Monday, July 1, 2019

TRUMP SAYS IMMIGRATION RAIDS COULD START JULY 4TH... BUT NO ONE BELIEVES THIS PATHOLOGICAL LIAR

Trump says immigration raids could start July Fourth



President Trump, the most successful reality television producer in the history of the medium, understands symbolism.  Speaking at the end of the G-20 meeting in Osaka, he laid down a challenge to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.  Via Breitbart:
President Donald Trump said his postponed immigration raids in 10 major cities could start up on Independence Day unless "something pretty miraculous" happens in Congress on immigration reform.
By selecting the national patriotic holiday for the beginning of the effort, he implicitly highlights the lack of patriotism of the Democrats who want to spend the money that would otherwise take care of Americans on free medical care for illegal aliens.  (I am waiting for him to comment on the absence of American flags on the debate stage for the first two Democrat presidential debates.)
Trump is directly contradicting the Democrats' narrative that he is "anti-immigrant":
"Unless we do something pretty miraculous, but the Democrats, it seems to me, they want to have open borders," Trump said. "And for the life of me, I cannot figure that out. It's one thing because I want people to come to our country. We need them because we have all these companies coming in.
"... The only problem is that they have to come in through a process. They have to come in legally. It's also very unfair. You have millions of people online for years trying to get into a country. ... But, yeah, we will be removing large numbers of people. People have to understand," the president continued.
It appears that the battle space has been defined by the Democrats: they are for open borders, for subsidies for border-violators, and against any preferred status for citizens.  Trump's timing is perfect if the raids commence July Fourth.
Image: White House photo.



Has Trump crushed the border surge?



Is it possible that President Trump's deal with Mexico on halting the border surge is working?  According to Axios:
The U.S. Border Patrol apprehended roughly 87,000 unauthorized immigrants [sic] in the month of June, a decline compared to the steep figures reported over the last three months, according to leaked internal Department of Homeland Security data.
Why it matters: The drop enables acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan to tout that the June 7 deal the U.S. struck with Mexico to stem the flow of migration is working — the kind of cover he needs to fend off attacks from prominent Trump allies.
Axios has some intriguing data and a chart showing that border apprehensions of "inadmissibles" (meaning foreign nationals who break U.S. law by entering illegally) have declined from 132,887 in May to approximately 87,000 in June.  Axios has a chart showing a precipitous drop.  It's still early, and these figures are normally compiled around the 7th or 8th.  Axios says they don't include "inadmissibles" turned back at legal ports of entry, which would put the numbers a bit higher.
But it could very well signal that President Trump's deal with Mexico is working.  Mexico may well be serious about enforcing its own border, given that it has sent 15,000 troops to its southern frontier with Guatemala.  In that case — even without any legal reform of asylum loopholes that enable economic migrants to abuse the asylum system, the sheer force of a Mexican troop wall is keeping them out.
Mexico paying for it...
But we will have to wait for official figures to know for sure.  There are some other potential explanations as well.
One, start with the fact that the data were leaked to Axios, a center-left news outlet that has good contacts with the swamp.  It's likely a swamper leaked the figures, one who's in opposition to President Trump's policies.  There are some Obama-holdovers in that category at the Department of Homeland Security still in place, and their names — such as that of acting DHS secretary Kevin McAleenan — have been fingered for leaks to undermine President Trump's bid to deport migrants who've been declared by courts deportable.  Perhaps the man is under political pressure for it and wants to show President Trump that he's getting results, so he's letting the data out in their most favorable form now.  Axios seems to think this might be what's going on.
It also raises the uncomfortable question of whether the same number of migrants are coming across but Border Patrol agents aren't arresting them, as per McAleenan.  We need to make sure that isn't the issue, either.
Aside from the potential political machinations, there also are conditions that might keep migrants away.  Axios cites the heat factor for one — very hot summer months tend to keep migrants from trying their luck crossing illegally through utterly hostile deserts.
Another weather factor is heavy rains that have made crossing the Rio Grande a dangerous proposition.  Often the river is easily crossable, but a recent drowning of a migrant father and child who tried to cross the rapids-like conditions may be sending a message to other migrants that they risk their lives when they just can't wait it out for better weather.  A third factor is that migrants can read and listen to television reports, so some could be holding back based on reports of lousy conditions in migrant detention centers based on House Democrats refusing to authorize funding for them.  Why wait there when Mexico allows them to work and stay in that country as they wait?  They also may be hearing about deportation raids coming up, meaning another deterrent.  Perhaps the promises of an easy crossing and even easier ability to stay may be starting to sound hollow to them based on President Trump's willingness to move on enforcing rule of law at the border.  Like anyone else, migrants respond to economic incentives.
Here's a third potential factor: Central America doesn't have that many people.  Guatemala has the most, with about 8 million people, and all the others have less, some way less.  Could it be that the Central American nations are running out of would-be emigrants?  These countries have booming economies, contrary to media sob stories.  They've already lost a significant and critical number in their working-age population and may be getting to a point where they can't afford to lose any more.  It may mean even higher wage rises and efforts to retain people.  This one's obviously a big macroeconomic trend factor, but it may be starting to operate at the margins.
All told, this drop in apprehensions could be good news.  Could the border surge be finally ebbing?  When it becomes a better deal to migrate legally than illegally, migrants will choose to immigrate legally.  The reduced border apprehensions may be starting to have that effect.



Illegal Alien, Girlfriend Accused of Murdering Woman and Her Two Children

Illegal Alien, Girlfriend Accused of Murdering Woman and Her Two Children
ACSO
JOHN BINDER
 1,618
1:19

An illegal alien, with the help of his girlfriend, allegedly murdered his ex-wife and her two children, according to North Carolina authorities.

Areli Aguirre Avilez, a 30-year-old illegal alien from Mexico, and his 16-year-old girlfriend allegedly murdered his ex-wife, 38-year-old Maria Calderon, and her two children, 11-year-old Angel Pacheco and 12-year-old America Pacheco, according to the Alexander County Sheriff’s Office, as reported by the Associated Press.
Police said Avilez and his girlfriend murdered Calderon by driving over her with a vehicle and then allegedly dumped her body in the Catawba River in North Carolina.
The illegal alien, police said, shot Calderon’s young children, Angel and America, to death and left them in their home that was then set on fire.
Aside from the accused murders, Avilez has been indicted on statutory rape, arson, and violating a domestic violence order charges. His 16-year-old girlfriend has been charged with murder and arson.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.


Friends of ALIPAC,

While we are extending our fundraising deadline by 24 hours, only 48 hours remain for you to decide if ALIPAC will continue to fight Amnesty and illegal immigration beyond this point. (By Midnight Monday, July 1, 2019.) Please step forward to rally to us in these final moments at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/


We have fought hard and efficiently on your behalf, and are so thankful for each of you who have sacrificed time and/or funds in 2019 to help ALIPAC fight to save every job, tax resource, election, and American life we can from this invasion.

We have raised only $12,082 of the $15,000 we must raise for ALIPAC to fight onward beyond this point!

Sen. Graham's Amnesty bill is expected to come at us next week, so please rally to us in these final 48 hours by contributing at least $10, but preferably $25, $50, $100, $200, $500, or $1,000+ to help ALIPAC meet the costs of running a national organization.

48 hours left to help at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/



William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team


PS: This is a hard deadline. We either raise the remaining $3,000, or we have to bow out. The decision is yours. If you want a hard-hitting national organization fighting against illegal immigration and Amnesty, now is the time to support us at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/F










Massive Migrant Crossings Lead to Another Shelter Opening in Arizona

Temporary Migrant Shelter (File Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
File Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
BOB PRICE
  4,196
2:40

Border Patrol officials in the Yuma Sector announced the building of an additional temporary migrant shelter in response to “sustained large volumes of family units in the Arizona sector. Sector officials opened the new shelter for tours late last week.

Border Patrol officials began construction of a new family shelter in the Yuma Sector” on June 15 in response to the strain on resources and facilities” due to the continuing unprecedented numbers of migrant families illegally crossing the border in southwestern Arizona, according to a statement obtained by Breitbart News. The shelter became available for tours on June 28 and is expected to begin housing migrants soon.
The shelter is reported to be similar in design to other temporary facilities located in Donna and El Paso, Texas. It is expected to hold up to 500 migrant families and unaccompanied minors.
“The temporary, soft-sided facility will accommodate up to 500 individuals in U.S. Border Patrol custody while they await transfer to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Refugee Resettlement,” officials said in a written statement. “The temporary structures are weatherproof and climate-controlled for eating, sleeping, and personal hygiene.”
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) awarded a contract valued at just under $15 million to build the facilities. This includes showers, toilets, and syncs, officials reported. It also includes the perimeter monitoring equipment, office space, lockers, security, power, HVAC services, food, snacks, water, and custodial services, CBP officials stated.
Construction on the project began just over two weeks ago and is part of the Border Patrol’s effort to secure the border and meet the humanitarian needs of the current border crisis. During the month of May, Yuma Sector Border Patrol agents apprehended 42,225 family units. This is up from 8,775 in May 2017 — a 381 percent increase, according to the May Southwest Border Migration Report.
Additionally, Yuma Sector agents apprehended nearly 6,000 unaccompanied minors and nearly 6,500 single adults.
Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for the Breitbart Border team. He is an original member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX and Facebook.














