Friday, October 28, 2016

Illegal Immigration

by -
gun shows

According to recent reports along the U.S. border with Mexico, the number of illegal immigrants trying to enter the United States is again spiking, and could rival the wave of illegal crossings in 2014. Facing this problem, one would hope that a priority for federal immigration officials would be to focus on employing new technologies to improve chances for catching criminals who have thus come into our country. Federal immigration officials, however, appear more interested in using new-fangled technology to intimidate and harass American citizens who decide simply to drop by lawful gun shows.

As discovered in an analysis of government emails by the Wall Street Journal, a joint program between local law enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials has been using license plate-reading technology to track gun show attendees. According to the Journal, the program dates back to 2010, and likely spread far beyond the original target area of southern California. It is possible that if you have attended a gun show in any state in the last the half-decade, your personal information is now stored in a government database.

To make matters worse, ICE apparently has no explicit policy in place limiting the use of license plate readers, or how information gathered thus far is shared with other agencies, or how it is stored and for how long. As we’ve seen previously in states like Maryland, which allegedly used concealed carry permit data shared with them through the shady and unaccountable network of intelligence “Fusion Centers,” it is conceivable that personal information collected from gun shows can be, and likely will be, used to target innocent Americans now and in the future. After all, a person would not even have to purchase a firearm at one of these gun shows to end up in a law enforcement database.

Such schemes attempting to link gun ownership to border crime is all too familiar for an Administration responsible for the “gun-walking” debacle known as “Fast and Furious.” But this latest revelation is a frightening reminder of just how far the Obama Administration is willing to go to chill law-abiding citizens’ exercise of their Second Amendment-guaranteed rights.

President Bill Clinton’s support for gun control measures was well-known. And, during the first two years of his Administration, when the Congress remained under firm Democratic Party control, Clinton pressed his anti-Second Amendment agenda through legislative measures; resulting in the so-called “Brady Bill” which he signed into law in 1993, and the “Assault Weapons Ban” the following year.

Barack Obama, however, not having a compliant Congress to work with (other than during his first two years, from 2009 to 2010), clearly prefers sneakier ways to move his anti-gun agenda forward. Thus, the use of federal regulatory agencies with no clear or even lawful jurisdiction over firearms, to limit the Second Amendment. Abusing the regulatory powers of the FDIC to pressure banks into severing ties with companies that engage in lawful firearms transactions in “Operation Choke Point,” is but the most outrageous example of this approach; there are numerous others, ranging from those involving the departments of State, Health and Human Services, or the Centers for Disease Control.

The recently revealed license plate-reading scheme, however, is a particularly nefarious tactic by the Obama Administration, insofar as it indiscriminately ensnares anyone who attends a gun show for any reason. All such persons become suspects in the eyes of law enforcement officials; including people who might merely be shopping for knives, or who had dropped by to view or participate in non-gun related exhibits popular at such shows.

This program illustrates the fundamental problem with dragnets such as these employed by ICE: potential “guilt” is determined not by any evidence of criminal forethought or activity, but by algorithms and connecting dots that fit the government’s perception of “suspicious activity”; even if such activity is completely legal and constitutional. For example, it is not far-fetched to envision that a person tracked at a gun show, and then tracked again at a school, could suddenly find himself surrounded by SWAT teams ready to shoot what the government’s computer program concludes is a possible killer, but is in reality nothing more sinister than a father picking up a child at school after dropping by a lawful gun show.

The government may see its gun show surveillance program as a clever way to catch gun “runners,” but it is simply another way to chill our Second Amendment rights.

by -
record number

There are a record number of Hispanics that believe Trump will win the presidency and they are playing the odds.

Hundreds of thousands of central and South Americans are flocking to America illegally, because they think Trump is going to win and build that wall.

They want to get to America before robots take all the jobs.

The numbers that came across in August were just slightly off the all-time high in 2014, but there is another scarier record that was broken.

Unaccompanied minors that were taken into custody spiked to an all-time high.

Broken family units are also among the high numbers.

Right now the southern border is a mess and it is getting worse.

Normally during the summer months and especially in August, we see the number of people crossing the border dramatically drop due to the summer heat.

This year is different. The numbers of families, kids and individuals from South and Central America that are entering our country illegally have continued to climb almost yearly.

