Monday, July 13, 2020

40 MILLION REASONS WHY AMERICA NEEDS JEFF SESSIONS

BIDEN HAS PROMISED 40 MILLION MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS AMNESTY. WHAT ABOUT THE JOBS, HOMELESS AND HOUSING CRISIS  THEN?


Conservative columnist Ann Coulter, once an immigration-centric supporter of the president and author of the book In Trump We Trust, has called Trump a “blithering idiot,” “complete moron,” “lout,” and the “most disloyal actual retard that has ever set foot in the Oval Office” for attacking Sessions, the “ONE PERSON in Trump administration who did anything about immigration.” 




Alabama Voters Should Consider Immigration in Sessions vs. Tuberville

 By Chris Chmielenski | July 13, 2020 | 4:56pm EDT







U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions adjusts his glasses as he testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee. (Photo credit: Mark Reinstein/Corbis Via Getty Images)
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions adjusts his glasses as he testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee. (Photo credit: Mark Reinstein/Corbis Via Getty Images)
Republicans in Alabama will vote Tuesday in a primary runoff between former Sen. Jeff Sessions and former football coach Tommy Tuberville, with the winner facing incumbent Sen. Doug Jones in November. But before voting, Alabamans should know how the candidates stand on immigration issues, including ending illegal immigration and giving American workers the first shot at jobs.
President Donald Trump won in 2016 by promising an immigration system that serves the national interest. The White House recently reiterated this commitment: "President Donald J. Trump is continuing to safeguard America's borders from uncontrolled migration, dangerous criminals, and lethal drugs....President Trump wants a merit-based immigration system that protects American workers and serves the national interest."
Examining each candidate’s record on immigration shows a different approach, giving voters valuable information on who is putting the interests of American workers first.
Tuberville supports securing the border, but he’s been quiet on other details that would further discourage future illegal immigration. For example, it is unclear if he supports requiring businesses to use E-Verify to ensure illegal aliens can't get jobs, and Tuberville hasn’t expressed support for a biometric entry/exit system to prevent visa overstays.  He also advocates for additional guest worker visas, which undermine American workers by giving jobs to foreign workers that would otherwise go to American workers and place downward pressure on wages.
It’s not easy to fully analyze Tuberville’s positions because, unlike both Sessions and Jones, he doesn’t have a voting history. He says he promises to support President Trump’s immigration policies, but electing someone with a non-existent record can be risky.
Tuberville raised additional questions about his commitment to an America First policy when he said last August: "There are people coming across the border that need jobs…and we want them to come over here….Let 'em come in and become citizens like we all became citizens."
Tuberville has backed away from those remarks. Still, voters are left wondering how he would vote if elected to the Senate.
Unlike Tuberville, Jeff Sessions has a long record which voters can analyze. As attorney general, Sessions did more than any previous officeholder to enforce our immigration laws. He cracked down on sanctuary cities that protect criminal aliens from deportation by ICE, worked to end asylum fraud, and implemented a zero-tolerance policy on illegal border crossings.
His work as attorney general and in the Senate led the ICE union that represents immigration officers to endorse him.
“As a U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions was the strongest supporter in the U.S. Congress of ICE, its mission, and its employees," the union's president, Chris Crane, said. "We have no doubt that Senator Sessions will pick up right where he left off – standing up for law enforcement and the enforcement of our laws.”
Throughout his career, Sessions has never wavered in his support of American workers. Without his vocal opposition in 2013, it is likely Congress would have granted amnesty to most illegal aliens and massively increased legal immigration. He has consistently fought for and introduced legislation that would end illegal immigration and put American workers first.
Comparing either Sessions or Tuberville to incumbent Sen. Doug Jones exposes vast differences. Sen. Jones opposes President Trump's America First agenda and believes constructing a border wall is a waste of money. 
Sen. Jones supports granting amnesty to illegal aliens and expanding legal immigration. Instead of boldly fighting for change, Sen. Jones rejects commonsense reforms and has received a failing grade from NumbersUSA.
As voters decide whom to vote for in the upcoming primary and general election, they should evaluate the candidates' records on immigration. Sessions has been a consistent advocate for President Trump's immigration policies, while Tuberville is on the right track but is unproven, and Sen. Jones has steadfastly opposed stopping illegal immigration and protecting American workers.
Chris Chmielenski is the deputy director for immigration nonprofit NumbersUSA.