Ann Coulter: Surprise! That 'cheap' immigrant labor costs us a lot

 1,443

© Getty Images
We could pay for every idiotic boondoggle proposed by the 300 Democratic presidential candidates if the current president would simply keep his central campaign promise to build a border wall and deport illegal aliens. (Back off — “illegal alien” is the term used in federal law.) 
A 2017 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) found that illegal aliens cost the American taxpayer — on net — $116 billion a year.
That’s pretty high, but the actual number is more likely triple that.
Straight out of the chute, FAIR assumes that there are only 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country, approximately the same number we’ve been told for the last 15 years as we impotently watched hundreds of thousands more stream across our border, year after year after year.
The 12 million figure is based on the self-reports of illegal aliens to U.S. census questionnaires. (Hello! I’m from the federal government. Did you break the law to enter our country? Now tell the truth! We have no way of knowing the answer, and if you say yes, you could be subjecting yourself to immediate deportation.)
More serious studies put the number considerably higher. At the low end, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale study last year put the number of illegals at 22 million. Yet Bear Stearns investment bank had it at 20 million back in 2005, and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele reported in 2004 that 3 million illegals were crossing each year — so simple math would put it at well over 60 million today.
So, right there, the FAIR study underestimates the tab for illegal immigration by at least a factor of three, meaning the real cost is about $350 billion a year. That’s triple what Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) free college tuition plan will cost in a decade.
I don’t mean to bash FAIR. It’s sweet how immigration restrictionists always bend over backward to be impartial. But their circumspection doesn’t mean the rest of us have to ignore reality.
Journalists’ usual method of determining the cost of “unauthorized entries” — as they say — is to phone some fanatically pro-illegal immigration group, such as Cato or CASA, and get a quote sneering at anyone else’s estimate of the costs.
In a deeply investigated 2017 Washington Post article, for example, the Post cited the “belief” that illegal aliens “drain government resources.” Without looking at any facts or figures, the reporter disputed that “belief” with a quote from Cathryn Ann Paul of CASA: "It's a myth that people who are undocumented don't pay taxes."
So there you have it! Cathryn Ann Paul says it’s a “myth.” Now let’s move on to the vibrant diversity being gifted to us by illegal aliens.
Earlier this year, The New York Times mocked President Trump’s tweet saying illegal immigration costs "250 Billion Dollars a year" by quoting big-business shill Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute: "There's no basis to any of those numbers about the fiscal cost." Am I doing OK, Mr. Koch?
The Times further explained that Trump’s figure “did not take into account the economic benefits of undocumented immigrants” — for example, the surprisingly affordable maids of some reporters.
Randy Capps of the Migration Policy Institute told the Times that studies of the cost of illegal immigration count only the costs or only the benefits. “They tend to talk past each other, unfortunately,” he said.
Well, the FAIR study counted both. For every dollar illegal immigrants pay in taxes — fees, Social Security withholding taxes, fuel surcharges, sales and property taxes — they collect $7 in government benefits: schooling, English as a second language classes, hospital costs, school lunch programs, Medicaid births, police resources and so on.
A few years ago, the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector looked at the winners and losers under our government redistribution system and found that in 2010, households headed by illegal immigrants received $14,387 more in government services than they paid in taxes.
Legal immigrant households also were big winners, receiving $4,344 more in government services than they paid in taxes. (Our government does a fantastic job deciding who can immigrate here.)
Only with nonimmigrant households does the government almost break even, doling out a mere $310 more in benefits than those households pay in taxes. (Surprise! The deficit is on track to hit $1 trillion next year.)
Like FAIR estimates, Rector’s study accepted the U.S. Census Bureau’s allegation that we’ve had the same number of illegal aliens in this country since the beginning of the Bush administration. Also like the FAIR study, Rector’s examination counted only the obvious costs imposed on us by illegal immigrants — things such as health care, education, fire and police protection, parks, roads, and bridges.
But there are all sorts of costs that no one ever counts. What about Americans’ lost wages to illegal immigrants who are willing to work for $7 an hour? Even if they don’t apply for unemployment insurance, how do we count the cost of suicide, opioid addiction or other anti-social behavior? 
Why not count the lost wages themselves? We want to know the cost-benefit ratio to those already here, not to the new total that includes the illegal immigrants. If it's a net negative to those already here — well, that's the point.
And what was the tab of illegal immigration to the family of Kate Steinle, the young woman shot dead by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco in 2015? There were obvious, tragic costs, of course — but there also are hidden costs, such as the lost productivity of the people close to Kate for years to come, the additional police presence around the San Francisco pier where she was killed and the reduction in tourist dollars.
We hear about the great largesse bestowed upon us by illegal immigrants all day long. The only hidden benefits are the warm feelings of self-righteousness that the CASA spokesman gets when bleating about illegals and the happiness that cheap servants bring to the top 10 percent.
In Maine, overdose deaths from opioids, mostly Mexican heroin, have skyrocketed in the last decade, up from an already catastrophic 100 to 200 deaths per year to more than double that — 418 in 2018. What is the cost of the state legislature spending weeks debating a bill to provide heroin addicts with Narcan? The cost of more crime and more police?
This isn’t to gratuitously mention the fact that completely unvetted, self-chosen illegal immigrants can, in fact, be rapists, drug dealers and cop-killers. It is to say that no analysis of illegal immigration’s cost can ever capture the full price.
Ann Coulter is a lawyer, a syndicated columnist and conservative commentator, and the author of 13 New York Times bestsellers. The most recent, “Resistance Is Futile! How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind,” was published in 2018.

The 2020 Democratic Candidates and Their Redefinition of American Citizenship


·          
New citizens stand during a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) naturalization ceremony at the New York Public Library, July 3, 2018. (Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)
Making the click-through worthwhile: How the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates want to make being an American citizen simply a matter of location and desire, instead of law; another allegation of hideous behavior from Donald Trump from the mid 1990s; the promised big roundup of thriller novels; and a heartfelt “thank you” to you, the readers.
The 2020 Democrats Want to Redefine Citizenship
Sometimes our political debates are furious and deeply divided because of demagogues, clickbait media, and hype. But sometimes our political debates are furious because they reflect a conflict of fundamentally opposed worldviews, where no compromise is feasible.
Many of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates want to fundamentally redefine who is American — that is, if you show up from another country and want to be here, you ought to enjoy the full rights of citizenship and all of the benefits provided to American citizens.
Bernie Sanders put it clearly: “We’re going to make public colleges and universities tuition-free and open that to the undocumented.” In other words, if are a citizen of another country and you want a free college education, all you have to do is show up in the United States and get accepted at any one of the 1,626 public colleges in the United States.
Needless to say, if enacted, this would bring a flood of people from all around the world, eager to enjoy the benefits of a college degree, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. (In case you’re wondering, there are a handful of other countries in Europe that offer very low or nominal tuition rates to American students, but at most of those schools, competition for the limited slots is high.)
It is not only Sanders. Beto O’Rourke says that the United States should contemplate eliminating the citizenship exam because it is a structural barrier to immigrants. Indeed, it is meant to be a structural barrier to those who lack English proficiency in speaking, reading, and writing, and civics knowledge. There was once a broad consensus that English proficiency and civics knowledge were required to be a good American citizen. The 2020 Democrats no longer believe this to be true.
Ten candidates, including Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren believe that crossing the border or entering the country without permission should no longer be a crime. On May 7, 2018, the Department of Justice announced they would prosecute all adult aliens apprehended crossing the border illegally, with no exception for asylum seekers or those with minor children. (If that policy was repealed, border crossers would still go through a civil legal process that could lead to their deportation.)
Booker, Steve Bullock, Bill de Blasio, Kirsten Gillibrand, Marianne Williamson, and Andrew Yang believe the federal government should NOT require the use of E-Verify to check the legal status of all hires by private employers. Another nine candidates said they only support that idea as part of a “compromise” on immigration reform.
Sanders contends that adding the question “Are you a U.S. citizen?” to the 2020 census would constitute “absolutely bigoted language.” Amy Klobuchar contends that if the question is included, she would, as president, require a “recount” and O’Rourke threatens that if it is included, he will re-do the entire census a second time without the question. Even John Hickenlooper, allegedly one of the centrists in the swarm of candidates, contends that asking the question on the census for is “ corrupt and illegal.”
We all have our notions of what constitutes an injustice. To many Democrats, the longstanding practice of enforcement of immigration law — policies in place throughout the Obama administration — is an inherent injustice. In their minds, being an American citizen is simply a matter of wanting to be here.
Yet Another Ugly Accusation against Donald Trump
No doubt, Trump’s history with women is sordid and scandalous and full of crass, crude, and objectifying behavior. On the other hand, we just went through a Supreme Court nomination fight that illustrated the limited options for a man who is accused of sexual assault with no evidence. We also know how conditional the “believe all women” rallying cry is.
In Carroll’s account, sometime in “the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996” she ran into Trump in the early evening at Bergdorf Goodman, a luxury department store based on Fifth Avenue in Midtown Manhattan in New York City. After some small talk, she agreed to try on lingerie in front of Trump for fun. She said there were no other customers or sales attendants in the Bergdorf Goodman lingerie department, and no other potential witnesses. She writes that she has checked and that the department store did not keep security tapes from that time. She describes herself as laughing through much of the experience. “I don’t remember if any person or attendant is now in the lingerie department. I don’t remember if I run for the elevator or if I take the slow ride down on the escalator. As soon as I land on the main floor, I run through the store and out the door — I don’t recall which door — and find myself outside on Fifth Avenue.” Carroll says did not report it to the police but told it to two friends. The two friends, contacted by New York magazine and not identified, confirmed Carroll described an experience like this.
Carroll is not seeking a police investigation or criminal charges. She insists this is not just a ploy to sell books; if it were, the book would be all about the president instead of the variety of creeps she’s encountered in her life. She appears to believe that the country should know about her experience and act accordingly.
 “You don’t feel like a victim?” Cooper asked.
“I was not thrown on the ground and ravished which the word rape carries so many sexual connotations. This was not sexual. It hurt. It just — it just — you know,” Carroll responded.
“But I think most people think of rape as — it is a violent assault. It is not — ,” Cooper began.
“I think most people think of rape as being sexy,” Carroll said.
“Let’s take a short break,” Cooper said.
“Think of the fantasies,” Carroll interjected.
“We will take a quick break if you can stick around. We’ll talk more on the other side,” Cooper continued.
“You’re fascinating to talk to,” Carroll said.
Do most people think of rape as being sexy?
In her account, Carroll wrote, “the struggle might simply have read as ‘sexy.’”
The Big Thriller Roundup
Last week on vacation, I finished Mark Greaney’s Agent in Place, the 2018 addition to his wildly popular series about Court Gentry, the CIA-trained “Gray Man” who can blend in just about anywhere and who has the skills and instincts to survive just about any situation. I had heard good things about the Gray Man Series, but until recently I was a bit wary: the strong, silent, brooding loner assassin protagonist can be a little tough to warm up to and enjoy. But what Agent in Place does particularly well — besides terrific research about the horrific situation in Syria as its civil war winds down, the Syrian exile community in France, and the glamorous halls of the high life in Paris – is set up a situation where the hero goes against his better judgment and agrees to pursue a mission that is one step short of suicidal. Greaney puts Gentry into a circumstance where any rational person would say, “Nope, sorry, I can’t help you, I’d like to, but doing this will almost certainly get me killed.” It’s the most desperate situation imaginable, the risks are just a Dagwood sandwich of various dangers and menaces and precarious gambles, his few allies are unreliable, and it requires sneaking into probably the single most dangerous location on earth. But the life of an innocent child hangs in the balance . . .  and Gentry would have to look at himself in the mirror if he choose to not try to save the child.
Back in May, I reviewed Matthew Betley’s Overwatch, which established his recovering-alcoholic Marine officer Logan West and an ever-changing realm of national-security threats that he and his out-of-retirement comrades must chase. That’s the first in his series; the fourth book in the series, Rules of Warhits stores and ships in mid-July. With a ripped-from-the headlines relevancy, much of Rules of War is set in a rapidly-deteriorating Venezuela. Betley told me, “I wanted to set it in a crumbling third-world country, and there’s no better example of that today than Venezuela.” Last week on Dana Perino’s program on Fox News, he talked a bit about the book, and a class action lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs and his recent experiences with the VA, attempting to get coverage for lung problems stemming from the burn pits in Iraq.
Also last week, I finished John A. Daly’s Blood TradeSet shortly after 9/11, Sean Coleman is another protagonist who’s overcoming his battles with the bottle, looking for a second chance and redemption for past mistakes. Blood Trade has a lot of atmosphere, high in the Colorado mountains, with a mood of foreboding hanging over much of the action. (Those who know my favorite television series will know I’m inclined to like stories of rural small towns with secrets behind every door.) Daly takes what looks like a mundane missing-persons stories and gradually reveals a chillingly plausible plot with, a deeply relatable motive for the story’s villains, and a vivid illustration of just how far some people will go to safe a life. This book is accurately titled. Daly’s next is Safeguardcoming in October, featuring Coleman guarding a defunct nuclear silo . . . and apparently attracting the attention of a local cult.
Then there’s arguably the most anticipated thriller of the summer, Brad Thor’s Backlash featuring Scot Harvath, who’s ended up working for the U.S. Secret Service, Navy SEALs, and as a CIA contractor over the course of 18 novels. As mentioned yesterday, not only does it live up to the hype, it’s really striking for how different a story this is from the previous books in this series. The last few Harvath novels have featured him and usually a small team investigating or uncovering some sinister plot by jihadists, or China, or the Russians. Backlash blows up that familiar rhythm and is reminiscent of that Liam Nesson movie The Grey, and the classic The Fugitive, and some of Jack London’s classic survival-in-the-most-hostile-wilds stories. Almost the entire story takes place in a remote corner of the world that I suspect has never been featured in a thriller before, and the story focuses as much on Harvath’s challenge to survive psychologically intact as physically. Thor is to be saluted for willing to experiment and move away from familiar territory, both literally and figuratively.
And these are just the thriller novels I’ve gotten my hands on recently. Daniel Silva’s The New Girl comes out July 16, with Israeli spymaster Gabriel Allon crossing paths with a ruthless Saudi prince who is likely to be compared to the real-life Mohammed bin Salman.
ADDENDA: You guys really are the best readers in the world. Yesterday I mentioned that reviews on Amazon help a book find an audience, and this morning I find 27 reviews on the page, each one kind and offering some sort of insightful observation. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Someone said to me recently that I shouldn’t have said the book isn’t that political, because it covers some big topics adjacent to our modern politics — “questions of heroism, of identity, and of faith” as one reviewer put it, and “the fragile line between chaos and sanity in a society” as another described it. This is what happens when you start the creation of your villains with, “what frightens me?”

 

What a Border Crisis Looks Like

·          
Migrants from Central America cross the Rio Bravo river to enter illegally into the United States at El Paso, Texas, June 11, 2019.(Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters)This is a similar border crisis to the one Obama faced in his second term, with similar challenges.
News flash: There’s a crisis at the border.  
This was discovered again over the past few days when immigration attorneys talked to reporters about appalling conditions at a Border Patrol facility detaining migrant minors in Clint, Texas.
According to the lawyers, many of the kids had to sleep on the concrete floor, failed to get proper adult supervision, and didn’t routinely take showers or brush their teeth. The details were hard to read. 
Assuming the account was accurate, one wonders how we could treat anyone this way, let alone children? But a lawyer who talked to the New Yorker mentioned a telling fact: The facility previously had a capacity of 104 and had never held children before. Yet it held roughly 350 children, apparently accommodated by placement of a new warehouse at the site. 
All this is consistent with vast numbers of migrants, many of them families and children, flooding the border and overtaxing facilities never meant for these kinds of numbers or this demographic of migrant. 
Indeed, the immigration lawyer mentioned to the New Yorker that the personnel at the Border Patrol facility were constantly receiving children and constantly transferring them over to a Health and Human Services site, and stipulated that the guards believed the children don’t belong there and should go someplace more appropriate. (Under the glare of publicity, they did.) 
The broader problem is that HHS, which is supposed to get custody of migrant children from Border Patrol in short order, is itself overburdened and backed up.  
Since it’s 2019, what should be properly attributed to dire circumstances and limited capacity is instead taken as evidence of President Donald Trump’s malice. 
If what’s happening at the border is a product of Trump policy, it would have to involve an intricate and well-executed plan. The White House would have to convince the acting head of the Department of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan — who served as deputy commissioner of Customs and Border Protection under President Barack Obama — to send word down through the bureaucracy to treat children as callously as possible and not to leak word of this explosive guidance.
In the real world, a migrant influx will test even an administration more favorably inclined toward immigration. The reason that the Left can’t keep their viral images straight — often misattributing to Trump photos of kids in steel-cage holding pens during the Obama years — is that this is a similar crisis to the one Obama faced in his second term, with similar challenges. 
A viral video of a Justice Department lawyer arguing before a panel of judges last week that kids don’t need toothbrushes and soap to meet the standard for “safe and sanitary” detention under the so-called Flores settlement has caused outrage. But few have stopped to note that the underlying case had to do with a district court finding that the Obama administration in 2015 was in material breach of the Flores standard (or that the DOJ lawyer was offering a technical legal argument — not a defense of mistreating kids).
All that said, once these migrants are under our care, it is our responsibility to make sure they are treated as humanely as possible. The border needs more resources. The Trump administration has been asking Congress to pass a funding package, and it should do so forthwith. To address the root cause of the crisis, it should also change the bizarre asylum rules that have forced us to release family units from Central America into the country, creating an incentive for more to come. 
As long as that’s the case, we aren’t going to be able to control the border or process people coming across it in an orderly fashion. What we’re seeing is what a border crisis looks like. If we don’t like it — and we shouldn’t — it’s time for Congress to act to begin to bring it to an end. 

 

 

 

The Border as an ‘Attractive Nuisance’

A U.S. Customs and Border Protection border-patrol agent talks to people on the Mexican side of the border wall in San Diego, Calif., November 28, 2018. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)
If you have a swimming pool, you can be held liable if a trespassing child falls in and drowns unless you’ve taken reasonable steps to keep children from getting to the pool, like a fence. An unfenced pool (or trampoline or a discarded refrigerator that locks from the outside, among other potentially dangerous things) is thus called an attractive nuisance.
The loopholes in our asylum laws make our nation’s borders an attractive nuisance, as well. Of course, no matter what we do, there will always be people who will try to illegally infiltrate our borders, and it’s inevitable that some of them will die in the process — whether by drowning, exposure, dehydration, or other causes. But when we fail to take the most elementary steps to dissuade people from trying to sneak in — heck, when we reward people for sneaking in with kids in tow and making bogus asylum claims — we share the responsibility for those deaths.
The heart-wrenching photograph of a Salvadoran father and daughter who were found drowned Monday on the banks of the Rio Grande forces us to face this issue. Julian Castro was right when he said at last night’s Democratic debate, watching that image of Oscar and his daughter, Valeria, is heartbreaking. It should also piss us all off.
But once pissed off, how to respond? How do we make our border not be an attractive nuisance?
Castro’s answer — and the approach of virtually all Democratic candidates and elected officials — is open borders. And I no longer mean that Democrats are, in effect, calling for open borders. At last night’s debate there was no longer any pretense. Castro took the lead, followed by the rest, in calling for repeal of the criminal law against border infiltration, ending the practice of making asylum claimants take a number at ports of entry and wait their turn, the complete abolition of immigrant detention, and amnesty for every foreigner who manages to get past the border so long as they don’t commit a serious” crime (whatever that means today).  Though she wasn’t on the stage Wednesday, the party’s leader, House speaker Nancy Pelosi, made clear that she’s on board, asking at an event Monday What’s the point? of enforcing immigration laws inside the United States. What all this represents is the abolition of immigration limits.
This would certainly end the attractive-nuisance problem. It would also lead to a rush for the border that would make the 2015 border crisis in Europe (sparked by the photo of another drowned child) pale by comparison. Gallup reported earlier this year that 42 million people in Latin America want to move here, and the share that would actually follow through would be a lot higher than now if we were to formally convert the Border Patrol into a welcome wagon, as the Democrats propose. And that’s not counting the AfricansMiddle Easterners, and other extra-continental migrants we’re seeing.
The other approach to ending the attractive-nuisance problem is to fence off the swimming pool, as it were. In some places that might actually mean a literal fence, but that won’t address the reasons for the current surge. At the very least, that would require plugging the three most serious legal loopholes incentivizing people to cross the border. It also would entail actually deporting people who’ve exhausted their due process, been turned down for asylum, and received a deportation order from a judge; until people in Central America see their fellows glumly stepping off the plane, their asylum ploys having failed, they’ll rightly figure the trip is worth it. More broadly, mandating the use of E-Verify, at least for new hires, is imperative, to fence off the labor market.
There are two ways the United States can limit its responsibility for deaths on the border: Unlimited immigration, or limits that are actually enforced.  The Democrats have made their choice. They should be made to answer for it.









Please call White House and GOP Senators then share & discuss this alert by email and on (FACEBOOK HERE) .. (TWITTER HERE) .. (GAB HERE) .. (ALIPAC HERE)

The situation with the border budget bill is still very fluid, and the US Senate has announced rare Friday session to vote on a defense bill! The messaging from the White House is about making a "deal" with Democrats, and we saw in this recent video of Trump (View) one of the deals he wants is for Amnesty for DACA Dreamer illegals!

By signaling and spreading the word you know an Amnesty plot is afoot (view article), when those behind the plan are eager to keep it concealed, we may have a chance of stopping or delaying it!

We must keep our pressure and momentum growing in the final hours before the summer break. Calling or blasting Democrats would be futile, and there will be many years for us all to beg the Democrats not to do things should they win an Amnesty deal from Trump and take over America with their millions of additional voters and government employees that were today's illegals.

We need calls, calls, calls to the White House and GOP Senators to demand:


"The only thing that will stop illegal immigration is to send illegals home as our current laws require. Stop spending billions to aid illegals and stop pushing Amnesty legislation deals with Democrats. No deals on DACA. Illegals go home. It's the will of the people, and it's the law. Stop allowing illegals to waltz right into America..." (etc.)

We need you to fill their phone lines, voice mails, and social media accounts. Use simple searches. For example, search "Lindsey Graham, Facebook" or "Marco Rubio, Twitter."

Call the White House again first at --
202-456-1111
Then tweet to Trump on Twitter
@realDonaldTrump

Then post a message on Trump's Facebook page at --https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/


Then REPEAT THIS PROCESS FOR ALL GOP SENATORS as fast as possible using their contact info at--
https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm


Let's push as hard as possible today, ALIPACers. Please call our targets and share this meme and alert with others by email (remove the unsubscribe at the bottom first) and on social media.


The ALIPAC Team




At Busy Southern Mexico Border, No Troops to Be Found



TECUN UMAN, Guatemala—One of the busiest border crossings between Mexico and Guatemala has yet to see Mexican National Guard troops. In the southeast of Mexico, across the Suchiate River, goods and people flow all day long between the two countries.
But there is still no sign of the 6,000 troops that the Mexican government said it would deploy after President Donald Trump threatened to impose escalating tariffs if Mexico did not move to secure its southern border.
The tariffs were set to start on June 10, but Mexican officials averted them with an agreement that included a promise to secure its 540-mile southern border with Guatemala.
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said a new National Guard force will be formed by June 30, of which 6,000 troops will be posted to the Mexico–Guatemala border. The National Guard will consist of members from Mexico’s military police, naval police, federal police, and the National Migration Institute, according to Luis Crescencio Sandoval González, Mexico’s secretary of defense.
“We are covering the southern border, and we are helping with the effort of the National Institute of Migration, which now has the power to be securing people, and we are supporting them to be able to carry out this activity,” González said at a press conference on June 24.






