NAFTA JOE BIDEN = DRUG DEALER
Jesse Watters: Why is Biden betraying us?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efkARlNJeyI
How California Law Created A Massive Marijuana Black Market | John Nores Jr.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z0gX0vKWjM
2,000 members of Mexican National Guard sent to Tijuana to deal with cartel caused violence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2WpqRS7A5Q
Ordinary people are taking the law into their own hands to counter cartel threat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VqjAZhJobE
Tom Cotton: Joe Biden Will Keep Foreign Drug Dealers in U.S.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) slammed President Joe Biden’s administration amid evidence that his deputies want to minimize the deportation of illegal migrants who are caught dealing deadly drugs.
“It’s the Biden administration policy to allow illegal aliens to stay in America even after they: -Deal fentanyl and heroin -Commit fraud -Commit assault -Drive drunk -Launder money,” Cotton tweeted February 8.
“More than 80,000 Americans died from drug overdoses last year. And the Biden administration just announced that deporting illegal alien cartel members who deal with fentanyl and heroin is no longer a priority for his administration,” he added.
For more than 20 years, many Americans have been killed by drunk-driving illegals, including many killed after federal and state officials decide not to deport illegals.
It's the Biden administration policy to allow illegal aliens to stay in America even after they:
-Deal fentanyl and heroin
-Commit fraud
-Commit assault
-Drive drunk
-Launder moneyhttps://t.co/Vr0RhYAJQV
— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) February 8, 2021
The Washington Post reported February 7 how Biden’s deputies are changing deportation priorities for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency:
While ICE’s new operational plans are not yet final, interim instructions sent to senior officials point to a major shift in enforcement. Agents will no longer seek to deport immigrants for crimes such as driving under the influence and assault, and will focus instead on national security threats, recent border crossers and people completing prison and jail terms for aggravated felony convictions.
“Generally, these convictions would not include drug based crimes (less serious offenses), simple assault, DUI, money laundering, property crimes, fraud, tax crimes, solicitation, or charges without convictions,” acting director Tae Johnson told senior officials in a Thursday email advising them on how to operate while new guidelines are finalized.
“The priority for the enforcement of immigration laws will be on those who are imposing a national security threat, of course, a public safety threat, and on recent arrivals,” Biden spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in the February 8 White House press briefing:
Nobody is saying that DUIs or assaults are acceptable behavior, and those arrested for such activities should be tried and sentenced as appropriate by local law enforcement. But we’re talking about the prioritization of who is going to be deported from the country.
The priority list for deportations also excludes migrants who take American’ jobs and wages. This policy will largely abandon the task of protecting Americans’ right to a national labor market.
Biden has repeatedly declared he wants to make the nation’s immigration system more “fair” to migrants. Since January 20, he has minimized deportations, stopped construction of the border wall, offered an amnesty to migrants, broken anti-migration deals with three counties, and has lowered legal barriers to migration.
However, he has said little or nothing about how he will protect Americans’ rights, wages, safe streets, and reasonable housing from foreign criminals or job seekers. A February 2 statement said:
President Biden’s strategy is centered on the basic premise that our country is safer, stronger, and more prosperous with a fair, safe and orderly immigration system that welcomes immigrants, keeps families together, and allows people—both newly arrived immigrants and people who have lived here for generations—to more fully contribute to our country.
Amid Biden’s inrush of migrants and shutdown of deportations, more than 20 million Americans are unemployed or are stuck in part-time jobs.
Biden is also rolling back protections for American graduates, who have lost at least one million jobs because Fortune 500 CEOs and their subcontractors have hired more than 1 million foreign graduates for jobs sought by Americans.
In a separate tweet, Cotton lambasted Biden’s team for dropping a rule that would protect American graduate from losing jobs to H-1B graduate visa-workers who are willing to work for low wages in the hope of getting green cards:
Big Tech abuses the H-1B visa program to hire cheap foreign labor instead of Americans. That isn’t good for American workers, but the Biden administration is letting companies get away with it.https://t.co/YIolIoyqJl
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) February 5, 2021
For years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration — or the hiring of temporary contract workers into the jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.
The multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, priority-driven, and solidarity-themed opposition to labor migration coexists with generally favorable personal feelings toward legal immigrants and immigration in theory.
Joe Biden's deputies attack Americans' right to their own national labor market, by quietly barring the deportation of illegal migrants who take Americans' wages and jobs.
That labor policy helps corporate donors.
But hurts blue collars & college grads. https://t.co/RNCMFv4aJh
— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) February 8, 2021
Report: ICE Releases Border-Crossing Terrorist Suspect from Venezuela Despite FBI Recommendation
A Lebanon-born Venezuelan on the FBI’s terrorism watchlist due to “highly derogatory information” is free in Michigan
DoD Spokesman: 'US Military Personnel Responded to an Inbound Missile Threat on the UAE'
(CNSNews.com) - As the Biden administration plans to unilaterally deploy U.S. troops to NATO allies near Russia, U.S. troops on Monday helped to defend the United Arab Emirates from a ballistic missile attack launched by the Houthis in Yemen.
"U.S. military personnel responded to an inbound missile threat on the UAE," Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby told a press briefing on Monday:
This involved the activation of Patriot missile batteries, coincident with the efforts by the armed forces of the UAE. The combined effort successfully engaged the threat, and there were no injuries or casualties.
We commend the professionalism of the UAE armed forces in confronting these threats and defending their territory. We, of course stand with the UAE, Saudi Arabia and our Gulf partners in defending against threats to their peoples and their territories.
President Biden also mentioned the attack on the UAE before his White House meeting with the Qatari emir:
"I also want to note that the UAE defeated a ballistic missile attack launched by the Houthis ...from Yemen yesterday. And we’ve been in daily contact with the UAE to address those threats," Biden said.
"And I’ve directed Secretary Austin to do everything he can to communicate the support of the United States for the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and throughout the Gulf region. America will have the backs of our friends in the region."
Back at the Pentagon, Kirby said he had nothing "specific" to announce about additional capabilities the U.S. might supply to the UAE in light of recent Houthi attacks. "But I would tell you that we are constantly looking -- even before this spate of recent attacks, but certainly in the wake of them -- for additional capabilities that might prove useful to our Gulf partners in this case, particularly the Emiratis.
“So again, nothing to announce today in terms of something moving, but very much committed to having a very discreet and specific conversation with the Emiratis about what they might need and what we might be able to provide.”
A reporter asked Kirby about the threat to U.S. forces in the region, given the continuing Houthi attacks:
"Well, I think just you never want to take anything for granted...but clearly, these attacks have not been 100 percent successful," Kirby said. "We continue to, as I said...to explore opportunities to improve our defenses and the defenses of our Emirati partners as well. So, I don't have an announcement to make in terms of what we're going to do differently.
“We're constantly trying to make sure that we're more ready. My understanding with respect to this particular attack is that the inbound missile was engaged by Emirati surface-to-air missiles. They're the ones that actually engaged this missile. The U.S. Patriots were fired, but it was the Emirati surface-to-air missiles that actually engaged the targets.”
Kirby confirmed that U.S. Patriot missiles also were fired last week, in a Houthi attack near the UAE's Al Dhafra Air Base, where U.S. forces are stationed.
Press reports said an Abu Dhabi oil facility was targeted in that Houthi drone attack.
Kirby wouldn't say if Americans were the target:
"What I can tell you is that the Patriots were engaged. I don't have anything more detailed to speak to in terms of actual target. But the Patriots were -- our Patriots were engaged."
A reporter asked if U.S. forces are firing missiles to defend Al Dhafra Air Base or to defend the UAE in general: "I mean, every attack is different," Kirby said. "So I don't want to put some blanket policy on it. But obviously, we're going to help come to the defense of our Emirati partners...If we can help defend our Emirati partners, we're going to do that."
DoD: Biden 'Unilaterally' Moving U.S. Troops to Eastern Europe; 'Trainers on the Ground' in Ukraine
(CNSNews.com) - Pentagon spokesman John Kirby on Monday clarified President Biden's comment on Friday evening, when Biden said, "I'll be moving U.S. troops to Eastern Europe and the NATO countries in the near term — not a lot."
Kirby said President Biden was not talking about U.S. troops that would fall under NATO: "NATO has to vote on activation of the response force. I mean, that's something that would have to come from the alliance itself, and that hasn't occurred."
Kirby said Biden was talking about a unilateral deployment "in close consultation with the actual allies themselves.
“I mean, you can't just unilaterally decide to throw extra U.S. forces at a country. You want to make sure that they're on board with it, and that you've had the appropriate conversations. And what I would tell you is that those sorts of conversations are ongoing," Kirby said.
“And, you know, I'll leave it at -- there. I leave it at that. I don't, again, have a timeline to give you. I certainly don't have any specifics with respect to a redeployment inside Europe to talk to in any great detail. But it is very much an active discussion here at the Pentagon. It certainly is an active discussion that we're having with our national security council counterparts..."
A reporter asked for clarification: "So what President Biden was talking about then is a unilateral deployment to NATO ally, countries around Ukraine? Right, that's what you're saying?"
"Yes," Kirby responded.
The Russian military buildup around Ukraine has "definitely got many of our NATO allies concerned, particularly those allies that border or very close to bordering Russia," Kirby said:
And so, we want to make sure that our NATO allies understand we take seriously our commitments to them. And so, if they desire, if they want additional capabilities, particularly in those Eastern Flank countries, to bolster their own self-defense, then we want to have that conversation with them, and we want to be willing to provide that for them.