HAVE YOU EVEN ONCE HEARD 

SOMETHING OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF 

THESE CORRUPT POLITICIANS ON 

AMERICA'S HOMELESS, THE HOUSING 

CRISIS OR THE JOBS CRISIS?


The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.
The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.


Democrats’ Top Priority After Victory: Amnesty

AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana
13 Jul 2020160
3:11
Democrats believe the top priority of a Joe Biden administration in 2021 would be passing amnesty for millions of illegal aliens in the country, according to a new report in The Hill.
Increasingly, the party believes that it will not only win the White House, but also the Senate, controlling the entire government for the first time since 2009-2010.
Then, Democrats briefly enjoyed a filibuster-proof majority. Now, Democrats are considering doing away with the filibuster altogether, allowing themselves to pass sweeping legislation by simple majority vote.
And the first priority will be legalizing the 11-million-plus illegal aliens, providing them a “path to citizenship” and the right to vote — and permanently reshaping the American electorate, essentially killing the Republican Party.
The Hill reports:
Democrats are vowing to move forward with immigration reform if presumptive nominee Joe Biden is elected president and the party also takes back the Senate in this fall’s elections.
The prospect would set up a bruising battle in Congress next year, one that Democrats shied away from in 2009 and 2010, after Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 and Democrats expanded their Senate majority and controlled the House.  
Durbin noted that Biden and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (Ill.) have both pledged to make immigration reform the first issue raised after a successful November.
“They’ve all said it’s first up,” Durbin said in remarks before the Senate left for the July 4 recess.
In passing amnesty, Democrats would be picking up where they left off in an ambitious “progressive” agenda first articulated in 2007 by party strategist and convicted felon Robert Creamer.
Breitbart News revealed in 2009 that Creamer had written a political manualListen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (Seven Locks Press, 2007), while serving federal time for a check-kiting scheme.
Creamer, well-connected in Chicago politics, joined the Obama campaign upon his release. His work provided the “blueprint” for the Obama agenda.
The plan was to use “universal” health care as a battering ram to force open the gates of Congress to radical legislation.
Then, immigration reform was to follow, along with other steps to transform the United States — permanently.
Immigration hawks have warned for years that legalizing those currently in the country would mean the end of the GOP, turning the U.S. into a larger version of California, which is essentially a one-party state with little hope of future political opposition.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His new book, RED NOVEMBER, is available for pre-order. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

 