Mexico Guatemala
A tube rafter gets ready for a day of ferrying people and goods across the Suchiate River between Tecun Uman, Guatemala, and Hidalgo, Mexico, on June 26, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

On June 21, Marcelo Ebrard Casaubon, Mexico’s foreign affairs secretary, said the National Guard deployment of 6,000 troops is complete.
“The National Guard is going to be in the southeast of the country—it’s going to cover the whole country, but the south of the country is going to be a priority,” Casaubon said.
But in the southeast of Mexico, the shores of the Suchiate River by Hidalgo City are void of military might.
Eduardo Gallardo Gonzalez, secretary of the department of municipal protection in Suchiate, Hidalgo City, said they are still expecting the National Guard.
“At this moment, the National Guard has not arrived,” he told The Epoch Times on June 25. “We do know that the National Guard is coming, but we do not know when.”
Gonzalez said the military and Navy have always conducted periodic patrols of the river border, but they’re not a constant presence, and patrols haven’t increased since the deal with Trump was reached.






Mexico Guatemala
Eduardo Gallardo Gonzalez, secretary of the department of municipal protection in Suchiate, Hidalgo City, Mexico, on June 25, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

A Mexican official told The Epoch Times on background that the military ran a test on the bank of the Suchiate by Hidalgo City on June 16 and 17. The official said the test was timed, in part, to coincide with the Guatemala general election on June 16, during which Guatemala authorities asked for assistance along the border. The result is that the government decided to use both male and female National Guard troops, and that they will be unarmed, the official said.
Data from Mexican immigration authorities shows that more than 26,800 migrants were apprehended in this area after crossing illegally in the first four months of 2019—making up half of the total apprehensions along the border.
However, with the United States apprehending more than 130,000 illegal immigrants in May, mostly from Central America, it’s clear that most of the migration at Mexico’s southern border is happening outside of legal channels.
The crossings over the Suchiate River from Tecun Uman into Mexico look nothing like in December 2018 when the international bridge was heaving with thousands of migrants as the second large caravan rammed its way through.
Now, the migrants cross in small groups and usually just in the early morning or late evening.






Mexico Guatemala
A street in the border town of Tecun Uman, Guatemala, on June 25, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

An official at the main immigration detention center in Tapachula, Mexico, 25 miles from the Hidalgo City crossing area, said the center is receiving between 200 to 500 new illegal immigrants each day on average—these are the ones being apprehended in the state of Chiapas and those who wish to transit legally.
“Normally, the majority of the people are from Central America,” said Gonzalez. “But, now we are also seeing Haitians and Cubans. The majority of them cross the river on a tube raft or wade across, then they walk 40km [25 miles] to Tapachula.”
From January to April, immigration authorities said they apprehended more than 1,800 Africans, 554 Indians, 393 Bangladeshis, 1,000 Haitians, and almost 2,000 Cubans crossing illegally.
The majority of the 5,000 migrants currently at the Tapachula detention center are from Haiti and Africa.






Mexico Guatemala
Migrants, mostly from Haiti and Africa at the main Immigrant detention center in Tapachula, Mexico, on June 24, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

Uncertainty Until Mexican Plan in Place

The caravans opened the floodgates to sustained, high levels of migration toward the United States, said Herbert Ivan Alayn Ortega, a member of the municipal council of Ayutla, San Marcos, Guatemala. He is based in Tecun Uman.
Before the caravans, Ortega said the largest groups that passed through Tecun Uman were no more than 50 people.
“Eight months ago, because of the caravan, the migrant flow went up steeply,” he told The Epoch Times on June 25. “We as a border city here in Tecun Uman, we have always lived with the migrant situation. We have seen people from India, Asia, of many nationalities—besides the Central American people we see all the time.”
Ortega said the migrants continue to cross illegally at the five main crossing points in the area, near the international bridge—Armadillo Pass, Coyote Pass, Palenque, Cruz del Migrante, and Cascajo.
A lot of speculation and uncertainty surrounds Mexico’s new security measures. If, and when, the measures become apparent, however, new smuggling routes will be set and the migration will continue, Ortega said.






Mexico Guatemala
Herbert Ivan Alayn Ortega, member of the Municipal Council of Ayutla, San Marcos, Guatemala, in his office in Tecun Uman, Guatemala, on June 25, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

At 5:30 a.m. on June 26, a group of six Salvadorans were walking back to Tecun Uman from the river after trying to get across to Mexico. They said Mexican police on the other side were demanding money—which they didn’t have, so they had to retreat. It’s likely they will try again under the cover of night.
But everything comes at a price, and the night crossing is 40 quetzales ($5.40) per person, rather than the usual rate of 10 quetzales ($1.35).
About 160 miles north of Tecun Uman, in La Mesilla, the price of being smuggled to the United States has already increased from $6,000 to $10,000.
Other lesser-used routes are further north through the jungle, a more difficult and dangerous journey through drug trafficking territory. These may become more commonly used, depending on Mexico’s moves.
With translation by Jorge Rodriguez.
Follow Charlotte on Twitter: @charlottecuthbo




A lot of Latino voters were kind of creeped out by three of the Democratic candidates' calculated use of Spanish in their debate statements. Not only were Cory Booker, Julian Castro, and Beto O'Rourke observably poor Spanish speakers, their use of the Spanish language to appeal to the Latino voters was just a little too cute on the pandering front. And that doesn't even get into the matter of their Hugo Chavez-style socialist promises for them. For many Latino voters, been there, done that.  
I would have loved to have seen the fluently Spanish-speaking moderator test Castro, who reputedly speaks very little Spanish with a Spanish-language question. Meanwhile, the most fluent Spanish speaker on the floor, the Sandinista- and Cuban-trained Bill De Blasio, didn't join the panderfest. Maybe he didn't want anyone to ask him how he got so good at it.
The big problem, though, was that they seemed to be running for president of some country other than the United States.
Here's how bad it was:













Embedded video

Beto O'Rourke gave a long monologue in Spanish. And Cory Booker, not to be outdone, also answered a question in Spanish.

And the full stop in Julián Castro's closing statement was his "Adios" to President Donald Trump





Here are a few Latino reactions:













Embedded video

Robert Francis O'Rourke may have the fake Spanish name, but Cory Booker really stepped it up tonight with his fake... well, Spanish.


















Embedded video

My biggest pet peeve is people trying to speak Spanish just to pander to Hispanics like we only understand Spanish!

What the hell is going! So offensive!









And that's just the real Spanish speakers, who, if they vote, very likely are going to also be English speakers.
What do we have going on here? Have we ever seen this before in a presidential debate, where candidates fall over themselves to speak a language that isn't the language of this country? There was even a moment when Booker showed ashocked face at O'Rourke's Spanish skills, apparently upset that he didn't get to speak it first. This is something different.
Number one, these Democrats shut out the non-Spanish speakers with their stunt (none of them translated their remarks) from their debate presentations, which after all, is supposed to be aimed at winning over U.S. voters. Every Spanish statement to non-Spanish-speaking voters is an insult to their attention. And the idea that every immigrant voter is a Spanish-speaking immigrant voter is kind of insulting too. Favoritism, anyone?
Don't get me wrong, I love speaking and reading Spanish myself, it's a really wonderful language to learn and I encourage everyone to learn it, given its usefulness around our hemisphere and beyond.
But it's also a foreign language here and if the only language you speak is Spanish, your future is in the Home Depot parking lot, maybe not even that. English, to immigrants, including my own Polish grandmother in her Depression-era letters to her sister, is the language of making it in America, a point of pride for immigrants for mastering. 
They seem to be trying to change this. The message being sent now is that they'd like to change the entire U.S. language or turn the U.S. into a salad bowl of competing languages, or better still, keep Latino migrants speaking only Spanish. In shifting to Spanish, however unready they are to speak it properly, these pandering Democrats seem to be rebuking the idea that English is the language that naturally assimilates people or helps people succeed. 
Which raises questions about what they are really after - are they trying to erase the U.S. as it is, and remake it into something more like a third-world country? Are they looking to keep Spanish speakers speaking only Spanish in a bid to ensure they remain dependent on Democrats for government services? Are they trying to create a helot underclass to keep under their thumbs to ensure their permanent California-style power? Are they looking for the actual illegal alien vote to pad their numbers or else keep the Democratic congressional seat numbers high?
The fact that they focused so much attention on goodies for these millions of foreigners living in the U.S. illegally supports this troubling picture. They promised amnesty, decriminalization of illegal border crossing, a repeal ofArticle 1325 (which is the baseline of U.S. immigration law) all to pander for the votes of foreign nationals living illegally in the U.S., and services galore, such as health care for illegals, which up until now had only been confined to U.S. citizens and legal residents. 
By contrast, they didn't promise anything to Americans, other than to take away their health care and kill off their corporate jobs. The people they most wanted to hand free stuff to were all non-citizens.
Incredibly, they're running for the presidency of the U.S. Yet they sound like they might just be running for the presidency of Honduras, given the content of their promises and of course, fealty to the language. Their tactic is exactly identical to that of Honduran communist Hugo Chavez acolyte Mel Zelaya (or Chavez himself) which was to try to institutionalize poverty and non-assimilation, creating the finest of loyal voting blocs.
Do they know which country they're running to be president of? A little ethnic spice is always a welcome thing in politics, but what we are seeing here is an entire candidate base going overboard, promoting socialism and coming uncomfortably close to promoting Hugo Chavezism. Even the Americans of Latino descent are noticing and they aren't amused. No wonder Trump is making such inroads with Latino voters. 
Image credit: Twitter screen shot










Leading 2020 Democrats Unified on Amnesty for Illegals Ahead of Debate

naturalization ceremony in L.A.
Mario Tama/Getty Images
JOHN BINDER
    4,154
5:35



Ahead of the first debate for 2020 Democrat presidential primary contenders, the leading Democrats among the pack of 24 candidates all effectively share the same views on immigration as they demand amnesty for all illegal aliens and more legal immigration to the U.S. to satisfy the needs of big business.

