Tuesday, February 19, 2019

GLOBALIST DEMOCRATS, MEXICO AND WALL STREET LOOK FOR THEIR NEXT OBAMA: Michelle Obama, Joe Biden and Beto "Betomatic" O'Rouke say it's me!!!

all globalist for wider open borders and more welfare for wall street!

Poll: Michelle Obama, Joe Biden Top Contenders for 2020 Democrat Nomination

Michelle Obama, Joe Biden jpg
AP/Getty Images

Former first lady and former Vice President Joe Biden tied for the Democrats’ favorite 2020 presidential candidate in a poll released on Tuesday.

Twenty-five percent of Democrat voters said that they would either back Obama or Biden for the Democrat nomination, even though neither Democrat has declared their candidacy for president in 2020, according to a Hill-HarrisX poll released on Tuesday.
Several polls had Biden leading the early list of Democrat contenders in the past few weeks. One poll released in February found that Biden would serve as a formidable opponent to President Donald Trump–the survey found that Trump would beat everyone but Biden in a 2020 matchup.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), who has declared for the 2020 Democrat nomination, ranks in third place at 12 percent of support. Right behind Harris is Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) at 11 percent; Sanders announced his candidacy for president on Tuesday.
“Our campaign is not only about defeating Donald Trump,” the democratic socialist wrotein a statement to his supporters on Tuesday. “Our campaign is about transforming our country and creating a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice.”
After Sanders, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), billionaire Michael Bloomberg, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) poll in the single-digits.
Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) all received less than six percent.
When factoring in independant voters, Biden beats Obama by one percent, with Biden at 23 percent and Obama at 22 percent.
Molly Murphy, a pollster at Democrat consulting firm ALG Research, said Obama’s popularity results from the fact that she has not decided to run for president.
“Because she’s never been a candidate, she’s never been on the ballot, she’s avoided a certain degree of scrutiny that candidates face. And so she’s all icing for people, it’s all good,” Murphy said.
The survey also found that 12 percent of Independents and Democrats preferred another Democrat candidate, suggesting some dissatisfaction with the current list of Democrat candidates for president.


U.S. Taxpayers Fund Border Walls in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Middle East

AFP/Getty Images

American taxpayers are continuing to fund border security measures and border walls in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, and Lebanon with President Trump’s signing of a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spending bill.

While the United States-Mexico border received only $1.3 billion for construction of a border wall at the overwhelmed southern border with soaring illegal immigration, foreign countries are getting help from American taxpayers to secure their borders.
The Republican-Democrat spending bill signed by Trump last week provides Pakistan with at least $15 million in U.S. taxpayer money for “border security programs” as well as funding for “cross border stabilization” between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
In total, the spending bill provides about $6 billion in American taxpayer money to finance foreign militaries, some of which can be used by Lebanon to “strengthen border security and combat terrorism.”
The spending bill provides about $112.5 million in U.S. taxpayer money for economic support for Egypt, including $10 million for scholarships for Egyptian students. Egypt’s military receives about $1.3 billion in the spending bill, some of which can be for border security programs.
Additionally, the spending bill includes:
Meanwhile, illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has swelled in recent months. In December 2018, the last month for illegal border crossing totals, there were close to 51,000 border crossings. The month before, there were nearly 52,000 border crossings. Experts project there to be at least 606,000 crossings this year at the southern border, a level of illegal immigration that surpasses nearly every year of illegal immigration under President Obama.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder


Sacrificing national security on the altar of open borders.