If they didn’t think that Trump would win and build the wall, then they wouldn’t make the trip during the summer to beat the election.

by -
sanctuary cities

The Obama administration rewards sanctuary states, counties and cities that shield violent illegal immigrants from deportation with hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants and one of the biggest recipients recently made headlines for protecting a serial criminal who murdered a young woman. The money flows through the Department of Justice (DOJ), the agency responsible for enforcing the law and defending the interests of the United States. The DOJ is also charged with providing federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime, according to its mission statement, and seeking just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior.

Apparently this doesn’t apply to local governments that support the president’s broad open borders policies, even when they violate federal law. The DOJ doled out $342,168,401 to 10 sanctuary states and cities that proudly reject federal claims for criminal illegal aliens earmarked for removal, according to the agency’s independent watchdog. Among them is Connecticut, a trailblazer in the sanctuary movement that received more than $69 million in grants from the DOJ. Connecticut has long protected illegal immigrants with sanctuary policies and even offers them special drivers’ licenses, known as Drive Only. The state also gives illegal aliens discounted tuition at public colleges and universities and authorities work hard to restrict the feds from deporting illegal immigrants. Last year an illegal immigrant who had spent 17 years in prison for attempted murder stabbed a 25-year-old woman to death in Norwich, a city of about 40,000 residents. The murderer had been earmarked for deportation at least three times.

California, also a renowned sanctuary state that offers illegal immigrants a number of taxpayer-funded perks, topped the list with $132,409,635 in DOJ grants. Judicial Watch has investigated the state’s illegal sanctuary policies for years and back in 2008 launched a California public records request with the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department to obtain the arrest and booking information on Edwin Ramos, an illegal alien from El Salvador who murdered three innocent American citizens. Ramos was a member of a renowned violent street gang and had been convicted of two felonies as a juvenile (a gang-related assault on a bus passenger and the attempted robbery of a pregnant woman) yet he was allowed to remain in the country. Last year Judicial Watch obtained records showing that violent crime—including murder and rape—in the Bay area has skyrocketed since the San Francisco Sheriff and City Council expanded illegal alien sanctuary policies in 2013.

Under the ordinance San Francisco law enforcement agencies are required to ignore most U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers. Judicial Watch is also investigating whether the city violated the law again with its sanctuary policy that led to the release of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal immigrant deported five times who gunned down Kate Steinle at one of the most popular tourist spots in San Francisco.

Two cities—New York and Chicago—got $60,091,942 and $28,523,222 respectively from the DOJ and Philadelphia followed with $16,505,312. South Florida’s Miami-Dade County received $10,778,815, Milwaukee, Wisconsin got $7,539,572, Cook County, Illinois $6,018,544, Clark County, Nevada $6,257,9851 and Orleans Parish, Louisiana $4,737,964. In some cases elected officials in these municipalities brag about defying federal immigration laws. One, the mayor of Chicago, is mentioned in the DOJ Inspector General report for publicly stating: “We are not going to turn people over to ICE, and we are not going to check their immigration status.” The city also prohibits employees from cooperating with federal immigration authorities, the report says.

Other recipients of our taxpayer dollars do the same with no consequences. The Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office has an “ICE Procedures” policy that states the agency shall not initiate any immigration status investigation into individuals in their custody or provide the feds with information on an inmate’s release date or address.

Philadelphia’s mayor issued an executive order stating that the pending release of the subject of an ICE immigration detainer shall not be provided to the agency unless the person has been convicted of a felony and New York enacted a law years ago restricting jail personnel from communicating with ICE regarding an inmate’s release date, incarceration status or court dates. The law resulted in ICE closing its office on Riker’s Island and ceasing operations on any other NYC Department of Corrections property, the report reveals. It’s beyond comprehension that these law-breaking local governments are being rewarded with federal funds distributed by the agency responsible for enforcing the law.

by -

Last summer when Donald Trump declared that he wanted to build a wall on our southern border, he started going up in the polls and critics got angry.

The controversial wall that Donald wants to build and have Mexico pay for has galvanized many Hispanics against Trump.

Violent protests with Hispanics holding signs saying “F*CK TRUMP”, have done little to stop the GOP nominee.

Now, one artist is taking a different approach to stand against Trump’s wall.

The artist Plastic Jesus is believed to have built a wall around the Hollywood star of Donald Trump. The wall even has barbed wire and little signs on it warning people to “keep out”.

The walled star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame is a big social media hit. People are stopping to take pictures and to share it on Instagram and Facebook.

If you don’t like Trump, this is a much more effective way of voicing your opinion than just yelling, “F*UCK TRUMP” as seen in this video. (CAUTION STRONG LANGUAGE)

What do you think of the wall around Donald Trump’s star? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
Texas Border

When it comes to reporting and news, Alex Jones and his Info Warriors are not the most respected journalists in America. Often focusing on conspiracy theories and fringe news, Alex Jones has somewhat of a bad reputation.

That doesn’t mean that he is wrong.

When Alex sent some reporters to our southern border, he had hoped to get some footage of illegals just walking into America to prove is his point that the borders are wide open.

Instead of getting some good footage, the reporters were arrested and detained.

They were taken into federal custody after having permission by two other agencies working on the border.

See the dramatic explanation from the people involved.

The big question is why where they detained?

What is on the border that the feds don’t want us to see? If Alex Jones is right, then the government is facilitating an open border to receive as many migrants that arrive.

If the feds are right, they were just protecting the border.

The video highlights how little we actually know about our southern border. How many people are actually coming in and why is the information being kept from us?

There are reports that more people have already crossed into America through the southern border so far this year than all of last year.

Illegal immigration is a real problem. The scary thing is we may not know how big of a problem it really is, especially if reporters are being arrested.

What do you think is happening at our southern border? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

Illegal immigrants who cross the border and are caught are dropped off at the McAllen, Texas bus station and then travel all through the United States.

We have seen a surge in illegal immigration and people crossing our southern border, but happens to those people that are caught? They are taken to a bus station.

A former firefighter and a volunteer who is helping the immigrants through a Catholic charity says he likes “helping people”.

Luis Guerroro who has been volunteering for over a year, says that the immigrants are dropped off at the McAllen bus station and they are left to find family and travel on their own.

At first Luis Guerroro said there was just one bus a day that would drop off the people who crossed the border throughout the day.

Now Luis says there are a couple of busses a day. The spike in illegals coming to the bus station is spiking and so is the number crossing our border.

The United Nations said that there are tons of people from Central America who are making their way through Mexico to the United States. They are on the way.

There are reports that we have brought in more illegal immigrants so far in 2016 than all of 2015. This is a major problem and dropping illegals off at a bus station to travel anywhere in the US they want is not a good idea.

What do you think we should do about illegal immigrants? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
Indian Reservation

Update: a few hours after we posted this story, Border Patrol officials in Arizona reported that the road has been reopened.

An Indian reservation along the Mexican border is prohibiting the Border Patrol from entering its land, which is a notorious smuggling corridor determined by the U.S. government to be a “High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA).”

Homeland Security sources tell Judicial Watch that the road in the southeast corner of the reservation has been cordoned off by a barbed wired gate to keep officers out. A hand-written cardboard sign reading “Closed, Do Not Open” has been posted on the fence. “This is the location used most for trafficking drugs into the country,” a Border Patrol source told JW, adding that agents assigned to the area are “livid.”

The tribe, Tohono O’odham, created the barricade a few weeks ago, Border Patrol sources tell JW, specifically to keep agents out of the reservation which is located in the south central Arizona Sonoran Desert and shares about 75 miles of border with Mexico.

The reservation terrain consists largely of mountains and desert making it difficult to patrol. For years it has appeared on the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) HIDTA list because it’s a significant center of illegal drug production, manufacturing, importation and distribution.

The reservation is a primary transshipment zone for methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin and marijuana destined for the United States, a DEA official revealed in congressional testimony a few years ago. In 2015 Arizona led all four Border Patrol sectors in drug seizures with 928,858 pounds of drugs confiscated, according to agency figures.

The relationship between the Border Patrol and the tribe has been stormy over the years, with accusations of human rights violations by federal agents and allegations that the agents’ presence has implemented a police state. Though only 75 miles runs along the Mexican border, the reservation is about 2.8 million acres or roughly the size of Connecticut and has about 30,000 members.

The tribe’s official website says that nine of its communities are located in Mexico and they are separated by the United States/Mexico border. “In fact, the U.S.-Mexico border has become an artificial barrier to the freedom of the Tohono O’odham,” the tribe claims. “On countless occasions, the U.S. Border Patrol has detained and deported members of the Tohono O’odham Nation who were simply traveling through their own traditional lands, practicing migratory traditions essential to their religion, economy and culture. Similarly, on many occasions U.S. Customs have prevented Tohono O’odham from transporting raw materials and goods essential for their spirituality, economy and traditional culture. Border officials are also reported to have confiscated cultural and religious items, such as feathers of common birds, pine leaves or sweet grass.”

A New York Times story published years ago explained that tightening of border security to the east and west after the 9/11 terrorist attacks funneled more drug traffic through the Tohono O’odham reservation. This created a need for more Border Patrol officers to be deployed to the crime-infested area.

The article also revealed that tribe members are complicit in the trafficking business. “Hundreds of tribal members have been prosecuted in federal, state or tribal courts for smuggling drugs or humans, taking offers that reach $5,000 for storing marijuana or transporting it across the reservation,” the article states. “In a few families, both parents have been sent to prison, leaving grandparents to raise the children.” The drug smugglers work mainly for the notorious Sinaloa Cartel, the piece revealed.

Nevertheless, federal officers have been told by Homeland Security superiors that they can’t cut the new wire fence obstacle to access the reservation even though it sits in the Border Patrol’s busiest drug sector. Perhaps the U.S. government can use money to force compliance. The Tohono O’odham recently got a huge chunk of change from Uncle Sam, $2.75 million, to build single-family homes for its largely poor tribe members.

Maybe the feds can withhold future allocations for the tribe’s various projects until it allows Border Patrol officers to do their job. In the meantime, a veteran Arizona law enforcement officer who’s worked in the region for decades says “a little wire and a small gate can cause huge security problems.”

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
Supreme Court

President Obama has not been one to shy away from making executive actions, and one of his most controversial ones is now before the Supreme Court.

Obama’s executive action would grant temporary legal status and work permits to about 4 million illegal aliens who arrived before 2010. Other than being here for over 6 years illegally, they would also have to be parents of US Citizens or legal permanent residents.

The “permanent residents” part has some people raising many questions. The executive action is to help families that have children who are US Citizens but are here illegally. Most people would agree that this group of illegals should receive some help, but the ambiguity of “permanent residents” is worrisome.

The executive action is being called “lawless” and now 26 states have challenged the action in court. Obama’s action was blocked from being implemented until the Supreme Court hears the case.

The troubling part of this law is that the administration would have the authority to enforce who should be arrested and deported. Since deportations are down in Obama’s second term, the new law may not see any more people deported–but 4 million given legal status.

Obama has released captured illegals who were known criminals and put them back on the street to commit more crimes.

The southern border is such a mess that Donald Trump has made it his main issue and it is helping him lead the race for the GOP nomination.

Nobody thinks that Obama is going to be tough on immigration and that is why our southern border continues to allow hundreds or more cross daily.

The answer isn’t what Donald Trump has suggested either. Deporting all 11 million illegal immigrants is not fair to those children and businesses, but something has to happen.

Will Obama get his way and give 4 million illegals a free path to being legal or will the Supreme Court find the overreach of power unacceptable?

What do you think? Should the Supreme Court overturn the executive action or should they allow it?

Let us know in the comments!

by -
border security

Last month, two men were caught on video climbing over the border wall with Mexico and into the United States, carrying with them two large back packs apparently loaded with illegal drugs. The climbers, who were also caught on government surveillance approaching the wall in Mexico before even setting foot on it, easily scaled down into the U.S. within a few yards of not one, but three U.S. Border Patrol vehicles. The Border Patrol officers, although clearly aware of the illegal fence climbers, did nothing. The men re-scaled the wall back into Mexico only after realizing a media crew was filming their escapade.

Such events appear to be “business as usual” at America’s southern border; reflecting a “hands-off” mentality by federal border agents that dramatically undercuts the federal government’s avowed commitment to stop illegal border crossings. It also lays bare the argument that building a wall along our border with Mexico “secures” the border. Clearly it doesn’t; and it will not until Uncle Sam develops the will to stop illegal border crossings.

The ineptitude on display last month brings to mind another botched “border control” operation by this Administration a few years ago — “Operation Fast and Furious” — in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, intentionally allowed firearms to be purchased by known Mexican drug members in the U.S., and then shipped back to Mexico where, in theory, they would be tracked. Due to reasons that can only be attributed — charitably — to bureaucratic incompetence, the guns disappeared; that is, until one showed up at the scene where U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot to death.

Tragedies such as Operation Fast and Furious, as well as the Border Patrol’s passive attitude towards stopping flagrant criminal activity, illustrates a problem rooted far deeper than the prima facie absurdity of Obama Administration policies. It reflects a fundamental unwillingness by federal law enforcement agencies to do their job. The question is not are we lacking a high-enough wall, but do we lack the will.

The worsening problems at the border is perhaps the single-most important factor in the rise of Donald Trump as a competitive presidential candidate in 2016. However, though Trump may be the loudest and shrillest voice on border issues, he still, like so many other candidates and office holders, is missing the forest for the trees when it comes to illegal immigration.

Trump and those who share his views on border security focus almost exclusively on the physical aspects of the issue; higher walls, more border patrol agents, and more money. While money, equipment and personnel certainly are important elements of a comprehensive border security program, they are wasted without a true commitment on the part of officials from the President down to agency heads, to actually use those resources to do the job.

The key to “securing the border” lies not in physical security, but in policy security; and without the will to stop illegals from coming in, and until we stop fretting about the risk of “someone getting hurt if our law enforcement officers do their job,” illegals will continue to pour in regardless of the physical obstacles, barriers, and deterrents we place in their way. No number of federal agents assigned to the border, and no amount of blustering from Trump about “growing [the border fence] ten feet higher,” will make a noteworthy difference if we on this side of the wall lack the courage to stop illegals before they ever put their first foot up to climb, or as soon as they touch down on our side.

First, we have to reverse the mixed messages of the Obama Administration to Latin America regarding illegal immigration, and take a strong stand that our borders actually mean something, and that those attempting to enter the country illegally will be sent back, pronto. We must back up this message by ending the absurd “catch and release” programs that kill the morale of Border Patrol agents and continue to demonstrate that we are not serious about stopping illegal immigration. Finally, we must address the economic incentives for illegal immigration by making clear to states and cities that federal funds cannot be used to subsidize pro-illegal immigration agendas of liberal local and state governments. This means Zero Tolerance (and zero federal money) for so-called “Sanctuary Cities.”

To accomplish these things, Republicans must resist the easy route of responding to populist calls for expensive, temporary “fixes,” and focus on the much harder task of reversing Washington’s current attitude towards immigration; replacing it with one that shows we have the courage to protect our borders. In the absence of such a commitment, individuals and government leaders “South of the Border” will continue to laugh at us to our face.

by -

Amid the discord ignited by Donald Trump’s idea to block money transfers to Mexico until it funds a wall it’s important to note that a U.S. government program is largely responsible for the billions in remittances flowing south of the border from illegal immigrants.

The program is called “Directo a Mexico” (Direct to Mexico) and the Federal Reserve, the government agency that serves as the nation’s central bank, launched it nearly a decade ago. Judicial Watch investigated the outrageous taxpayer-subsidized initiative and obtained government records back in 2006. It was created by President George W. Bush following the 2001 U.S.-Mexico Partnership for Prosperity, undermines our nation’s immigration laws and is a potential national security nightmare. The goal was to provide low-cost banking services to illegal immigrants and facilitate the process for those sending money home. Remittances are transferred through the Federal Reserve’s own automated clearinghouse linked directly to Mexico’s central bank (Banco de Mexico).

At the time Federal Reserve officials acknowledged that most of the Mexicans who send money home are illegal immigrants so a Mexican-issued identification is the only requirement to use the government banking service. A colorful brochure promoting “Directo a Mexico” offered to help immigrants who don’t have bank accounts and assured the best foreign exchange rate and low transfer fees. A frequently asked question section posed this:

“If I return to Mexico or am deported, will I lose the money in my bank account?” The answer: “No. The money still belongs to you and can easily be accessed at an ATM in Mexico using your debit card.”

In short, the U.S. created this special banking system specifically for illegal aliens and tens of billions of dollars have flowed through it, according to figures obtained by JW from Banco de Mexico.

This is worth noting because news coverage of Trump’s plan to fund a wall along the Mexico-U.S. border has omitted this important information, instead focusing on the negative impact to the Mexican economy if remittances are cut. In fact, the mainstream newspaper that first published the Republican presidential candidate’s idea wrote that it “could decimate the Mexican economy.”

Another article, published by a national newswire, said “any move to target payments sent home by people living in the United States could have a crushing financial effect in Mexico, the leading recipient of U.S. remittances.” Various other reports have focused on the devastating effects that cutting remittances will have on poor Mexicans that depend on their U.S. relatives to survive.

Under the Republican presidential candidate’s plan, an anti-terrorism law would be used to halt remittances made by illegal aliens unless Mexico makes a payment of $5 billion to $10 billion for a wall along the southern border. President Obama called it a “half-baked” plan that would create turmoil within the Mexican economy and would result in more Mexicans fleeing to the U.S. looking for work, according to a news report.

Mexico’s largest newspaper writes this week that Trump has shaken up that country’s government and his hostility towards Mexicans has threatened to make the U.S. a nightmare for all Mexicans, even if the billionaire businessman doesn’t win the presidential election.



When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than...