From slogans like “Diversity is our strength” to claims that the U.S. is a “nation of immigrants,” the top three Democrat candidates largely agree on wanting to expand rights to all illegal aliens, driving more legal immigration to the country beyond the current annual total of about 1.2 million, and denouncing President Trump’s high-wage, low-immigration economic model.
Here, Breitbart News breaks down the immigration stances among former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) before they hit the debate stage this week:
Joe Biden
In a Miami Herald op-ed this week, Biden released his blueprint for America’s immigration system which begins by declaring that the 3.5 million illegal aliens who are enrolled and eligible for President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program “are Americans.”
“We are a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants … that starts by recognizing that DREAMers are Americans, and Congress needs to make it official,” Biden wrote. ‘The millions of undocumented people in the United States can only be brought out of the shadows through fair treatment, not ugly threats.”
Aside from giving amnesty to all illegal aliens, Biden said it is the “obligation” of Americans to provide all illegal aliens with free healthcare.
Biden has also supported the President George W. Bush-era policy that states “any willing worker” should be allowed to come to the U.S. to compete against America’s working and middle class for jobs.
“Instead of sending [foreign graduates] home, we should be a stamping a green card on their diploma as they walk across the stage,” Biden said in 2013. “Literally, I mean this literally, not figuratively, literally … we’ve also proposed adding additional H-1B visas so that American employers can hire the best and the brightest no matter where they come from if they can’t be found here.”
At the U.S.-Mexico border, Biden opposes building a wall to stop illegal immigration. Instead, Biden has said, the southern border should be secured using “smart investments in border technology.” These same “border technology” initiatives were implemented by former President Bush and failed so much that the Obama administration halted thementirely.
Bernie Sanders
Though Sanders has touted his plans to increase the minimum wage for America’s working and middle class, his immigration platform increases the foreign competition that Americans would be subjected to in the labor market.
Biden, through the years, has raised concerns with mass immigration and its depressing impact on Americans’ wages and job prospects, but in May he called for amnesty for all 11 to 22 million illegal aliens, according to the Las Vegas Sun:
As it stands, Sanders said, the 1.8 million so-called Dreamers would “immediately” gain permanent legal status, and the rest of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally would be able to “come out of the shadow,” he said. There would also be a “path to citizenship.” [Emphasis added]
Since 2013, Sanders has voted to increase legal immigration levels and foreign worker visa programs, including the process known as “chain migration” whereby newly naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country.
Sanders has advocated for increasing detention space at the U.S.-Mexico border to create adequate space for federal immigration officials to hold illegal aliens, but he also railed against the deportation of illegal aliens who have final orders for removal.
Sanders, like many Democrats running for president, supports giving free health care to all illegal aliens, which American taxpayers would fund.
Elizabeth Warren
Warren has proposed a robust plan founded in “economic patriotism” similar to that of Trump’s, but her plan is undermined by her broadly open borders worldview.
This week, Warren announced that she was joining the likes of fellow Democrat primary candidate Julián Castro — known for his mass immigration stances — by announcing that if she were to become president, she would decriminalize illegal immigration, thus making it not a criminal offense for foreign nationals to cross into the U.S.
“We should not be criminalizing mamas and babies trying to flee violence at home or trying to build a better future,” Warren said.
Like Biden and Sanders, Warren has proposed legalizing all illegal aliens living in the U.S., giving them a pathway to become American citizens, and providing taxpayer-funded healthcare to all illegal aliens.
“We must pass comprehensive immigration reform that is in line with our values, creates a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants including our DREAMers, and protects our borders,” Warren said.
Warren has favored expanding chain migration that would increase legal immigration levels; has vowed that she will not build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, calling it a “monument to hate and division”; and has said she will end all private detention of border crossers and illegal aliens.
Democrats are expected to continue attacking Trump’s immigration policies during their scheduled debates this week, despite the administration’s “Hire American” initiative leading to increased wages for America’s working and blue collar class, along with more disenfranchised Americans entering the labor market.
The 2020 Democrat presidential primary debates air on NBC, MSNBC, and Telemundo on June 26 and June 27.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder

ILLEGALS & WELFARE

WE CAN’T TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN, AND YET WE LET MEXICO BUILD THEIR BILLION DOLLAR WELFARE STATE ON OUR BACKS!!!

70% OF ILLEGALS GET WELFARE!
 “According to the Centers for Immigration Studies, April '11, at least 70% of Mexican illegal alien families receive some type of welfare in the US!!! cis.org”

So when cities across the country declare that they will NOT be sanctuary, guess where ALL the illegals, criminals, gang members fleeing ICE will go???? straight to your welcoming city. So ironically the people fighting for sanctuary city status, may have an unprecedented crime wave to deal with along with the additional expense.
*
$17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
*
$12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English.
*
$22 billion is spent on (AFDC) welfare to illegal aliens each year.
*
$2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as (SNAP) food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
*
$3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. Does not include local jails and State Prisons.
*
2012 illegal aliens sent home $62 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. This is why Mexico is getting involved in our politics.
*
$200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

THE SLOW DEATH OF CALIFORNIA, A WELFARE STATE AND COLONY OF MEXICO
With crime soaring, rampant homelessness, sanctuary state status attracting the highest illegal immigrant population in the country and its “worst state in the U.S. to do business” ranking for more than a decade, California and its expansive, debt-ridden, progressive government is devolving into a third-world country. JANET LEVY


AMERICA: THE WORLD’S WELFARE OFFICE
*
With crime soaring, rampant homelessness, sanctuary state status attracting the highest illegal immigrant population in the country and its “worst state in the U.S. to do business” ranking for more than a decade, California and its expansive, debt-ridden, progressive government is devolving into a third-world country. JANET LEVY

"This is how they will destroy America from within.  The leftist billionaires who orchestrate these plans are wealthy. Those tasked with representing us in Congress will never be exposed to the cost of the invasion of millions of migrants.  They have nothing but contempt for those of us who must endure the consequences of our communities being intruded upon by gang members, drug dealers and human traffickers.  These people have no intention of becoming Americans; like the Democrats who welcome them, they have contempt for us." PATRICIA McCARTHY

"Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just how much of a drain illegal immigration has become." FAIR President Dan Stein

We must warn illegal aliens

I think Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have an excellent point about how badly the illegal aliens in detention centers are being treated.  They aren't being given everything they want or need, and the accommodations are worse than what they enjoyed in their home countries.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if many of them regret coming here after all.  Yet the evil white people in Congress are arguing about setting aside money to improve their conditions and buy their toiletries.  Now employees at capitalist business Wayfair are protesting that their employer is willing to sell the government beds for illegal aliens, because apparently sleeping on concrete or on a mattress on top of concrete is morally superior.  Didn't Santa Alexandria say it was more important to be morally right than factually correct?   Surely, the patron saint of bartending has a deeper understanding of morality than the rest of us, especially us engineers.
Ilhan Omar has pointed out that America doesn't live up to its reputation as a land of milk and honey.  The streets are not paved with gold, and not everyone is a millionaire.  All those poor immigrants were fooled as she was into bringing their unskilled labor and criminal talents here to improve the country.  You know the human-smuggling cartels are not going to give them their money back.
It seems there is but one thing to do.  The American government should make commercials with Spanish (and other) narration, showing America as it really is.  Show the horrible detention centers.  Show the homeless people encamped on the streets of Los Angeles and San Francisco.  (I think Tucker Carlson has some videos he might be willing to share.)  Show the videos of urban youth pillaging stores in downtown areas.  Show pictures of abortion centers, too.  Potential immigrants need to be able to make informed decisions about whether to violate our immigration laws.
Illegally resident aliens sacrifice a lot to come here and sponge off the American taxpayer, so we can feel wonderfully virtuous as our taxes are increased to support them.  The poor people who are citizens of our country often own their own homes and have air conditioning, televisions, and computers.  It's hard to motivate the citizenry to accept higher taxes so the money can be redistributed to others who are not particularly needy.  But illegals come here with just the designer clothes on their backs, with someone's sick and dirty child or children in tow.  And after hundreds or thousands of miles dealing with no beds and sniveling brats, we fail to hand them the keys to even the sanctuary cities.  They have no concept of the suffering that still awaits them.  Oh, the humanity!
They have to be warned, for pity's sake.  And if warning them cannot be funded by the elected officers in Congress who enjoy their derived feelings of virtue from having something to complain about, then it will serve us all right if the illegals start packing up and going back to wherever they came from.  They can make their home countries great instead!  Their brilliant innovations are more than we deserve to benefit from, failing as we do in our promises.  The agonies of losing them will be richly appropriate punishment.
My only concern is that citizens who want to be paid reparations for their ancestors' enslavement will also start packing and abandoning the United States, to move to their ancestral homelands and apply their talents on behalf of those countries.  How can we maintain our superpower status if everyone who thinks he is getting a raw deal packs up and goes elsewhere?  We are nothing without our global moral superiority.
Well, we would be one thing: better off.
Sam can be reached at syounnokis@gmail.com.

Five Charged in Texas Human Trafficking, Sex Slavery Scheme

stash house
File Photo: U.S. Border Patrol
BOB PRICE
 49
2:53

HOUSTON, Texas — Houston police arrested five people in connection to an alleged human trafficking and sex slavery operation. Police rescued 18 victims who officials say were held for ransom and forced to work or perform sexual acts. At least one of the suspects is a twice-deported criminal alien.

On June 5, Houston Police Department investigators received information about a migrant being held in a Houston stash house, Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo told reporters on June 28. The information led to the arrest of five individuals and the rescue of 18 — including two women and 16 men.
Acevedo told reporters that investigators traveled to an area where they believed the trafficking victims were being held. During a traffic stop, officers rescued a juvenile victim and detained several suspects, the chief said.
The traffic stop spurred a further joint investigation with the Houston Police Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations special agents. The investigation led law enforcement officials to a location in northwest Houston, Acevedo explained, where an undercover money exchange led to the arrest of another suspect and the recovery of an additional kidnap victim.
This arrest led to the uncovering of a stash house “where other victims were being held against their will,” the Houston police chief stated. “We were able to rescue 16 additional victims from deplorable conditions.”
Acevedo said that women were being held captive and were sexually assaulted for 25 days. The chief told reporters the 16 men were being held with “little to no clothing” and were forced to work and perform sexual acts.
The investigation led to the arrest of five subjects. Their charges include engaging in organized crime, sexual assault, and aggravated kidnapping, he stated.
In total, police arrested five suspects. Those suspects are identified by police as:
  • Fredy Moreno-Gill, 26
  • Jose Manuel Aviles-Diaz, 26
  • Jose Silvestre, 18
  • Morris Gudiel Campos Gomez, 39
  • Gabriel Salazar-Bautista, 35
Court records from the U.S. Southern District of Texas reveals that Gabriel Salazar-Bautista is a Mexican national who immigration officers deported in 2009 and 2013. Salazar-Bautista was one of the suspects arrested in the initial traffic stop on June 3. He now faces a federal charge of illegal re-entry after removal in addition to the Texas kidnapping charge.
In addition to the human trafficking victims, police recovered four guns, more than $10,000 cash, and 19 grams of cocaine.
Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for Breitbart Texas. He is a founding member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX.