When I was growing up my mom sagely told me, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”
For the past several decades, where actual border security and effective immigration law enforcement are concerned, the political elites of both parties have consistently exclaimed, “No way!”
Rather than devise strategies to effectively enforce our immigration laws, secure our borders and deter massive illegal immigration, our political leaders worked mightily to devise excuses and subterfuges to scam Americans by perpetrating Theft By Deception: The Immigration Con Game.
Politicians from both parties have declared that since we cannot deport all of the illegal aliens in the United States, the best we can do is legalize them to ostensibly “get them out of the shadows.”
That lunacy does not deter illegal immigration but encourages it -- in essence, firing the starter’s pistol for aspiring illegal aliens from around the world. That is why a succession of caravans is now heading to the United States.
Indeed, the betrayal of America and Americans by our politicians was the predication for my articles, "Caravan Of 'Migrants' - A Crisis Decades In The Making: America is on the edge of forfeiting its sovereignty and security" and "Sanctuary Country - Immigration failures by design."
I urge you to take the time to read both of those articles in which I provide an insider’s view of how the leadership of both parties have come to see in the immigration system not so much a law enforcement system that protects America and Americans from aliens, irrespective of race, religion or ethnicity, whose presence would pose a threat to national security, public safety, public health and the jobs of Americans, but rather a delivery system for an unlimited supply of cheap and exploitable foreign workers, an unlimited supply of foreign tourists and, for the lawyers of both parties, an unlimited supply of clients.
This is why the critical interior enforcement mission has always been severely understaffed. TSA, for example, has more than 45,000 employees, the NYPD has more than 36,000 officers just to protect the City of New York, but ICE only has about 6,000 agents for the entire United States of America and half of them are not even doing immigration law enforcement but are engaged in investigating narcotics, financial crimes, kiddie porn and intellectual property theft.
The very creation of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as a key component of the Department of Homeland Security (that I have come to refer to as the Department of Homeland Surrender) by President George W. Bush in the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11, was designed to undermine, not enhance, border security and/or immigration law enforcement. 
Customs has nothing to do with immigration law enforcement and merging immigration with other non-related agencies and then bifurcating the immigration mission into ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) created what John Hostettler, the former Republican Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims, referred to as “immigration incoherence.”
With all of the threats that America and Americans face from transnational gangs, drug cartels and international terrorist organizations, President Trump has tried to get the funding for a border wall. The Republicans didn’t do anything to help him when they controlled the House of Representatives and the Democrats not only won’t help him but have accused him of creating a false crisis on the border when he declared a “national emergency.”
In response to Trump’s declaration of the national emergency to move money from related programs to fund the border wall, the Democrats are employing the tactic that the ACLU refers to as “lawfare,” filing a blizzard of lawsuits.
Evidence of the dire threats we face have been provided in abundance in a series of Congressional hearings predicated on government reports and threat assessments authored by the intelligence community and DEA.
Democrats created “Sanctuary Cities” and “Sanctuary States” and now the Democrats are calling for the dismantling of ICE altogether and the elimination of America’s borders even though the preface of the official government report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel, begins with this paragraph:
It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.
While a wall on the border by itself would not ameliorate the threats, it would represent a vital element of what needs to be a coordinated program to address all of the vulnerabilities in the immigration system.
I have come to compare a secure barrier along the southern border with a wing on an airplane: without the wing the airplane won’t fly; however, a wing by itself goes nowhere.
We need to prevent the entry of illegal aliens and contraband by whatever means they are able to enter the United States. I have frequently referred to the multiple means by which aliens enter the United States as the “Immigration Colander.”  This is why we must understand that the United States has 50 “border states.”
Here are the cold, hard facts that illustrate the severe threats we face that any rational adult would certainly consider a crisis.
To begin with, I would argue that the flood of narcotics into the United States should be seen as a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD).
Fentanyl is as lethal as cyanide.
Furthermore, Americans pay for the poisons to the tune of tens of billions of dollars that flow into the coffers of drug trafficking organizations and terrorist organizations.
My article, "New York City: Hub For The Deadly Drug Trade'Sanctuary' policies attract foreign drug traffickers, fugitives and terrorists" was, in large measure, predicated on a November 13, 2017 Washington Post news report“Mexican traffickers making New York a hub for lucrative — and deadly — fentanyl.”
Here is how that Washington Post report began:
NEW YORK — The middle-aged couple in the station wagon went shopping at a New Jersey Walmart on a warm night in August. They stopped for dinner at an IHOP on the way home. And when they arrived at their apartment building in a quiet residential section of Queens, the narcotics agents following them got a warrant to go inside.
They found several suitcases loaded with brick-shaped bundles of what appeared to be heroin. But lab tests determined that most of it — 141 pounds — was pure fentanyl, a synthetic and supremely dangerous opioid 50 times more powerful than heroin.
It was the largest fentanyl seizure in U.S. history. There was enough inside the apartment to kill 32 million people, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. 
Let’s imagine that a terror plot has been uncovered for international terrorists to enter the United States to blow up a football stadium filled with 60,000 fans, as in the 1977 cinematic thriller Black Sunday.
Such a huge attack would be devastating and send fear not just across America but across the world.
However, My article "DEA Reports Record Deaths From Drug Overdoses How a broken southern border allows narcotics to flood America" was predicated on the DEA’s 2018 National Drug Threat Assessment that included the following:
  • In 1999 drug poisoning in the U.S. accounted for 16,849 deaths, while deaths from suicide, homicide, firearms and motor vehicles accounted for more deaths than did drug poisoning.
  • In 2009 deaths attributed to drug poisoning moved into first place with 37,004 such fatalities.
  • Since 2009 drug poisoning has accounted for more deaths than did the other causes of death, with a sharp upward trend in the number of such fatalities.  In 2013, 43,982 deaths were attributed to drug poisoning, in 2014 that number increased to 47,055, in 2015 the number jumped to 52,404 and in 2016 that number had skyrocketed to 63,632 deaths.
Because those 63,632 tragic deaths attributed to opiate overdoses did not occur en masse and there was no dramatic explosion, they got very little attention.
Those deadly drugs are pouring into the United States primarily across our southern border and through ports of entry, between ports of entry, as well as through international airports.
A small quantity of fentanyl can kill millions of people, yet the Democrats quibble about whether or not we should construct barriers, not to prevent anyone from entering the United States, but to make certain that all who do enter the country are inspected the same way that passengers who seek to board airliners must undergo a search by TSA.
While the Democrats argue that the wall would be too expensive, not unlike insulation on a house, the wall would pay for itself. That was the premise for my article, "America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation."
As for the threats posed by international terrorists, my article, "Border Security Is National Security" referenced an April 12, 2017 Washington Times report, Sharafat Ali Khan smuggled terrorist-linked immigrantsMy article included the following excerpt:
Khan is a citizen of Pakistan who had established himself as a permanent resident in Brazil and then smuggled numerous illegal aliens from the Middle East into the United States through Mexico.  ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) issued a press release about this case, Foreign national extradited and pleads guilty to human smuggling conspiracy.
That Khan first became a resident of Brazil prior to beginning his smuggling operation is of particular concern. 
Terror training camps run by Hamas and Hezbollah are to be found in the Tri-Border region of Brazil (where Brazil abuts with Argentina and Paraguay).  While there was no specific mention of Khan making use of those camps, given the nature of his crimes, this is a very real and troubling possibility.
It is also entirely possible that members of ISIS and al-Qaeda are present in those terror training camps.
Concerns about the Tri-Border Region were ably reported on in a paper, Islamist Terrorist Threat in the Tri-Border Region that was published by Jeffrey Fields, Research Associate, Center for Nonproliferation Studies.
The U.S./Mexican border is all that stands between America and Middle Eastern terrorists operating throughout  Latin America. As I noted in my recent article, "The Impending Alien Invasion," Latin America has become a hotbed for terrorist activities, a fact that was highlighted at a hearing conducted on April 17, 2018 by the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence on the topic, "State Sponsors of Terrorism: An Examination of Iran’s Global Terrorism Network."
My article included an excerpt of the prepared testimony of one of the witnesses, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies:
In recent years, Hezbollah’s Latin American networks have also increasingly cooperated with violent drug cartels and criminal syndicates, often with the assistance of local corrupt political elites. Cooperation includes laundering of drug money; arranging multi-ton shipments of cocaine to the United States and Europe; and directly distributing and selling illicit substances to distant markets. Proceeds from these activities finance Hezbollah’s arms procurement; its terror activities overseas; its hold on Lebanon’s political system; and its efforts, both in Lebanon and overseas, to keep Shi’a communities loyal to its cause and complicit in its endeavors.
This toxic crime-terror nexus is fueling both the rising threat of global jihadism and the collapse of law and order across Latin America that is helping drive drugs and people northward into the United States. It is sustaining Hezbollah’s growing financial needs. It is helping Iran and Hezbollah consolidate a local constituency in multiple countries across Latin America. It is thus facilitating their efforts to build safe havens for terrorists and a continent-wide terror infrastructure that they could use to strike U.S. targets.
For the Democrats the only crisis that concerns them is not if hundreds of thousands of Americans lose their lives, but if they lose their next elections.