This Recession Is a Bigger Housing Crisis Than 2008

Listen to the wall. Photo: Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images
The wealthiest country in human history has trouble keeping its people housed, even in good times. In 2017, the United States boasted one of the strongest economies in the world, and nearly half of its tenants were rent burdened. A majority of households in the bottom quintile of our nation’s income distribution give more than 40 percent of their disposable income to landlords each month. Only three other developed countries force their poor to shoulder heavier housing costs.
Graphic: United Nations
In times of crisis, the unaffordability of American housing is exacerbated by our “just in time” socioeconomic model: Steady GDP growth is the duct tape holding together this jerry-rigged social order in which low-income Americans have little to no emergency savings, many basic welfare benefits are contingent on employment, and the threadbare safety is patchy by design. This top-heavy, gold-plated jalopy of a political economy can pass as road safe in fair weather; try to ride it through a once-in-a-century epidemiological storm and it starts to break apart.
Between 2006 and 2014, about 10 million Americans lost their homes to the foreclosure crisis. Today, upwards of 20 million U.S. renters are poised to be evicted between now and September, according to Emily Benfer, the chair of the American Bar Association’s Task Force Committee on Eviction.
At present, the impending flood of evictions is partially dammed by a federal moratorium that covers one-fourth of all renters, the $600 federal unemployment insurance bonus, and the recent dispersion of $1,200 coronavirus relief checks. But even with these protections, a great many renters are being washed out of their homes while millions more accrue onerous debts. Roughly one-third of U.S. households have not made their full housing payments for July, according to a survey by the online retail platform Apartment List. In New York City, one-quarter of all renters haven’t paid their landlords since March.
This is in part because fiscal aid has not reached everyone in need (many state unemployment insurance systems have failed to keep pace with applications; many workers do not qualify for federal unemployment benefits; and others were reliant on informal work), and the federal moratorium on evictions does not cover most renters. But it is also because the federal moratorium doesn’t actually have an enforcement mechanism. Fifteen states have passed legislation requiring landlords to verify that their buildings aren’t covered by the federal ban before seeking to remove their tenants. In all other states, the obligation lies with the tenant, which is to say a renter must verify that their building is covered by the moratorium and prove it in court.
People facing eviction do not generally have much disposable income available to cover legal bills; in fact, many struggle to muster the data or internet connection necessary for attending the videoconference hearings that have taken the place of eviction courts throughout much of the country. A Washington Post account of one embattled renter’s attempt to avert eviction illustrates the pathologies of this process:
Judge Yvonne Williams, glasses snuggled tight to the blue mask covering most of her face, peered into the camera in her Texas courtroom recently to press a renter about the more than $4,000 she owed her landlord.

“What do you have toward the rent?” Williams asked.

The renter appeared on another shaky screen from a dark room and explained that she had been furloughed as the spread of the novel coronavirus shut down much of the U.S. economy. But she had three kids and nowhere to go, the renter said, and was working to raise the money, which included more than $1,000 in late fees.

… During the hearing, the judge was asked whether the renter might be covered by the moratorium, which doesn’t expire until late July. But Williams shrugged off the question. (The Washington Post viewed the hearing online.)

“I am not familiar with that, but if someone will show me the law on that, I will certainly entertain that,” she responded. “Right now, I am going to give them the eviction … as unfortunate as it is.”

According to a search on Fannie Mae’s website, the building is covered by the moratorium.
Absent congressional action, enhanced unemployment benefits will expire at the end of this month, while the federal eviction moratorium will be lifted in the fall. As of this writing, congressional Republicans are committed to reducing unemployment benefits and blocking an extension of existing rental protections.
For their part, House Democrats have passed legislation establishing a $100 billion rental-assistance program, while Senator Elizabeth Warren has proposed expanding the number of households covered by the federal eviction moratorium and extending that ban into March 2021.
If no action is taken, up to 28 million Americans could be thrown out of their homes by October, according to Benfer. The victims of such a catastrophic social failure will extend well beyond the ranks of the displaced. As Bloomberg’s Noah Smith writes:
When a landlord evicts a tenant, they need someone else to move in relatively quickly. If no one does, it means a financial loss for the landlord and an economic loss for the country as a whole because the apartment is going to waste. The time and expense that the evicted tenant has to spend moving to a new place results in an additional economic loss…Units whose tenants are evicted will probably sit empty for many months until the crisis is past, while the evicted low-income people will either crowd in with family or become homeless, increasing the risk of coronavirus spread. This is bad from both an economic and a public-health standpoint.
The fiscal cost of keeping cash-strapped Americans in their homes — and unburdened by back rent — may well be lower than that of allowing them to be thrown onto the streets by the tens of millions. The human costs of the latter, meanwhile, are higher than any decent society could afford.
Trump’s Snub of Jeff Sessions Sends a Bad Message
We could be living through the final months of the Trump presidency.
By Matthew Boose
American Greatness, May 29, 2020
. . .
https://amgreatness.com/2020/05/29/trumps-snub-of-jeff-sessions-sends-a-bad-message/


Trump's Attacks on Jeff Sessions Anger Immigration Hawks
By W. James Antle III
Washington Examiner, May 28, 2020
. . .
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/trumps-attacks-on-jeff-sessions-anger-immigration-hawks

 

Trump's attacks on Jeff Sessions anger immigration hawks

 | May 28, 2020 12:00 AM
President Trump has made it clear that he doesn’t want Jeff Sessions returned to the Alabama Senate seat he held for 20 years, but the president’s Twitter tirades against his former attorney general could reverberate beyond the Yellowhammer State to produce a backlash among Trump voters concerned about immigration.
Conservative columnist Ann Coulter, once an immigration-centric supporter of the president and author of the book In Trump We Trust, has called Trump a “blithering idiot,” “complete moron,” “lout,” and the “most disloyal actual retard that has ever set foot in the Oval Office” for attacking Sessions, the “ONE PERSON in Trump administration who did anything about immigration.” Fox News host Tucker Carlson has told an Alabama radio host that “Sessions was Trump long before Trump” and had been “the single most impressive member of the Senate.” Sessions announced his comeback candidacy last year on Carlson’s show.
Sessions was the first senator to endorse Trump for president in early 2016, having been persuaded that the businessman and reality TV star was the best vehicle for his populist brand of conservatism. Trump borrowed heavily from Sessions’s immigration policy handbook during the campaign and plucked top adviser Stephen Miller from the 73-year-old Alabamian’s Senate staff. But as Attorney General Sessions recused himself in the Trump-Russia investigation, paving the way for the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller, he was forced out of the Justice Department over a year later.
Trump hasn’t forgiven Sessions. He has not only endorsed his Republican primary opponent, former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville, he has railed against Sessions on Twitter, calling him “slime” who had his chance but blew it. “Alabama, do not trust Jeff Sessions,” Trump posted. “He let our Country down.” Tuberville edged out Sessions in the first round of voting thanks to Trump’s endorsement. The two will face each other in a July runoff.
What impact Trump will have on that race is unclear, but immigration hawks nationwide are outraged. "I refuse to believe what’s happening to Jeff Sessions right now is entirely due to recusal,” said RJ Hauman, government relations director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. “It may be a factor, but don’t forget that those aligned with big business and the GOP establishment have taken hold of President Trump’s policy agenda and campaign strategy. So, no surprise that the man who has long fought for an immigration system that puts the American people first is being thrown under the bus."
Hardliners speculate that son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, who sparred with the former attorney general over criminal justice reform as well as immigration, played a role in Sessions’s demise. Now, Trump’s choice, Tuberville, is not well-liked by immigration hawks.
“Even voters attracted to Trump because of his ostensible hawkishness on immigration, but who don't closely follow immigration politics and policy, are likely to be influenced by Trump's ravings,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. “But for those who know the issue, the vendetta against Sessions is just one more indication that Trump isn't actually a restrictionist. I don't mean that he's lying about supporting the wall, etc. — I think that genuinely comes from his gut — but when it comes to the level of legal immigration and guestworker admissions, he's more in tune with Obama and Jeb and Pelosi and Schumer than with Sessions.”
Many MAGA activists are taking the president’s side in the argument, however. Sessions’s replacement, Attorney General Bill Barr, has forcefully unraveled the Trump-Russia investigation and defended the president’s prerogatives. Aspects of the investigation, from warrants to surveil Trump campaign associates to the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, have since been revealed to be flawed. The Mueller report found no collusion between Trump and Russia to swing the 2016 election.
The normally mild-mannered Sessions has surprisingly hit back at Trump and defended his recusal as required by law and resulting in the president’s exoneration. Trump’s interventions in Alabama politics have failed before. He endorsed interim Sen. Luther Strange in the last Republican primary for this seat, but voters chose the controversial Roy Moore instead. Almost alone among national GOP leaders, Trump backed Moore in the special election, but he lost to Democrat Doug Jones.
Sessions didn’t have a Democratic challenger last time he ran for reelection and won 97.5% of the vote. Coulter has accused Trump of risking “another Roy Moore fiasco” in the state, but local insiders think Trump could fall on deaf ears again.
“Twitter is an echo chamber, and there are zero undecided voters on the platform,” said Alabama-based Republican strategist Brent Buchanan. "It changes nothing in the Alabama Senate runoff." Either Sessions or Tuberville should be heavily favored over Jones later this year, with Trump at the top of the ticket. It's a rare GOP pickup opportunity as the party defends Senate seats in Arizona, Colorado, North Carolina and Maine.
“Trump's attacks hurt both Sessions and himself, but the question is what's the net effect, and with whom,” said Krikorian. “In Alabama, specifically, they probably hurt Sessions more than Trump, though I still don't think they guarantee a win by Florida Man,” a residency-related nickname for Tuberville.


Trump’s Snub of Jeff Sessions Sends a Bad Message

We could be living through the final months of the Trump presidency.
By Matthew Boose • 
What kind of message does it send when the president, five months before his reelection contest, throws the first senator ever to endorse his presidency under the bus?
For supporters of Jeff Sessions, President Trump’s decision to snub his former attorney general and endorse a goofy RINO football coach instead is more evidence that the America First agenda that won him the White House, and that Sessions pioneered, has become an afterthought for his administration.
The president rages at Sessions for his recusal from the Russia probe. But here’s a thought experiment: what are the odds that Tommy Tuberville would have distinguished himself as some maverick against the Russia hoax had he been in the Senate? Any takers?
To ask the question is to answer it. It’s because the Republican Party is so unprincipled and unimpressive that Sessions (and Trump) stood out in the first place. Sessions is a decent man, and his patriotic convictions carried him, with justice, to a place of prominence in American history.
Trump, a man of instinct, interprets Sessions’ recusal as a sign of weakness, ignoring his loyalty to the president before, during, and after his White House tenure and his vigorous efforts to pursue the president’s America First agenda as attorney general.

Still America First?

The president, if it wasn’t obvious by now, is not some Leninist ideologue who was planning to methodically deport millions of illegal immigrants. This comes as a disappointment to some of his most ideologically driven supporters as well as to his most delusional detractors.
Sure, the president doesn’t have to (and probably shouldn’t) adhere rigidly to doctrine, but Trump’s personal feud with Sessions is disappointing and counterproductive. While not by itself dispositive, it is part of a familiar pattern of setbacks for some of the strongest advocates of the “America First” message, who have started to weary of his inconsistent attention to the Greatness Agenda.
Because of the coronavirus pandemic, Trump has been granted a public mandate by a clear majority of Americans to effectively shut down all immigration into the United States. Outside the predictable partisan noises from liberal media and activist groups, it would be a hugely popular decision. Of course, voters have wanted to reduce immigration for many years. They would reward Trump for it without a doubt.
But the president’s much-hyped immigration “moratorium” followed a familiar playbook: after the excitement of the news died down, it was apparent that Trump left a massive exception for hundreds of thousands of guest workers, hardly a logical decision in the middle of the worst economic crisis in decades, and unfair to college graduates entering a brutal job market.
There are now murmurs that the president will enact a second order this week to expand the ban. But Jared Kushner wants to keep immigration flowing. He has also been given a say in “overhauling” the Republican party platform, for some reason.
The Trump base has been inured to these reversals. While Kushner is often seen as the culprit, the lack of focus in the president’s governance cannot be overlooked.
It came as a shock when Trump, in a recent tweet, complained that Big Tech is controlled by the “radical Left” and that he would do something about censorship of conservatives. Just by acknowledging the problem, the president thrilled beleaguered members of his base who have been fighting to stay online, with little support, over the last four years.
The president doesn’t have much to gain by liberalizing the MAGA movement, but in the wake of Biden’s “you ain’t black” moment, the president has sought to highlight his efforts to reform the criminal justice system, something that his supporters never voted for in 2016.
Why not, instead of desperately trying to expand the coalition, focus instead on retaining the core voters who got Trump elected in the first place?

What’s Next?

We could be living through the final months of the Trump presidency. Victory is by no means assured in November, and it’s anybody’s guess what will become of the MAGA movement if Trump loses to Joe Biden. The Left will seek revenge without mercy.
Trump is a courageous man, and his ability to survive four years of daily, relentless counter-insurrection is admirable. The nationalist awakening that he inspired would never have been possible without him. He is an American original, and there is no doubt that he is the only choice for American patriots and conservatives in November.
That is what makes the president’s distractions so disappointing. Yes, it doesn’t help that Trump has had to contend with a vicious media, an obstructive permanent bureaucracy, and hoax after hoax for years on end. Neither has the weak, gelded Republican party been of much use.
But none of these excuses will make a difference in November, and they won’t matter years from now when posterity looks back on the Trump era. Will this time be remembered as an inflection point for a dying Republic, the moment America came roaring back, or a tragic disappointment?
There is now even talk that President Trump wants to end the war in Afghanistan before November—an aspiration of noble Trumpian proportions—and he appears to finally have taken serious notice of Twitter censorship (five months before the election!) It remains to be seen if these are momentary, or lasting, attentions.
The last four years have been great fun, but the president wasn’t elected to trigger the libs with memes or let criminals out of prison. He was elected to serve the American people and put America First.
The decisions Trump makes now will resonate loudly.


MEXICO'S LA RAZA OCCUPATION OF ALABAMA - THE CASE ON SESSIONS v TUBERVILLE

BIDEN HAS PROMISED 40 MILLION MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS AMNESTY. WHAT ABOUT THE JOBS, HOMELESS AND HOUSING CRISIS  THEN?


Alabama Voters Should Consider Immigration in Sessions vs. Tuberville

 By Chris Chmielenski | July 13, 2020 | 4:56pm EDT




U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions adjusts his glasses as he testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee. (Photo credit: Mark Reinstein/Corbis Via Getty Images)
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions adjusts his glasses as he testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee. (Photo credit: Mark Reinstein/Corbis Via Getty Images)
Republicans in Alabama will vote Tuesday in a primary runoff between former Sen. Jeff Sessions and former football coach Tommy Tuberville, with the winner facing incumbent Sen. Doug Jones in November. But before voting, Alabamans should know how the candidates stand on immigration issues, including ending illegal immigration and giving American workers the first shot at jobs.
President Donald Trump won in 2016 by promising an immigration system that serves the national interest. The White House recently reiterated this commitment: "President Donald J. Trump is continuing to safeguard America's borders from uncontrolled migration, dangerous criminals, and lethal drugs....President Trump wants a merit-based immigration system that protects American workers and serves the national interest."
Examining each candidate’s record on immigration shows a different approach, giving voters valuable information on who is putting the interests of American workers first.
Tuberville supports securing the border, but he’s been quiet on other details that would further discourage future illegal immigration. For example, it is unclear if he supports requiring businesses to use E-Verify to ensure illegal aliens can't get jobs, and Tuberville hasn’t expressed support for a biometric entry/exit system to prevent visa overstays.  He also advocates for additional guest worker visas, which undermine American workers by giving jobs to foreign workers that would otherwise go to American workers and place downward pressure on wages.
It’s not easy to fully analyze Tuberville’s positions because, unlike both Sessions and Jones, he doesn’t have a voting history. He says he promises to support President Trump’s immigration policies, but electing someone with a non-existent record can be risky.
Tuberville raised additional questions about his commitment to an America First policy when he said last August: "There are people coming across the border that need jobs…and we want them to come over here….Let 'em come in and become citizens like we all became citizens."
Tuberville has backed away from those remarks. Still, voters are left wondering how he would vote if elected to the Senate.
Unlike Tuberville, Jeff Sessions has a long record which voters can analyze. As attorney general, Sessions did more than any previous officeholder to enforce our immigration laws. He cracked down on sanctuary cities that protect criminal aliens from deportation by ICE, worked to end asylum fraud, and implemented a zero-tolerance policy on illegal border crossings.
His work as attorney general and in the Senate led the ICE union that represents immigration officers to endorse him.
“As a U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions was the strongest supporter in the U.S. Congress of ICE, its mission, and its employees," the union's president, Chris Crane, said. "We have no doubt that Senator Sessions will pick up right where he left off – standing up for law enforcement and the enforcement of our laws.”
Throughout his career, Sessions has never wavered in his support of American workers. Without his vocal opposition in 2013, it is likely Congress would have granted amnesty to most illegal aliens and massively increased legal immigration. He has consistently fought for and introduced legislation that would end illegal immigration and put American workers first.
Comparing either Sessions or Tuberville to incumbent Sen. Doug Jones exposes vast differences. Sen. Jones opposes President Trump's America First agenda and believes constructing a border wall is a waste of money. 
Sen. Jones supports granting amnesty to illegal aliens and expanding legal immigration. Instead of boldly fighting for change, Sen. Jones rejects commonsense reforms and has received a failing grade from NumbersUSA.
As voters decide whom to vote for in the upcoming primary and general election, they should evaluate the candidates' records on immigration. Sessions has been a consistent advocate for President Trump's immigration policies, while Tuberville is on the right track but is unproven, and Sen. Jones has steadfastly opposed stopping illegal immigration and protecting American workers.
Chris Chmielenski is the deputy director for immigration nonprofit NumbersUSA.


HAVE YOU EVEN ONCE HEARD 

SOMETHING OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF 

THESE CORRUPT POLITICIANS ON 

AMERICA'S HOMELESS, THE HOUSING 

CRISIS OR THE JOBS CRISIS?


The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.
The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.


Democrats’ Top Priority After Victory: Amnesty

AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana
13 Jul 2020160
3:11
Democrats believe the top priority of a Joe Biden administration in 2021 would be passing amnesty for millions of illegal aliens in the country, according to a new report in The Hill.
Increasingly, the party believes that it will not only win the White House, but also the Senate, controlling the entire government for the first time since 2009-2010.
Then, Democrats briefly enjoyed a filibuster-proof majority. Now, Democrats are considering doing away with the filibuster altogether, allowing themselves to pass sweeping legislation by simple majority vote.
And the first priority will be legalizing the 11-million-plus illegal aliens, providing them a “path to citizenship” and the right to vote — and permanently reshaping the American electorate, essentially killing the Republican Party.
The Hill reports:
Democrats are vowing to move forward with immigration reform if presumptive nominee Joe Biden is elected president and the party also takes back the Senate in this fall’s elections.
The prospect would set up a bruising battle in Congress next year, one that Democrats shied away from in 2009 and 2010, after Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 and Democrats expanded their Senate majority and controlled the House.  
Durbin noted that Biden and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (Ill.) have both pledged to make immigration reform the first issue raised after a successful November.
“They’ve all said it’s first up,” Durbin said in remarks before the Senate left for the July 4 recess.
In passing amnesty, Democrats would be picking up where they left off in an ambitious “progressive” agenda first articulated in 2007 by party strategist and convicted felon Robert Creamer.
Breitbart News revealed in 2009 that Creamer had written a political manualListen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (Seven Locks Press, 2007), while serving federal time for a check-kiting scheme.
Creamer, well-connected in Chicago politics, joined the Obama campaign upon his release. His work provided the “blueprint” for the Obama agenda.
The plan was to use “universal” health care as a battering ram to force open the gates of Congress to radical legislation.
Then, immigration reform was to follow, along with other steps to transform the United States — permanently.
Immigration hawks have warned for years that legalizing those currently in the country would mean the end of the GOP, turning the U.S. into a larger version of California, which is essentially a one-party state with little hope of future political opposition.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His new book, RED NOVEMBER, is available for pre-order. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

 

This Recession Is a Bigger Housing Crisis Than 2008

Listen to the wall. Photo: Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images
The wealthiest country in human history has trouble keeping its people housed, even in good times. In 2017, the United States boasted one of the strongest economies in the world, and nearly half of its tenants were rent burdened. A majority of households in the bottom quintile of our nation’s income distribution give more than 40 percent of their disposable income to landlords each month. Only three other developed countries force their poor to shoulder heavier housing costs.
Graphic: United Nations
In times of crisis, the unaffordability of American housing is exacerbated by our “just in time” socioeconomic model: Steady GDP growth is the duct tape holding together this jerry-rigged social order in which low-income Americans have little to no emergency savings, many basic welfare benefits are contingent on employment, and the threadbare safety is patchy by design. This top-heavy, gold-plated jalopy of a political economy can pass as road safe in fair weather; try to ride it through a once-in-a-century epidemiological storm and it starts to break apart.
Between 2006 and 2014, about 10 million Americans lost their homes to the foreclosure crisis. Today, upwards of 20 million U.S. renters are poised to be evicted between now and September, according to Emily Benfer, the chair of the American Bar Association’s Task Force Committee on Eviction.
At present, the impending flood of evictions is partially dammed by a federal moratorium that covers one-fourth of all renters, the $600 federal unemployment insurance bonus, and the recent dispersion of $1,200 coronavirus relief checks. But even with these protections, a great many renters are being washed out of their homes while millions more accrue onerous debts. Roughly one-third of U.S. households have not made their full housing payments for July, according to a survey by the online retail platform Apartment List. In New York City, one-quarter of all renters haven’t paid their landlords since March.
This is in part because fiscal aid has not reached everyone in need (many state unemployment insurance systems have failed to keep pace with applications; many workers do not qualify for federal unemployment benefits; and others were reliant on informal work), and the federal moratorium on evictions does not cover most renters. But it is also because the federal moratorium doesn’t actually have an enforcement mechanism. Fifteen states have passed legislation requiring landlords to verify that their buildings aren’t covered by the federal ban before seeking to remove their tenants. In all other states, the obligation lies with the tenant, which is to say a renter must verify that their building is covered by the moratorium and prove it in court.
People facing eviction do not generally have much disposable income available to cover legal bills; in fact, many struggle to muster the data or internet connection necessary for attending the videoconference hearings that have taken the place of eviction courts throughout much of the country. A Washington Post account of one embattled renter’s attempt to avert eviction illustrates the pathologies of this process:
Judge Yvonne Williams, glasses snuggled tight to the blue mask covering most of her face, peered into the camera in her Texas courtroom recently to press a renter about the more than $4,000 she owed her landlord.

“What do you have toward the rent?” Williams asked.

The renter appeared on another shaky screen from a dark room and explained that she had been furloughed as the spread of the novel coronavirus shut down much of the U.S. economy. But she had three kids and nowhere to go, the renter said, and was working to raise the money, which included more than $1,000 in late fees.

… During the hearing, the judge was asked whether the renter might be covered by the moratorium, which doesn’t expire until late July. But Williams shrugged off the question. (The Washington Post viewed the hearing online.)

“I am not familiar with that, but if someone will show me the law on that, I will certainly entertain that,” she responded. “Right now, I am going to give them the eviction … as unfortunate as it is.”

According to a search on Fannie Mae’s website, the building is covered by the moratorium.
Absent congressional action, enhanced unemployment benefits will expire at the end of this month, while the federal eviction moratorium will be lifted in the fall. As of this writing, congressional Republicans are committed to reducing unemployment benefits and blocking an extension of existing rental protections.
For their part, House Democrats have passed legislation establishing a $100 billion rental-assistance program, while Senator Elizabeth Warren has proposed expanding the number of households covered by the federal eviction moratorium and extending that ban into March 2021.
If no action is taken, up to 28 million Americans could be thrown out of their homes by October, according to Benfer. The victims of such a catastrophic social failure will extend well beyond the ranks of the displaced. As Bloomberg’s Noah Smith writes:
When a landlord evicts a tenant, they need someone else to move in relatively quickly. If no one does, it means a financial loss for the landlord and an economic loss for the country as a whole because the apartment is going to waste. The time and expense that the evicted tenant has to spend moving to a new place results in an additional economic loss…Units whose tenants are evicted will probably sit empty for many months until the crisis is past, while the evicted low-income people will either crowd in with family or become homeless, increasing the risk of coronavirus spread. This is bad from both an economic and a public-health standpoint.
The fiscal cost of keeping cash-strapped Americans in their homes — and unburdened by back rent — may well be lower than that of allowing them to be thrown onto the streets by the tens of millions. The human costs of the latter, meanwhile, are higher than any decent society could afford.