Illegal Alien Indicted On Fentanyl Charges In Arizona: 'The Drugs...Are Enough To Kill Thousands Of People'

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2019/07/01/illegal-alien-indicted-in-arizona-the-drugsare-enough-to-kill-thousands-of-people-n2549254


As the opioid epidemic continues to ravage families across America, authorities in Mesa, Arizona have arrested two individuals, including one illegal immigrant, on charges "of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute fentanyl and possession with intent to distribute fentanyl." 
The Toledo Blade reports that the U.S. District Court in Toledo indicted Felipe Penuelas-Rodriguez, 50, and Reyna Trejo, 30, in late June after the pair were arrested after authorities discovered the two were attempting to distribute enough fentanyl to kill at least 500,000 individuals. 
Penuelas-Rodriguez and Trejo were both arrested in June "with approximately one kilogram of fentanyl, as well as approximately 2,100 pills that tested positive for fentanyl." 
While running background checks, authorities discovered that Penuelas-Rodrguez is an illegal alien. 
“The drugs seized are enough to kill thousands of people,” U.S. Attorney Justin Herdman said in a statement. “The fentanyl pills stamped to look like prescription painkillers are another reminder that there are no safe drugs available on the street.”
While it is unclear where these laced pills originated, the narcotics confiscation follows a similar pattern across America. In February 2019, the United States Drug Enforcement Agency issued a press release after a similar, albeit much larger, drug bust occurred in New York City.
“These arrests highlight a growing trend in illicit street drugs which increases the risk of drug overdose,” DEA Special Agent in Charge Ray Donovan said the time. “Traffickers are mass producing pseudo-pharmaceutical pills made of heroin, fentanyl and other illicit drugs in makeshift laboratories throughout New York City. These pills attract users because they are more convenient and less conspicuous; but users should beware because they are unregulated and lethal. DEA and our law enforcement partners are committed to removing such threats and arresting drug dealers, traffickers and manufacturers.”
 “If you take ‘prescription’ pills that did not come directly from a pharmacy, you are risking your life,” Special Narcotics Prosecutor Bridget G Brennan added. 
Both men in the Arizona case have pleaded not guilty. The case will be heard by Judge James Carr.

Ann Coulter: Surprise! That 'cheap' immigrant labor costs us a lot


© Getty Images

BY ANN COULTER, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR



© Getty Images
We could pay for every idiotic boondoggle proposed by the 300 Democratic presidential candidates if the current president would simply keep his central campaign promise to build a border wall and deport illegal aliens. (Back off — “illegal alien” is the term used in federal law.) 

BLOG: JUDICIAL WATCH ESTIMATES THAT THE INVASION COST US $135 BILLION JUST IN WELFARE. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE MEXICAN CRIME TIDAL WAVE OR $50 BILLION IN REMITTANCES.

A 2017 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) found that illegal aliens cost the American taxpayer — on net — $116 billion a year.
That’s pretty high, but the actual number is more likely triple that.
Straight out of the chute, FAIR assumes that there are only 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country, approximately the same number we’ve been told for the last 15 years as we impotently watched hundreds of thousands more stream across our border, year after year after year.

The 12 million figure is based on the self-reports of illegal aliens to U.S. census questionnaires. (Hello! I’m from the federal government. Did you break the law to enter our country? Now tell the truth! We have no way of knowing the answer, and if you say yes, you could be subjecting yourself to immediate deportation.)

BLOG: NOW DO THE MATH!
More serious studies put the number considerably higher. At the low end, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale study last year put the number of illegals at 22 million. Yet Bear Stearns investment bank had it at 20 million back in 2005, and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele reported in 2004 that 3 million illegals were crossing each year — so simple math would put it at well over 60 million today.
So, right there, the FAIR study underestimates the tab for illegal immigration by at least a factor of three, meaning the real cost is about $350 billion a year. That’s triple what Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) free college tuition plan will cost in a decade.
I don’t mean to bash FAIR. It’s sweet how immigration restrictionists always bend over backward to be impartial. But their circumspection doesn’t mean the rest of us have to ignore reality.
Journalists’ usual method of determining the cost of “unauthorized entries” — as they say — is to phone some fanatically pro-illegal immigration group, such as Cato or CASA, and get a quote sneering at anyone else’s estimate of the costs.
In a deeply investigated 2017 Washington Post article, for example, the Post cited the “belief” that illegal aliens “drain government resources.” Without looking at any facts or figures, the reporter disputed that “belief” with a quote from Cathryn Ann Paul of CASA: "It's a myth that people who are undocumented don't pay taxes."
So there you have it! Cathryn Ann Paul says it’s a “myth.” Now let’s move on to the vibrant diversity being gifted to us by illegal aliens.
Earlier this year, The New York Times mocked President Trump’s tweet saying illegal immigration costs "250 Billion Dollars a year" by quoting big-business shill Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute: "There's no basis to any of those numbers about the fiscal cost." Am I doing OK, Mr. Koch?
The Times further explained that Trump’s figure “did not take into account the economic benefits of undocumented immigrants” — for example, the surprisingly affordable maids of some reporters.
Randy Capps of the Migration Policy Institute told the Times that studies of the cost of illegal immigration count only the costs or only the benefits. “They tend to talk past each other, unfortunately,” he said.

BLOG: THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN ECONOMY IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE IS ESTIMATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $2 BILLION YEARLY. THIS SAME COUNTY HANDS ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS MORE THAN $1 BILLION YEARLY IN WELFARE.
Well, the FAIR study counted both. For every dollar illegal immigrants pay in taxes — fees, Social Security withholding taxes, fuel surcharges, sales and property taxes — they collect $7 in government benefits: schooling, English as a second language classes, hospital costs, school lunch programs, Medicaid births, police resources and so on.
A few years ago, the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector looked at the winners and losers under our government redistribution system and found that in 2010, households headed by illegal immigrants received $14,387 more in government services than they paid in taxes.
Legal immigrant households also were big winners, receiving $4,344 more in government services than they paid in taxes. (Our government does a fantastic job deciding who can immigrate here.)
Only with nonimmigrant households does the government almost break even, doling out a mere $310 more in benefits than those households pay in taxes. (Surprise! The deficit is on track to hit $1 trillion next year.)
Like FAIR estimates, Rector’s study accepted the U.S. Census Bureau’s allegation that we’ve had the same number of illegal aliens in this country since the beginning of the Bush administration. Also like the FAIR study, Rector’s examination counted only the obvious costs imposed on us by illegal immigrants — things such as health care, education, fire and police protection, parks, roads, and bridges.

But there are all sorts of costs that no one ever counts. What about Americans’ lost wages to illegal immigrants who are willing to work for $7 an hour? Even if they don’t apply for unemployment insurance, how do we count the cost of suicide, opioid addiction or other anti-social behavior? 

Why not count the lost wages themselves? We want to know the cost-benefit ratio to those already here, not to the new total that includes the illegal immigrants. If it's a net negative to those already here — well, that's the point.
And what was the tab of illegal immigration to the family of Kate Steinle, the young woman shot dead by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco in 2015? There were obvious, tragic costs, of course — but there also are hidden costs, such as the lost productivity of the people close to Kate for years to come, the additional police presence around the San Francisco pier where she was killed and the reduction in tourist dollars.
We hear about the great largesse bestowed upon us by illegal immigrants all day long. The only hidden benefits are the warm feelings of self-righteousness that the CASA spokesman gets when bleating about illegals and the happiness that cheap servants bring to the top 10 percent.
In Maine, overdose deaths from opioids, mostly Mexican heroin, have skyrocketed in the last decade, up from an already catastrophic 100 to 200 deaths per year to more than double that — 418 in 2018. What is the cost of the state legislature spending weeks debating a bill to provide heroin addicts with Narcan? The cost of more crime and more police?
This isn’t to gratuitously mention the fact that completely unvetted, self-chosen illegal immigrants can, in fact, be rapists, drug dealers and cop-killers. It is to say that no analysis of illegal immigration’s cost can ever capture the full price.


Ann Coulter is a lawyer, a syndicated columnist and conservative commentator, and the author of 13 New York Times bestsellers. The most recent, “Resistance Is Futile! How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind,” was published in 2018.



Illegal Alien, Girlfriend Accused of Murdering Woman and Her Two Children

Illegal Alien, Girlfriend Accused of Murdering Woman and Her Two Children
ACSO
JOHN BINDER
   1,618
1:19

An illegal alien, with the help of his girlfriend, allegedly murdered his ex-wife and her two children, according to North Carolina authorities.

Areli Aguirre Avilez, a 30-year-old illegal alien from Mexico, and his 16-year-old girlfriend allegedly murdered his ex-wife, 38-year-old Maria Calderon, and her two children, 11-year-old Angel Pacheco and 12-year-old America Pacheco, according to the Alexander County Sheriff’s Office, as reported by the Associated Press.
Police said Avilez and his girlfriend murdered Calderon by driving over her with a vehicle and then allegedly dumped her body in the Catawba River in North Carolina.
The illegal alien, police said, shot Calderon’s young children, Angel and America, to death and left them in their home that was then set on fire.
Aside from the accused murders, Avilez has been indicted on statutory rape, arson, and violating a domestic violence order charges. His 16-year-old girlfriend has been charged with murder and arson.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart Texas. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.


Friends of ALIPAC,

While we are extending our fundraising deadline by 24 hours, only 48 hours remain for you to decide if ALIPAC will continue to fight Amnesty and illegal immigration beyond this point. (By Midnight Monday, July 1, 2019.) Please step forward to rally to us in these final moments at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/


We have fought hard and efficiently on your behalf, and are so thankful for each of you who have sacrificed time and/or funds in 2019 to help ALIPAC fight to save every job, tax resource, election, and American life we can from this invasion.

We have raised only $12,082 of the $15,000 we must raise for ALIPAC to fight onward beyond this point!

Sen. Graham's Amnesty bill is expected to come at us next week, so please rally to us in these final 48 hours by contributing at least $10, but preferably $25, $50, $100, $200, $500, or $1,000+ to help ALIPAC meet the costs of running a national organization.

48 hours left to help at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/



William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team


PS: This is a hard deadline. We either raise the remaining $3,000, or we have to bow out. The decision is yours. If you want a hard-hitting national organization fighting against illegal immigration and Amnesty, now is the time to support us at--
https://www.alipac.us/donations/F












Massive Migrant Crossings Lead to Another Shelter Opening in Arizona

Temporary Migrant Shelter (File Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
File Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
BOB PRICE
    4,196
2:40

Border Patrol officials in the Yuma Sector announced the building of an additional temporary migrant shelter in response to “sustained large volumes of family units in the Arizona sector. Sector officials opened the new shelter for tours late last week.