The Kochs and their network of donors have opposed any reductions to legal immigration to raise American workers’ wages; reforms to save U.S. taxpayers billions by ending welfare-dependent legal immigration; and an end to the country’s birthright citizenship policy that rewards illegal aliens’ U.S.-born children with American citizenship.

The Washington, DC-imposed mass legal immigration policy is a boon to corporate executives, Wall Street, big business, and multinational conglomerates, as America’s working and middle class have their wealth redistributed to the country’s top earners through wage stagnation.


Sixteen states sue to keep the nation’s southern border wide open for illegal aliens and terrorists.

Sixteen states and at least six activist groups have filed or are preparing lawsuits taking aim at President Trump’s Feb. 15 emergency declaration that seeks to divert already appropriated government funds to build a wall on the nation’s porous border with Mexico.
This was to be expected. When the Left loses elections, it turns to unelected federal judges to carry out its will.
There is also an effort afoot in Congress to overturn the declaration. If both chambers pass a resolution of disapproval, White House senior adviser Stephen Miller seemed to indicate Sunday that the president would veto it. Trump is “going to protect his national emergency declaration, guaranteed,” Miller said on Fox News Channel.

Of the six activist organizations, four –Public Citizen, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Defenders of Wildlife— have been funded by radical leftist financier George Soros through his philanthropies.
The 16 states seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent Trump from moving forward with wall construction while the case is pending in the courts are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Virginia, according to the Washington Post.
In what is clearly an example of judge-shopping, the states filed at U.S. District Court in Northern California, which is part of the territory covered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit where various judges have issued sweeping injunctions against Trump administration policies.
The legal action accuses Trump of “an unconstitutional and unlawful scheme.” The states say they are attempting “to protect their residents, natural resources, and economic interests from President Donald J. Trump’s flagrant disregard of fundamental separation of powers principles engrained in the United States Constitution.”
The activists have initiated three lawsuits at U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., aimed at frustrating President Trump’s efforts to secure the border and halt the long-running invasion of the nation by illegal aliens.
Founded by former Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader, Public Citizen initiated a lawsuit Friday to strike down the president’s proclamation under the National Emergencies Act, on behalf of the Frontera Audubon Society of Weslaco, Texas, and a group of Texas landowners. The lawsuit claims that endangered species will be harmed if the wall if built.
In its suit CREW is trying to force the Justice Department to hand over internally produced legal opinions “that discuss the power of the president to invoke emergency powers to build a wall or other type of barrier along the U.S. border with Mexico[.]"
Defenders of Wildlife launched a legal action Saturday to freeze the emergency declaration. The Center for Biological Diversity and Animal Legal Defense Fund are also listed in the papers as plaintiffs. Like the suit filed by Public Citizen, this suit alleges endangered species will be adversely affected if the wall goes up.
At time of writing, the national ACLU did not appear to have filed a lawsuit seeking to stay Trump’s emergency declaration, but on Friday the group’s affiliate in Massachusetts filed “a lawsuit demanding information about a contract for a section of the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border that President Donald Trump said his administration awarded,” the Boston Herald reports. Trump tweeted in December that he “just gave out a 115 mile long contract for another large section of the Wall in Texas.”
On Friday, California’s new leftist governor, sanctuary city fanatic Gavin Newsom (D), said his state would soon hop on the anti-declaration bandwagon.
Soros personally gave money to Newsom’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign and to his campaign for his previous post, lieutenant governor of California, in 2014, according to the California secretary of state’s online campaign finance database.
Many other litigious left-wingers vow to sue to stop the wall. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and other Democrat lawmakers may also sue.
Officials in El Paso County, Texas, say they will litigate. Ditto for the fake libertarians at the Niskanen Center, and the leftists at the Soros-funded Border Network for Human Rights.
The Left and NeverTrumpers in the GOP have suffered a collective nervous breakdown since the declaration was unveiled.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who has called for the in-your-face harassment of Trump administration employees, told MSNBC Friday that there should be nationwide protests over what she called the “fake” emergency declaration.