That's the unilateral movements, and it is really designed to ensure NATO solidarity, and quite frankly, to help bolster the capabilities of our allies.
Second and distinct from that, of course, is the NATO Response Force. And this is a 40,000-troops strong response force that only NATO. the alliance. can activate. We have obligations inside that just like other countries inside the alliance. We signed up for a certain amount of contribution to that. It is not something that is just off the shelf, and you just go grab it. So, you want to make it as short a tether as possible.
And that's why we've alerted those extra 8,500 troops here in the States. They have not been given deployment orders. They've just been told to be ready on a shorter period of time, in case the alliance activates that. And as for Ukraine, you're right. The principal threat right now, at least from a military perspective is from Russia on Ukraine, and to Ukrainian soil.
Which is why we continue to provide security assistance material to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Another shipment just arrived on Friday, there'll be more coming in coming days, and why we still have trainers on the ground. Not just us, the Brits do, the Canadians do, trainers on the ground, to help improve the competence and the confidence of Ukrainian Armed Forces.
So, it's really a multi-tiered approach here. But the president has been very clear, we're not going to see American troops on the ground in combat with the Russians in Ukraine. He has made clear that that's not on the table. So, what we're focused on is the very real security commitments that we have, you mentioned under Article Five, specifically to our NATO allies.
Should Mr. Putin decide to make or to exhibit threats against the alliance, we want to make sure that he understands unequivocally that that's not going to be acceptable, and the United States will fight to defend our NATO allies and our commitments to our allies on the continent. But look, again, and pardon me for going on. But it was a very good question.
We don't think it has to come to conflict. There still we still believe there's time and space for diplomacy...
On January 25, Biden told reporters: "We have no intention of putting American forces or NATO forces in Ukraine."
Three days later, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley said the U.S. has already sent U.S. military "advisers and trainers" to Ukraine:
"There is a small contingent of US and NATO advisers and trainers currently in Ukraine," Milley said. "The United States has zero offensive combat weapons systems, nor any permanent forces, nor bases in Ukraine.
"Our role is limited in that we help train, advise and assist with tactics, techniques and procedures. We participate in institutional development of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense."
Biden Admin Commences Border Wall Construction Study with ‘No Plan to Build’
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced the next study phase for the construction of a border barrier project covering 86 miles in the Rio Grande Valley. Last week, the agency opened the door for public comments as part of an environmental assessment. Despite the appearance of progress, CBP is already disclosing that it will not proceed with construction or new permanent land acquisitions at the conclusion of the study. The bureaucratic maneuver helps shield the agency from violating legal responsibilities to dispense with funds as Congress ordered.
In Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019, Congress appropriated funds for the 86-mile construction project which the Biden Administration later urged subsequent lawmakers to cancel. Although the President has promised he will not use tax dollars to fund border wall construction, the administration is legally obligated to move forward with the study process due to the Congressional appropriation.
The latest announcement doubles down on the administration’s request to cancel funding, which the current Congress has yet to do. Until then, the obligation holds. The announcement begins what could be a lengthy environmental process designed more to adhere with federal funding laws rather than break ground as intended.
According to a Cambridge University Press research document analyzing more than 2,000 environmental studies, the time frame for completion of an impact statement ranged from 51 days to 18 years. Should the administration remain committed to not building wall projects, the environmental process can stretch almost indefinitely.
After announcing a pause in border wall construction in January, the administration faced claims by Republican lawmakers that the move violated impoundment laws regarding the failure to expend congressionally appropriated funds. In June, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined the administration’s pause was a programmatic delay and did not violate any laws.
In a June press release, the White House acknowledged the legal obligation to expend the funds for wall construction:
Although most of the funds used for the border wall were diverted from other purposes, Congress provided DHS with some funding for border barrier projects. DHS is legally required to use the funds consistent with their appropriated purpose.
In the same announcement, the administration emphasized, “DHS will engage in a comprehensive review that includes detailed environmental impact analysis and remediation, and robust and substantive engagement with relevant stakeholders, including border community residents, their elected representatives, tribal communities, and environmental and other interested non-governmental organizations and advocates.” The statement signals the administration intends to be thorough in its public outreach and is in no hurry to break ground.
An agency spokesperson further told Breitbart Texas:
The environmental planning activities addressed in the news advisory of January 20, 2022, will not involve any construction of new border barrier or permanent land acquisition. The environmental assessment is unrelated to the levee remediation work in the RGV approved by DHS on April 30, 2021.
The public comment period will terminate on March 7, 2022.
Randy Clark is a 32-year veteran of the United States Border Patrol. Prior to his retirement, he served as the Division Chief for Law Enforcement Operations, directing operations for nine Border Patrol Stations within the Del Rio, Texas, Sector. Follow him on Twitter @RandyClarkBBTX.
No comments:
Post a Comment