Border Patrol officials began construction of a new family shelter in the Yuma Sector” on June 15 in response to the strain on resources and facilities” due to the continuing unprecedented numbers of migrant families illegally crossing the border in southwestern Arizona, according to a statement obtained by Breitbart News. The shelter became available for tours on June 28 and is expected to begin housing migrants soon.
The shelter is reported to be similar in design to other temporary facilities located in Donna and El Paso, Texas. It is expected to hold up to 500 migrant families and unaccompanied minors.
“The temporary, soft-sided facility will accommodate up to 500 individuals in U.S. Border Patrol custody while they await transfer to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Refugee Resettlement,” officials said in a written statement. “The temporary structures are weatherproof and climate-controlled for eating, sleeping, and personal hygiene.”
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) awarded a contract valued at just under $15 million to build the facilities. This includes showers, toilets, and syncs, officials reported. It also includes the perimeter monitoring equipment, office space, lockers, security, power, HVAC services, food, snacks, water, and custodial services, CBP officials stated.
Construction on the project began just over two weeks ago and is part of the Border Patrol’s effort to secure the border and meet the humanitarian needs of the current border crisis. During the month of May, Yuma Sector Border Patrol agents apprehended 42,225 family units. This is up from 8,775 in May 2017 — a 381 percent increase, according to the May Southwest Border Migration Report.
Additionally, Yuma Sector agents apprehended nearly 6,000 unaccompanied minors and nearly 6,500 single adults.
Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for the Breitbart Border team. He is an original member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX and Facebook.




















Ann Coulter: Surprise! That 'cheap' immigrant labor costs us a lot

 1,443

© Getty Images
We could pay for every idiotic boondoggle proposed by the 300 Democratic presidential candidates if the current president would simply keep his central campaign promise to build a border wall and deport illegal aliens. (Back off — “illegal alien” is the term used in federal law.) 
A 2017 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) found that illegal aliens cost the American taxpayer — on net — $116 billion a year.
That’s pretty high, but the actual number is more likely triple that.
Straight out of the chute, FAIR assumes that there are only 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country, approximately the same number we’ve been told for the last 15 years as we impotently watched hundreds of thousands more stream across our border, year after year after year.
The 12 million figure is based on the self-reports of illegal aliens to U.S. census questionnaires. (Hello! I’m from the federal government. Did you break the law to enter our country? Now tell the truth! We have no way of knowing the answer, and if you say yes, you could be subjecting yourself to immediate deportation.)
More serious studies put the number considerably higher. At the low end, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale study last year put the number of illegals at 22 million. Yet Bear Stearns investment bank had it at 20 million back in 2005, and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele reported in 2004 that 3 million illegals were crossing each year — so simple math would put it at well over 60 million today.
So, right there, the FAIR study underestimates the tab for illegal immigration by at least a factor of three, meaning the real cost is about $350 billion a year. That’s triple what Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) free college tuition plan will cost in a decade.
I don’t mean to bash FAIR. It’s sweet how immigration restrictionists always bend over backward to be impartial. But their circumspection doesn’t mean the rest of us have to ignore reality.
Journalists’ usual method of determining the cost of “unauthorized entries” — as they say — is to phone some fanatically pro-illegal immigration group, such as Cato or CASA, and get a quote sneering at anyone else’s estimate of the costs.
In a deeply investigated 2017 Washington Post article, for example, the Post cited the “belief” that illegal aliens “drain government resources.” Without looking at any facts or figures, the reporter disputed that “belief” with a quote from Cathryn Ann Paul of CASA: "It's a myth that people who are undocumented don't pay taxes."
So there you have it! Cathryn Ann Paul says it’s a “myth.” Now let’s move on to the vibrant diversity being gifted to us by illegal aliens.
Earlier this year, The New York Times mocked President Trump’s tweet saying illegal immigration costs "250 Billion Dollars a year" by quoting big-business shill Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute: "There's no basis to any of those numbers about the fiscal cost." Am I doing OK, Mr. Koch?
The Times further explained that Trump’s figure “did not take into account the economic benefits of undocumented immigrants” — for example, the surprisingly affordable maids of some reporters.
Randy Capps of the Migration Policy Institute told the Times that studies of the cost of illegal immigration count only the costs or only the benefits. “They tend to talk past each other, unfortunately,” he said.
Well, the FAIR study counted both. For every dollar illegal immigrants pay in taxes — fees, Social Security withholding taxes, fuel surcharges, sales and property taxes — they collect $7 in government benefits: schooling, English as a second language classes, hospital costs, school lunch programs, Medicaid births, police resources and so on.
A few years ago, the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector looked at the winners and losers under our government redistribution system and found that in 2010, households headed by illegal immigrants received $14,387 more in government services than they paid in taxes.
Legal immigrant households also were big winners, receiving $4,344 more in government services than they paid in taxes. (Our government does a fantastic job deciding who can immigrate here.)
Only with nonimmigrant households does the government almost break even, doling out a mere $310 more in benefits than those households pay in taxes. (Surprise! The deficit is on track to hit $1 trillion next year.)
Like FAIR estimates, Rector’s study accepted the U.S. Census Bureau’s allegation that we’ve had the same number of illegal aliens in this country since the beginning of the Bush administration. Also like the FAIR study, Rector’s examination counted only the obvious costs imposed on us by illegal immigrants — things such as health care, education, fire and police protection, parks, roads, and bridges.
But there are all sorts of costs that no one ever counts. What about Americans’ lost wages to illegal immigrants who are willing to work for $7 an hour? Even if they don’t apply for unemployment insurance, how do we count the cost of suicide, opioid addiction or other anti-social behavior? 
Why not count the lost wages themselves? We want to know the cost-benefit ratio to those already here, not to the new total that includes the illegal immigrants. If it's a net negative to those already here — well, that's the point.
And what was the tab of illegal immigration to the family of Kate Steinle, the young woman shot dead by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco in 2015? There were obvious, tragic costs, of course — but there also are hidden costs, such as the lost productivity of the people close to Kate for years to come, the additional police presence around the San Francisco pier where she was killed and the reduction in tourist dollars.
We hear about the great largesse bestowed upon us by illegal immigrants all day long. The only hidden benefits are the warm feelings of self-righteousness that the CASA spokesman gets when bleating about illegals and the happiness that cheap servants bring to the top 10 percent.
In Maine, overdose deaths from opioids, mostly Mexican heroin, have skyrocketed in the last decade, up from an already catastrophic 100 to 200 deaths per year to more than double that — 418 in 2018. What is the cost of the state legislature spending weeks debating a bill to provide heroin addicts with Narcan? The cost of more crime and more police?
This isn’t to gratuitously mention the fact that completely unvetted, self-chosen illegal immigrants can, in fact, be rapists, drug dealers and cop-killers. It is to say that no analysis of illegal immigration’s cost can ever capture the full price.
Ann Coulter is a lawyer, a syndicated columnist and conservative commentator, and the author of 13 New York Times bestsellers. The most recent, “Resistance Is Futile! How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind,” was published in 2018.

The 2020 Democratic Candidates and Their Redefinition of American Citizenship


·          
New citizens stand during a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) naturalization ceremony at the New York Public Library, July 3, 2018. (Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)
Making the click-through worthwhile: How the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates want to make being an American citizen simply a matter of location and desire, instead of law; another allegation of hideous behavior from Donald Trump from the mid 1990s; the promised big roundup of thriller novels; and a heartfelt “thank you” to you, the readers.
The 2020 Democrats Want to Redefine Citizenship
Sometimes our political debates are furious and deeply divided because of demagogues, clickbait media, and hype. But sometimes our political debates are furious because they reflect a conflict of fundamentally opposed worldviews, where no compromise is feasible.
Many of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates want to fundamentally redefine who is American — that is, if you show up from another country and want to be here, you ought to enjoy the full rights of citizenship and all of the benefits provided to American citizens.
Bernie Sanders put it clearly: “We’re going to make public colleges and universities tuition-free and open that to the undocumented.” In other words, if are a citizen of another country and you want a free college education, all you have to do is show up in the United States and get accepted at any one of the 1,626 public colleges in the United States.
Needless to say, if enacted, this would bring a flood of people from all around the world, eager to enjoy the benefits of a college degree, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. (In case you’re wondering, there are a handful of other countries in Europe that offer very low or nominal tuition rates to American students, but at most of those schools, competition for the limited slots is high.)
It is not only Sanders. Beto O’Rourke says that the United States should contemplate eliminating the citizenship exam because it is a structural barrier to immigrants. Indeed, it is meant to be a structural barrier to those who lack English proficiency in speaking, reading, and writing, and civics knowledge. There was once a broad consensus that English proficiency and civics knowledge were required to be a good American citizen. The 2020 Democrats no longer believe this to be true.
Ten candidates, including Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren believe that crossing the border or entering the country without permission should no longer be a crime. On May 7, 2018, the Department of Justice announced they would prosecute all adult aliens apprehended crossing the border illegally, with no exception for asylum seekers or those with minor children. (If that policy was repealed, border crossers would still go through a civil legal process that could lead to their deportation.)
Booker, Steve Bullock, Bill de Blasio, Kirsten Gillibrand, Marianne Williamson, and Andrew Yang believe the federal government should NOT require the use of E-Verify to check the legal status of all hires by private employers. Another nine candidates said they only support that idea as part of a “compromise” on immigration reform.
Sanders contends that adding the question “Are you a U.S. citizen?” to the 2020 census would constitute “absolutely bigoted language.” Amy Klobuchar contends that if the question is included, she would, as president, require a “recount” and O’Rourke threatens that if it is included, he will re-do the entire census a second time without the question. Even John Hickenlooper, allegedly one of the centrists in the swarm of candidates, contends that asking the question on the census for is “ corrupt and illegal.”
We all have our notions of what constitutes an injustice. To many Democrats, the longstanding practice of enforcement of immigration law — policies in place throughout the Obama administration — is an inherent injustice. In their minds, being an American citizen is simply a matter of wanting to be here.
Yet Another Ugly Accusation against Donald Trump
No doubt, Trump’s history with women is sordid and scandalous and full of crass, crude, and objectifying behavior. On the other hand, we just went through a Supreme Court nomination fight that illustrated the limited options for a man who is accused of sexual assault with no evidence. We also know how conditional the “believe all women” rallying cry is.
In Carroll’s account, sometime in “the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996” she ran into Trump in the early evening at Bergdorf Goodman, a luxury department store based on Fifth Avenue in Midtown Manhattan in New York City. After some small talk, she agreed to try on lingerie in front of Trump for fun. She said there were no other customers or sales attendants in the Bergdorf Goodman lingerie department, and no other potential witnesses. She writes that she has checked and that the department store did not keep security tapes from that time. She describes herself as laughing through much of the experience. “I don’t remember if any person or attendant is now in the lingerie department. I don’t remember if I run for the elevator or if I take the slow ride down on the escalator. As soon as I land on the main floor, I run through the store and out the door — I don’t recall which door — and find myself outside on Fifth Avenue.” Carroll says did not report it to the police but told it to two friends. The two friends, contacted by New York magazine and not identified, confirmed Carroll described an experience like this.
Carroll is not seeking a police investigation or criminal charges. She insists this is not just a ploy to sell books; if it were, the book would be all about the president instead of the variety of creeps she’s encountered in her life. She appears to believe that the country should know about her experience and act accordingly.
 “You don’t feel like a victim?” Cooper asked.
“I was not thrown on the ground and ravished which the word rape carries so many sexual connotations. This was not sexual. It hurt. It just — it just — you know,” Carroll responded.
“But I think most people think of rape as — it is a violent assault. It is not — ,” Cooper began.
“I think most people think of rape as being sexy,” Carroll said.
“Let’s take a short break,” Cooper said.
“Think of the fantasies,” Carroll interjected.
“We will take a quick break if you can stick around. We’ll talk more on the other side,” Cooper continued.
“You’re fascinating to talk to,” Carroll said.
Do most people think of rape as being sexy?
In her account, Carroll wrote, “the struggle might simply have read as ‘sexy.’”
The Big Thriller Roundup
Last week on vacation, I finished Mark Greaney’s Agent in Place, the 2018 addition to his wildly popular series about Court Gentry, the CIA-trained “Gray Man” who can blend in just about anywhere and who has the skills and instincts to survive just about any situation. I had heard good things about the Gray Man Series, but until recently I was a bit wary: the strong, silent, brooding loner assassin protagonist can be a little tough to warm up to and enjoy. But what Agent in Place does particularly well — besides terrific research about the horrific situation in Syria as its civil war winds down, the Syrian exile community in France, and the glamorous halls of the high life in Paris – is set up a situation where the hero goes against his better judgment and agrees to pursue a mission that is one step short of suicidal. Greaney puts Gentry into a circumstance where any rational person would say, “Nope, sorry, I can’t help you, I’d like to, but doing this will almost certainly get me killed.” It’s the most desperate situation imaginable, the risks are just a Dagwood sandwich of various dangers and menaces and precarious gambles, his few allies are unreliable, and it requires sneaking into probably the single most dangerous location on earth. But the life of an innocent child hangs in the balance . . .  and Gentry would have to look at himself in the mirror if he choose to not try to save the child.
Back in May, I reviewed Matthew Betley’s Overwatch, which established his recovering-alcoholic Marine officer Logan West and an ever-changing realm of national-security threats that he and his out-of-retirement comrades must chase. That’s the first in his series; the fourth book in the series, Rules of Warhits stores and ships in mid-July. With a ripped-from-the headlines relevancy, much of Rules of War is set in a rapidly-deteriorating Venezuela. Betley told me, “I wanted to set it in a crumbling third-world country, and there’s no better example of that today than Venezuela.” Last week on Dana Perino’s program on Fox News, he talked a bit about the book, and a class action lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs and his recent experiences with the VA, attempting to get coverage for lung problems stemming from the burn pits in Iraq.
Also last week, I finished John A. Daly’s Blood TradeSet shortly after 9/11, Sean Coleman is another protagonist who’s overcoming his battles with the bottle, looking for a second chance and redemption for past mistakes. Blood Trade has a lot of atmosphere, high in the Colorado mountains, with a mood of foreboding hanging over much of the action. (Those who know my favorite television series will know I’m inclined to like stories of rural small towns with secrets behind every door.) Daly takes what looks like a mundane missing-persons stories and gradually reveals a chillingly plausible plot with, a deeply relatable motive for the story’s villains, and a vivid illustration of just how far some people will go to safe a life. This book is accurately titled. Daly’s next is Safeguardcoming in October, featuring Coleman guarding a defunct nuclear silo . . . and apparently attracting the attention of a local cult.
Then there’s arguably the most anticipated thriller of the summer, Brad Thor’s Backlash featuring Scot Harvath, who’s ended up working for the U.S. Secret Service, Navy SEALs, and as a CIA contractor over the course of 18 novels. As mentioned yesterday, not only does it live up to the hype, it’s really striking for how different a story this is from the previous books in this series. The last few Harvath novels have featured him and usually a small team investigating or uncovering some sinister plot by jihadists, or China, or the Russians. Backlash blows up that familiar rhythm and is reminiscent of that Liam Nesson movie The Grey, and the classic The Fugitive, and some of Jack London’s classic survival-in-the-most-hostile-wilds stories. Almost the entire story takes place in a remote corner of the world that I suspect has never been featured in a thriller before, and the story focuses as much on Harvath’s challenge to survive psychologically intact as physically. Thor is to be saluted for willing to experiment and move away from familiar territory, both literally and figuratively.
And these are just the thriller novels I’ve gotten my hands on recently. Daniel Silva’s The New Girl comes out July 16, with Israeli spymaster Gabriel Allon crossing paths with a ruthless Saudi prince who is likely to be compared to the real-life Mohammed bin Salman.
ADDENDA: You guys really are the best readers in the world. Yesterday I mentioned that reviews on Amazon help a book find an audience, and this morning I find 27 reviews on the page, each one kind and offering some sort of insightful observation. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Someone said to me recently that I shouldn’t have said the book isn’t that political, because it covers some big topics adjacent to our modern politics — “questions of heroism, of identity, and of faith” as one reviewer put it, and “the fragile line between chaos and sanity in a society” as another described it. This is what happens when you start the creation of your villains with, “what frightens me?”