“And so it’s time for everybody to stand up. All hands on deck to refuse this president these fake emergency powers that he would like the have. And so I’m urging everybody get together —rally in every community across this country all this weekend, send a message to Washington, D.C., ‘No, Mr. President, we’re not going allow you to do this.”
Soros-funded MoveOn.org called for national protests.
“Donald Trump has declared a #FakeNationalEmergency—an illegal power grab from an unhinged man to push his racist, dangerous policies.”
"We're mobilizing rapid-response events on Presidents Day—Monday, 2/18—against Trump's fake crisis and racist deportation force and to stand with immigrant, Muslim, and Black and brown communities to stop Trump's dangerous and illegal power grab.”
Answering the leftist call for anarchy, on Saturday around 50 protesters, some of whom wore masks, occupied and vandalized the National Border Patrol Museum not far from the border in El Paso, Texas. The demonstrators reportedly hoisted banners reading “No Deportations on Stolen Ground” and shouted “Say it loud, say it clear, Border Patrol kills!”
Twitter is filled with often-strident denunciations of the emergency declaration by GOP pundits inside the Washington Beltway.
NeverTrumper David French of National Review penned an over-the-top column titled “Trump’s Emergency Declaration Is Contemptuous of the Rule of Law,” in which he calls the declaration “a contemptuous document,” and “the proclamation of a monarch, not an argument by a president.”
President Trump invoked the National Emergencies Act Friday as Congress finalized the 1,169-page, $333 billion omnibus spending bill that keeps the government operating until Sept. 30.
The bill, now law, contains $1.375 billion for 55 miles of border barriers in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas. The emergency declaration would take $6.7 billion in previously allocated funds to build the wall. Included in the already appropriated funds are $600 million from the Department of the Treasury Department, $2.5 billion from the Department of Defense’s anti-drug program, and $3.6 billion from the Pentagon’s military construction budget.
Law professors Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, a left-winger, and John Yoo of UC Berkeley, a conservative, say the president can call upon the statute, which President Gerald Ford signed into law in 1976, to get construction of the wall underway.
President Trump has already invoked the National Emergencies Act three times in his tenure. President Barack Obama invoked the statute no fewer than 10 times. Thirty-one previously-declared presidential emergencies reportedly remain in effect.
“Congress expressly gave presidents the authority to declare such emergencies and act unilaterally,” Turley wrote in a recent column.
The National Emergencies Act gives presidents sweeping authority as well as allowance in federal regulations to declare an “immigration emergency” to deal with an “influx of aliens which either is of such magnitude or exhibits such other characteristics that effective administration of the immigration laws of the United States is beyond the existing capabilities” of immigration authorities “in the affected area or areas,” he wrote. The basis for such an invocation generally includes the “likelihood of continued growth in the magnitude of the influx,” rising criminal activity, as well as high “demands on law enforcement agencies” and “other circumstances.”
Yoo wrote earlier this month that Trump is on especially strong ground because Democrats and Republicans passed a law in 2006 authorizing the building of a border wall.
In Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981), the Supreme Court held “that when Congress broadly delegates a general power to the executive branch in the area of foreign affairs, such as the power to impose economic sanctions, it would not read Congress’s neglect to grant a more specific, related authority as foreclosing the president from exercising that authority. Instead, it would treat Congress’s silence as acquiescence to presidential initiative, especially in times of emergency,” Yoo wrote.
“That is exactly the case here: Congress has authorized a wall and other security measures at the border, it has not passed any law forbidding such a wall, and the president has invoked delegated powers to continue the wall’s construction.”
More lawsuits are coming. Count on it.
And George Soros, the preeminent funder of the Left, will be there writing the checks.

40% of all Federal Border Crimes are by invading Mexicans!

Gov. Jerry Brown, on a trip to Mexico, seeks to position California as a more welcoming place for immigrants... $25 BILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE NOT WELCOMING ENOUGH?!?
We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan” or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico.

CA AG Becerra: California Is ‘Definitely and Imminently’ Filing a Lawsuit Against Trump’s Emergency


Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said he “definitely and imminently” planned to file a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border.
When asked if and when a lawsuit will happen, Becerra said, “Definitely, and imminently.”
He added, “We are prepared. We knew something like this might happen, and with our sister state partners, we are ready to go.”
Becerra specified to ABC News after his interview that New Mexico, Oregon, Hawaii and Minnesota will be joining California in the lawsuit.
Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN