FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN MEXIFORNIA JUST AS THEY DISPUTE THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS. APPROXIMATELY HALF THE POPULATION OF CA IS NOW MEXICAN AND BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES FOR WELFARE LIKE BUNNIES. THE $22 BILLION IS STATE EXPENDITURE ONLY. COUNTIES PAY OUT MORE WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY LEADING AT OVER A BILLION DOLLARS PAID OUT YEARLY TO MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. NOW MULTIPLY THAT BY THE NUMBER OF COUNTIES IN CA AND YOU START TO GET AN IDEA OF THE STAGGERING WELFARE STATE MEXICO AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAVE ERECTED SANS ANY LEGALS VOTES. ADD TO THIS THE FREE ENTERPRISE HOSPITAL AND CLINIC COST FOR LA RAZA’S “FREE” MEDICAL WHICH IS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $1.5 BILLION PER YEAR.
Liberals claim they more than make that up with taxes paid, but that’s simply not true. It’s not even close. FAIR estimates illegal aliens in California contribute only $1.21 billion in tax revenue, which means they cost California $20.6 billion, or at least $1,800 per household.
Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming. Furthermore, the complexion of illegal aliens has changed with far more on welfare and committing crimes than those who entered the country in the 1980s. Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has testified before a Congressional committee that in 2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County jail inmates were illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest street gang, the 18th Street gang, were illegal aliens. Granted, those statistics are old, but if you talk to any California law enforcement officer, they will tell you it’s much worse today. The problem is that the Brown administration will not release any statewide data on illegal alien crimes. That would be insensitive. And now that California has declared itself a “sanctuary state,” there is little doubt this sends a message south of the border that will further escalate illegal immigration into the state.
"If the racist "Sensenbrenner Legislation" passes the US Senate, there is no doubt that a massive civil disobedience movement will emerge. Eventually labor union power can merge with the immigrant civil rights and "Immigrant Sanctuary" movements to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan." Indeed, California goes out of its way to attract illegal aliens. The state has even created government programs that cater exclusively to illegal aliens. For example, the State Department of Motor Vehicles has offices that only process driver licenses for illegal aliens. With over a million illegal aliens now driving in California, the state felt compelled to help them avoid the long lines the rest of us must endure at the DMV. And just recently, the state-funded University of California system announced it will spend $27 million on financial aid for illegal aliens. They’ve even taken out radio spots on stations all along the border, just to make sure other potential illegal border crossers hear about this program. I can’t afford college education for all my four sons, but my taxes will pay for illegals to get a college education.
California used to be home to America's largest and most affluent middle class. Today, it is America's poverty capital. What went wrong? In a word: immigration.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Official Poverty Measure, California's poverty rate hovers around 15 percent. But this figure is misleading: the Census Bureau measures poverty relative to a uniform national standard, which doesn't account for differences in living costs between states – the cost of taxes, housing, and health care are higher in California than in Oklahoma, for example. Accounting for these differences reveals that California's real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in America, and nearly twice the national average of 12.7 percent.
Likewise, income inequality in California is the second-highest in America, behind only New York. In fact, if California were an independent country, it would be the 17th most unequal country on Earth, nestled comfortably between Honduras and Guatemala. Mexico is slightly more egalitarian. California is far more unequal than the "social democracies" it emulates: Canada is the 111th most unequal nation, while Norway is far down the list at number 153 (out of 176 countries). In terms of income inequality, California has more in common with banana republics than other "social democracies."
More Government, More Poverty
High taxes, excessive regulations, and a lavish welfare state – these are the standard explanations for California's poverty epidemic. They have some merit. For example, California has both the highest personal income tax rate and the highest sales tax in America, according to Politifact.
Not only are California's taxes high, but successive "progressive" governments have swamped the state in a sea of red tape. Onerous regulations cripple small businesses and retard economic growth. Kerry Jackson, a fellow with the Pacific Research Institute, gives a few specific examples of how excessive government regulation hurts California's poor. He writes in a recent op-ed for the Los Angeles Times:
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor. By some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national average. Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics ... found that "in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ... energy expenditures exceeding 10% of household income."
Some government regulation is necessary and desirable, but most of California's is not. There is virtue in governing with a "light touch."
Finally, California's welfare state is, perhaps paradoxically, a source of poverty in the state. The Orange Country Register reports that California's social safety net is comparable in scale to those found in Europe:
In California a mother with two children under the age of 5 who participates in these major welfare programs – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), housing assistance, home energy assistance, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children – would receive a benefits package worth $30,828 per year.
... [Similar] benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just $1,112 in Romania. The California benefits package is higher than in well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even Sweden ($22,111).
Although welfare states ideally help the poor, reality is messy. There are three main problems with the welfare state. First, it incentivizes poverty by rewardingthe poor with government handouts that are often far more valuable than a job. This can be ameliorated to some degree by imposing work requirements on welfare recipients, but in practice, such requirements are rarely imposed. Second, welfare states are expensive. This means higher taxes and therefore slower economic growth and fewer job opportunities for everyone – including the poor.
Finally, welfare states are magnets for the poor. Whether through domestic migration or foreign immigration, poor people flock to places with generous welfare states. This is logical from the immigrant's perspective, but it makes little sense from the taxpayer's. This fact is why socialism and open borders arefundamentally incompatible.
Why Big Government?
Since 1960, California's population exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people. The growth was almost entirely due to immigration – many people came from other states, but the majority came from abroad. The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that 10 million immigrants currently reside in California. This works out to 26 percent of the state's population.
This figure includes 2.4 million illegal aliens, although a recent study from Yale University suggests that the true number of aliens is at least double that. Modifying the initial figure implies that nearly one in three Californians is an immigrant. This is not to disparage California's immigrant population, but it is madness to deny that such a large influx of people has changed California's society and economy.
Importantly, immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio higher than 2:1, according to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies. In California, immigration has increased the pool of likely Democrat voters by nearly 5 million people, compared to just 2.4 million additional likely Republican voters. Not only does this almost guarantee Democratic victories, but it also shifts California's political midpoint to the left. This means that to remain competitive in elections, the Republicans must abandon or soften many conservative positions so as to cater to the center.
California became a Democratic stronghold not because Californians became socialists, but because millions of socialists moved there. Immigration turned California blue, and immigration is ultimately to blame for California's high poverty level.
No comments:
Post a Comment