 

What a Border Crisis Looks Like

·          
Migrants from Central America cross the Rio Bravo river to enter illegally into the United States at El Paso, Texas, June 11, 2019.(Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters)This is a similar border crisis to the one Obama faced in his second term, with similar challenges.
News flash: There’s a crisis at the border.  
This was discovered again over the past few days when immigration attorneys talked to reporters about appalling conditions at a Border Patrol facility detaining migrant minors in Clint, Texas.
According to the lawyers, many of the kids had to sleep on the concrete floor, failed to get proper adult supervision, and didn’t routinely take showers or brush their teeth. The details were hard to read. 
Assuming the account was accurate, one wonders how we could treat anyone this way, let alone children? But a lawyer who talked to the New Yorker mentioned a telling fact: The facility previously had a capacity of 104 and had never held children before. Yet it held roughly 350 children, apparently accommodated by placement of a new warehouse at the site. 
All this is consistent with vast numbers of migrants, many of them families and children, flooding the border and overtaxing facilities never meant for these kinds of numbers or this demographic of migrant. 
Indeed, the immigration lawyer mentioned to the New Yorker that the personnel at the Border Patrol facility were constantly receiving children and constantly transferring them over to a Health and Human Services site, and stipulated that the guards believed the children don’t belong there and should go someplace more appropriate. (Under the glare of publicity, they did.) 
The broader problem is that HHS, which is supposed to get custody of migrant children from Border Patrol in short order, is itself overburdened and backed up.  
Since it’s 2019, what should be properly attributed to dire circumstances and limited capacity is instead taken as evidence of President Donald Trump’s malice. 
If what’s happening at the border is a product of Trump policy, it would have to involve an intricate and well-executed plan. The White House would have to convince the acting head of the Department of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan — who served as deputy commissioner of Customs and Border Protection under President Barack Obama — to send word down through the bureaucracy to treat children as callously as possible and not to leak word of this explosive guidance.
In the real world, a migrant influx will test even an administration more favorably inclined toward immigration. The reason that the Left can’t keep their viral images straight — often misattributing to Trump photos of kids in steel-cage holding pens during the Obama years — is that this is a similar crisis to the one Obama faced in his second term, with similar challenges. 
A viral video of a Justice Department lawyer arguing before a panel of judges last week that kids don’t need toothbrushes and soap to meet the standard for “safe and sanitary” detention under the so-called Flores settlement has caused outrage. But few have stopped to note that the underlying case had to do with a district court finding that the Obama administration in 2015 was in material breach of the Flores standard (or that the DOJ lawyer was offering a technical legal argument — not a defense of mistreating kids).
All that said, once these migrants are under our care, it is our responsibility to make sure they are treated as humanely as possible. The border needs more resources. The Trump administration has been asking Congress to pass a funding package, and it should do so forthwith. To address the root cause of the crisis, it should also change the bizarre asylum rules that have forced us to release family units from Central America into the country, creating an incentive for more to come. 
As long as that’s the case, we aren’t going to be able to control the border or process people coming across it in an orderly fashion. What we’re seeing is what a border crisis looks like. If we don’t like it — and we shouldn’t — it’s time for Congress to act to begin to bring it to an end. 

 

 

 

The Border as an ‘Attractive Nuisance’

A U.S. Customs and Border Protection border-patrol agent talks to people on the Mexican side of the border wall in San Diego, Calif., November 28, 2018. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)
If you have a swimming pool, you can be held liable if a trespassing child falls in and drowns unless you’ve taken reasonable steps to keep children from getting to the pool, like a fence. An unfenced pool (or trampoline or a discarded refrigerator that locks from the outside, among other potentially dangerous things) is thus called an attractive nuisance.
The loopholes in our asylum laws make our nation’s borders an attractive nuisance, as well. Of course, no matter what we do, there will always be people who will try to illegally infiltrate our borders, and it’s inevitable that some of them will die in the process — whether by drowning, exposure, dehydration, or other causes. But when we fail to take the most elementary steps to dissuade people from trying to sneak in — heck, when we reward people for sneaking in with kids in tow and making bogus asylum claims — we share the responsibility for those deaths.
The heart-wrenching photograph of a Salvadoran father and daughter who were found drowned Monday on the banks of the Rio Grande forces us to face this issue. Julian Castro was right when he said at last night’s Democratic debate, watching that image of Oscar and his daughter, Valeria, is heartbreaking. It should also piss us all off.
But once pissed off, how to respond? How do we make our border not be an attractive nuisance?
Castro’s answer — and the approach of virtually all Democratic candidates and elected officials — is open borders. And I no longer mean that Democrats are, in effect, calling for open borders. At last night’s debate there was no longer any pretense. Castro took the lead, followed by the rest, in calling for repeal of the criminal law against border infiltration, ending the practice of making asylum claimants take a number at ports of entry and wait their turn, the complete abolition of immigrant detention, and amnesty for every foreigner who manages to get past the border so long as they don’t commit a serious” crime (whatever that means today).  Though she wasn’t on the stage Wednesday, the party’s leader, House speaker Nancy Pelosi, made clear that she’s on board, asking at an event Monday What’s the point? of enforcing immigration laws inside the United States. What all this represents is the abolition of immigration limits.
This would certainly end the attractive-nuisance problem. It would also lead to a rush for the border that would make the 2015 border crisis in Europe (sparked by the photo of another drowned child) pale by comparison. Gallup reported earlier this year that 42 million people in Latin America want to move here, and the share that would actually follow through would be a lot higher than now if we were to formally convert the Border Patrol into a welcome wagon, as the Democrats propose. And that’s not counting the AfricansMiddle Easterners, and other extra-continental migrants we’re seeing.
The other approach to ending the attractive-nuisance problem is to fence off the swimming pool, as it were. In some places that might actually mean a literal fence, but that won’t address the reasons for the current surge. At the very least, that would require plugging the three most serious legal loopholes incentivizing people to cross the border. It also would entail actually deporting people who’ve exhausted their due process, been turned down for asylum, and received a deportation order from a judge; until people in Central America see their fellows glumly stepping off the plane, their asylum ploys having failed, they’ll rightly figure the trip is worth it. More broadly, mandating the use of E-Verify, at least for new hires, is imperative, to fence off the labor market.
There are two ways the United States can limit its responsibility for deaths on the border: Unlimited immigration, or limits that are actually enforced.  The Democrats have made their choice. They should be made to answer for it.





No comments: