Category: Immigration

I doubt there are many who have any conviction that Speaker Pelosi and/or Senate Minority Leader Schumer have any intention to honor the “perception” they gave that with the President opening the government they will assist in real border control. In fact, it is a virtual certainty that if/when they and other Democrats complete their seemingly never-ending victory dances over their “forcing” President Trump to open the government, NO border wall funding is in their future. And certainly not within the next few weeks.

So what can be done without House financial support?

Media Mania

Even knowing how possessed this media is and the consistency of their attacks on this president, it has been shocking to see and hear their coverage of the reopening of the government tied directly to the “win” against President Trump in it happening. Pelosi, Schumer, other leading Democrats and talking heads at every level in the U.S. are ecstatic! This is in total disregard of what’s at stake: the safety of the U.S. against what amounts to be an invasion of illegal activities and those who initiate them when crossing our southern border. Drugs, human trafficking, murders, and those who commit other serious crimes are crossing by the thousands every week. Yet the mainstream media and leftists ignore the threats those illegals bring to the U.S., and their cries for open-borders have gone far beyond fever-pitch to outright hysteria: “Let them in! Let them in! We Welcome them!”

At what cost?

Have you noticed how little is the reporting on the costs of illegal immigration by this media? They refuse to report numbers, discuss details of specific criminal acts of violence or their victims, or to even discuss the consideration of the economic and social costs of these open-border policies. The left are treating illegal immigration just like they are unresponsibly reporting in their discussions about “Medicare for All.” Both policies would bankrupt America, to begin with, yet alone how each would destroy life as we know it.

Do you know what’s amazing? Anyone can via the internet read hundreds of horror stories perpetrated on the people of Europe by illegal immigrants over just the last 2 years! And the U.S. media refuse to report them. And leading European countries are now relentlessly trying to find ways to stop illegal immigration in their futures while contemplating deportation procedures of millions of illegals who inhabit their countries if that is even possible. These include countries like The Netherlands, Germany, France, Greece, Italy, and even the U.K. Where’s the U.S. Media on telling any of those stories? 

We could easily fill these pages with not only stories documenting the gang rapes, murders, forced prostitution, sexual assault, theft, and home invasions perpetrated daily by these illegals on citizens of European nations, we could show hundreds and hundreds of pictures of these horrors that play out daily. But that is not OUR job — IT’S THE JOB OF AMERICAN MEDIA TO WARN AMERICA WHAT IS COMING TO OUR SHORES AND THROUGH THE SOUTHERN BORDER!

Have we all just gone to sleep? Or is it that we in America have some responsibility to knowingly allow people through our borders every day, many of who want nothing more than to find unimaginable ways to illegally and surreptitiously insert themselves into legal Americans lives while sucking the life right out of us?

Surely not. Americans are not that stupid. But before you embrace benign trust and acceptance for leftist Americans by self-convincing yourself that “they’re just hungry people looking for a better way of life,” there are several considerations you must ponder:

• How many illegals are there and how much do they cost Americans in real dollars? With the vast resources available to billion dollar newspapers and television networks, isn’t it logical to expect one or several of those to put those research assets to work to find out and give to Americans what our costs of illegals really are? How about starting with just the number of illegals that are here? But, no: not only do none of them conduct such research, but they also spend their ink and airtime to blast the Administration. Here’s just one example:

“President Trump on Sunday asserted that the U.S. has already incurred nearly $19 billion in costs related to illegal immigration in 2019, and called it “ridiculous” that millions of immigrants are living in the U.S illegally. Trump claimed in a tweet that there are close to 26 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, casting doubt on the more commonly cited figure of 11 million.

Notice that not one organization or news entity of any kind did anything but intimate the President was wrong in reporting these numbers! NONE GAVE US WHAT THE CORRECT NUMBERS ARE! Does anyone but me find that a bit brazen and amazingly hypocritical?

It isn’t going to get better, I fear. Theirs is a “one-task” issue: destroy President Trump and all those who support him. I doubt that ever before in U.S. history has the media in America so viciously attacked any previous president — even Richard Nixon. Their universal goal consistent in every presidential administration is to lift up and support Democrat presidents while attacking Republicans. And all the while the media maintain they know better than do Americans what elected officials do, why they do it, and what their actions mean. The media give Americans NO credit for understanding on their own. Don’t expect that to change anytime soon.

And, by the way, truth in reporting is immaterial today. But I’m sure you already know that!

Politics of Immigration: The Wall

In numerous reports at TruthNewsNetwork we have related facts, statistics, posted videos and news reports, and even have posted interviews with several federal elected officials regarding the U.S. immigration system. We will not go back into those today. But what we WILL do is set the stage for the upcoming red-letter day in U.S. immigration history: February 15, 2019. What is that day? The deadline was given by President Trump to Democrats to have crafted bipartisan legislation for border security that includes funding for a southern border wall/barrier.

“It ain’t gonna happen!”

Pelosi, Schumer, and other leading Democrats feel strongly they have won this battle with Donald Trump. What they have assumed is that the battle they won was the war of immigration reform. They miscalculated. The tenant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is NOT going away, nor are his demands for a southern border barrier. I assure you, this time he will NOT cave. And a battle is NOT a war. The battle is yet unresolved: but it WILL be!

So what will happen? What are the options?

Honestly, there are really only two in regards to options for border security: 1) legislatively Congress passes legislation that comprehensively closes the southern border with a combination of border barriers, manpower increases, electronic surveillance measures where capable, and significant funding increases to support border judges and staff sufficient to handle the outrageous backload of immigration cases that have spiraled out of control; 2) President Trump declares a National Security Threat at the southern border and invokes measures for funding and building that border barrier per border control experts and diverts federal dollars from federal and DHS discretionary funding to complete those measures.

So which will it be?

IF, Pelosi and Schumer refuse to bring meaningful and comprehensive legislation to the floor of both Houses and such legislation is not passed and sent to the President for signature, he will declare that National Emergency and initiate through Executive Order the security measures necessary to close the border.

But Democrats will Fight!

So? It would be surprising if they DIDN’T fight….and very odd!

They HATE President Trump; they HATE Trump supporters; they HATE ALL conservatives in the U.S. Nothing is going to change that anytime soon. But stopping the flood of illegals into the nation from the South, stemming the flow of billions of American tax dollars into Mexico and Central America, and stopping the hundreds of thousands of needless crimes committed annually by illegals in the U.S. are far more important than winning a political game of chess!

Can President Trump win the Immigration War?

He can. And HE will not be the victor — Americans will be the winners.

Many times in U.S. history have presidents used the power given to the Executive Branch to invoke government actions regarding national security issues. In fact, Abraham Lincoln was the first to do so when he suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. It is far from unusual for such measures to take place.

“But,” some will say, “those on the left will certainly file in a liberal court somewhere actions for a temporary restraining order to stop the President from doing so.” That certainly will happen. But this action is quite a bit different than others that have been stopped. Two very significant things weigh in favor of the Courts allowing these measures to proceed should President Trump initiate that action:

1) Congress granted the unilateral power for ANY president to take such actions when he or she alone is confident such actions are necessary for the purposes of national security. As long as a president can show just cause and that his/her efforts with that specific executive action were instigated only after attempts to obtain that necessary action through the legislative process have failed. Few would dare argue that this president has NOT sufficiently implored Congress to shut our border against an onslaught of illegal entries into the United States;

2.) Even if a liberal court steps in with a temporary restraining order, this administration has already jumped around the lengthy appeals process and pursued immediate relief directly from the Supreme Court. While SCOTUS has previously spurned such action from this and previous White Houses, certain of those appeals have been taken up. The conventional wisdom is that in this case, it would be simple to present the urgency of such immediate action to protect Americans and that the legislative process has totally failed to do so.

Summary

We WILL have a border barrier. President Trump will win this faceoff somehow.

How do I know that with such certainty? He never gives in and never gives up when he knows what he is doing is right and as Commander in Chief is necessary for the safety of Americans and the United States. There is NO quit in this president.

Folks, find an oddsmaker and win you some money in February! This is a safe bet!!!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Everyone sees and hears the same thing day after day after day after day: “Why doesn’t President Trump just agree to one of the bills passed by the House of Representatives that fully funds the federal government and let government employees go back to work. The closing was strictly for political purposes — his border wall — which is a waste of $5 Billion taxpayer dollars, will not work, and is immoral. And those 800,000 federal employees are being penalized in the name of his stupid Wall.” Has anyone heard any or all of that? It’s EVERYWHERE!

Certainly, it would be much easier for a lot of folks if President Trump went ahead and caved to Pelosi and Schumer and did just that: call those workers back. But if he did, he would be betraying 63+ million Americans who he promised while campaigning that he would build that wall, close the southern border, and stop the flood of illegal immigrants from coming across that border. That would stop the flood of illegal drug, stop the sex traffickers, stop multiple felony offenders, and see to it that immigration laws in place are enforced until the portions of those laws that are outdated, unreasonable, and ineffective are terminated, fixed, or replaced with new legislation from Congress.

I am stepping aside of objectivity for just one moment and say this: Why would ANY American — member of Congress or anyone else for that matter — want so desperately for the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants that numbered among them are gang members, drug and human traffickers, and thousands of others that have already been deported for lawbreaking to be allowed into the United States illegally? They are willing for this to happen in spite of no one knowing who those illegals are, which are good people just looking for better lives, and which are illegals who prey on legal Americans by committing against them everything from petty larceny to rape and murder? Until someone in a position of authority is willing to explain their willingness to continue to allow that to happen, please stop the outrageously ridiculous cries to do so.

To kick off a real discussion about this today, let’s address the argument that is thrown in our faces almost daily: Ronald Reagan gave citizenship to millions of illegals in 1986. He was the Republican hero that all point to as the conservative example for all to follow. If he did that, what is wrong for doing it again?

Yes, that was 33 years ago — a LONG time ago. But that law and surrounding circumstances are worth taking a look at. So let’s (in brief) take a look:

Reagan’s 1986 Immigration Law

President Reagan had a heart for immigrants. As a former California governor, he knew first-hand the benefits that immigrants were to the California agriculture industry. He was pressured by most of the leaders in California’s agriculture industry to find a way to legalize all those workers that were necessary to California Agriculture operation. They made it clear that without those illegals available to work in their fields, vineyards, and on their farms, California’s leading economic industry was doomed. That was the place that Reagan birthed the idea of addressing the growing illegal migrant population in America.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) is the legal name of the law. In a very brief fashion, here were the immigration issues addressed in the law:

• required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status;
• made it illegal to hire or recruit illegal immigrants knowingly;
• legalized certain seasonal agricultural undocumented immigrants, and;
• legalized undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982, and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt.
• candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed at least a minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language.

At the time, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimated that about four million illegal immigrants would apply for legal status through the act and that roughly half of them would be eligible.

So what did the law actually do?

I’ll refer to an article from the Washington Post who better than I could list its provisions:

What did the 1986 immigration law do? Two big things. First, there was the “amnesty” bit. Any unauthorized immigrants who had already been living in the United States continuously since 1982 became eligible for temporary legal status, after paying a $185 fee and demonstrating “good moral character.” After 18 months, they could then become eligible for green cards, provided they learned to speak English.

Second, there was the enforcement bit. The law aimed to secure the U.S.-Mexico border against illegal crossings with new surveillance technology and a bigger staff. The bill also, for the first time in history, imposed penalties on businesses that knowingly hired or employed unauthorized immigrants.

How many immigrants took advantage of amnesty? The law awarded green cards to about 2.7 million immigrants, all told — including about 1 million farm workers. It was the largest legalization program in U.S. history.

When the bill passed, at the signing ceremony, President Reagan was obviously pleased with the accomplishments. Listen closely to the things he says at the signing:

Has it Worked?

• The 1986 amnesty legalized approximately 2.7 million illegal immigrants, a much smaller number than the 11 million estimated today. Washington approved 90 percent of the 1.3 million agricultural workers who sought legal status despite detecting fraud in nearly a third of the applications.
• The amnesty was supposed to be balanced with stronger enforcement measures, such as employer sanctions for those who hire illegal immigrants. This remains a major selling point of the “comprehensive” approach to immigration today.
• This enforcement turned out to be a bait and switch, like when spending cuts are promised in exchange for tax increases. The amnesty happened and is irreversible. The enforcement has been spotty and in some cases never materialized.
• What did materialize was more illegal immigration. By one estimate, illegal immigration increased by 44 percent between 1987 and 1989, from the start of amnesty to its peak. The Congressional Research Service reports that the illegal immigrant population swelled from 3.2 million in 1986 to 12.4 million in 2007, “before leveling off at 11.1 million in 2011.”
• Some analysts believe the number of illegal immigrants reached as high as 20 million. The author of a Bear Stearns report arriving at the figure later told the Wall Street Journal, “The assumption that illegal people will fill out a census form is the most ridiculous concept I have ever heard of.”
• It’s also worth noting that four years after amnesty became law, President George H.W. Bush signed a bill increasing legal immigration by 40 percent. Legal immigration has also been higher than in the mid-1980s and illegal immigration still increased.

Many Republicans who want to repeat the Reagan amnesty hope this will improve the party’s standing among Hispanics. But the actual Republican Hispanic vote share decreased between 1984, before amnesty, and 1988, after. It is noteworthy that since December of 2018, the statistics showing support among Hispanics for President Trump’s stand against illegal migrants has climbed from 31% to 59%.

As illegal immigration increased, enforcement decreased. Audits of employers of illegal immigrants dropped 77 percent between fiscal years 1990 and 2003. Warnings fell 62 percent. Notices of intent to fine illegal employers plummeted 82 percent.

Summary

So here’s the answer to the question asked in the first paragraph above: The reason President Trump has not agreed to the immigration plans given to him by Democrats is illustrated perfectly by the Washington Post  — which few would disagree that doesn’t support the President in any way — the promises of Democrats that were even included in the law were NOT and still are NOT being kept in the wake of the blanket amnesty given to 2.7 million illegals. And the population of other illegals, as a result, has climbed to what the most recent non-partisan report states is now over 20 million.

How could any thinking, breathing human being expect this president — ANY president — to flatly agree to any promises made by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer? Why shouldn’t he go ahead and open the government? If he does, several things will happen:

• Obviously, all those federal workers go back on the job. That’s a good thing;
• Nancy Pelosi said plainly in their last meeting when the President asked she and Chuck: “If I go ahead and re-open the government, will you agree to negotiate over the next 30-days to fund border protection measures that include the wall?” Nancy stated they would not;
• In doing so, he would break a campaign promise that was the justification for millions of Americans to vote for him for President. For that, he certainly would lose the White House in 2020.

Let’s stipulate the wall, other types of border security, and closing the border WERE Trump campaign promises. But Americans should NOT have to argue in any way about the need for Congress and other parts of our government to enforce the laws of the United States! Not doing so accepts anarchy as a legitimate and acceptable government operation!

Here’s what I suggest: everytime you have a conversation with anyone who supports keeping immigration policies just as they are and wants the government open without making any commitments for real immigration law enforcement, ask them this question: “What is an acceptable number to you of legal Americans to be killed by illegal migrants before you would demand total illegal immigration law enforcement?”

And if they give you a number — any number — ask them this: “Are you O.K. if included in that number is your wife, husband, or child?”

That may seem harsh or cruel. But if we continue down this open-border road on which we are traveling, the odds of having an immediate family member having that happen become more and more real everyday.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Ever wonder what happens to the money illegal migrants make while working in the U.S.? It is common knowledge that, for decades, the primary reason for illegals entering the U.S. is to find better employment than that available to them in their home countries — especially Mexico. Having the ability to almost at will cross the U.S. southern border, it is common for illegals to find mostly blue collar jobs that pay far more than the available jobs in Mexico. Unfortunately, many employers in the U.S. find it tempting to take advantage of those workers AND U.S. law by paying those migrants lower than normal wages and paying many in cash. Doing so saves companies millions in required Medicare, Social Security, and federal unemployment employer matching fees. Cash payments allow migrants to get these jobs AND employers to bypass federal and state employment laws by not enrolling these workers in the system.

A large majority of these illegals send a portion of their earnings back to Mexico to family members. It is shocking to know how many U.S. dollars head to Mexico in this fashion every year. It’s BILLIONS!

How much is it?

Mexicans sent home $26.1 billion from January to November 2017, according to figures released Tuesday by the central bank of Mexico. That’s the most ever recorded and better than the $24.1 billion sent in 2016 over the same period. Most of the cash sent to Mexico by Mexicans living in the U.S. is transferred by “undocumented” workers. A survey by Inter-American Dialogue of remittances to Mexico found that 67 percent were sent by these individuals living in the U.S.

Of all of the remittances sent to 11 countries in Latin America from the U.S., Mexico received the largest share by far at 36 percent – four times more than the closest competitor, Guatemala, at 9 percent, the survey found.

Remittances to Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), which exceed US$70 billion dollars, are playing a key role in the region’s economic development,” according to the institute’s recent “Remittances scorecard.”

The majority of remittances to Mexico, 88.2 percent, are sent using the services of companies like MoneyGram and Western Union, the institute found. It said the cash transfer industry has “expanded dramatically,” and now helps migrants in the U.S. pay their bills in Latin America.

But while services have expanded, the cost of sending money to Latin America and the Caribbean has dropped to below 5 percent of the transfer amount. Ira Mehlman, media director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, says the cash transfers reveal a “hidden cost of illegal immigration because you have millions of dollars being taken out of local communities.” “Remittances being sent out of the country represent a substantial economic impact on local communities because that money is not circulating in those communities,” Mehlman said. “On top of that, a lot of the people generating this money are working off the books and there are no payroll taxes being taken,” he added.

Data gathered by the Mexican government and BBVA Research shows nearly one-third (29.6 percent) of all of the remittances sent from the U.S. to Mexico originated in California. Just over 14 percent was sent from Texas, and 5.1 percent from Illinois. Recently obtained numbers show that remittances sent to Mexico totaled 2.3 percent of the country’s GDP. Forbes has reported that the money sent from the U.S. to Mexico by migrants “replaced oil revenues as Mexico’s number one source of foreign income.”

Some 90 percent of all remittances sent worldwide are in cash, rather than by electronic or bank transfer, according to Alix Murphy, director of mobile partnerships at the remittances company WorldRemit, which operates in 47 states of the U.S. She said the market for money transfer services in the U.S. was “very diversified.” “We’re talking hundreds of companies that are regulated by the states.” Individuals using cash transfer services are required to show identification, but not immigration status. Foreign-issued IDs, however, can be used, according to an analysis by the Congressional Research Service.

The Remittance Status Verification Act, introduced by then-Senator David Vitter (R-La.) in 2014 but never passed into law, would have fined senders of international cash transfers seven percent of the transfer amount if they could not show “proof of status under U.S. immigration laws.” If enacted, such a law could slow the flow of remittances considerably, according to David Landsman, executive director of the National Money Transmitters Association.

In remarks published in the “Remittance Industry Observatory” newsletter, Landsman said that “forcing remittance companies to be immigration enforcement agents would make remittance volumes plummet in the best of times. Their transactions would then go through more informal methods, and become completely opaque to law enforcement.”

Details

We have known for years that most migrants slip into the U.S. illegally for job opportunities. Jobs that offer real futures to natives of Mexico are slim. And most Mexicans lack really good education because of dollars and cents. No reasonable person fails to understand the desperation that drives those from Mexico and all of Central America to the U.S. southern border. It’s all about income.

Additionally, it is unquestionable that the families of those illegals are dependent in part — and often totally dependent — on income sent back to Mexico from employed illegals in the U.S. That being said, those $26.1 billion taken out of the U.S. economy hurt the U.S. How?

No one knows an exact number if there is one, but experts state payroll dollars roll over 5 times in the markets where spent. As an example: Joe the Worker is married with 4 kids and makes $2000 a month. Joe takes home $1600 of that. Joe pays $600 rent, $100 in utilities, $400 in food, $200 for auto expense, $100 for clothing, $100 for prescription drugs, and $100 for miscellaneous expenses. Jose the worker is married with 4 kids and makes $2000 a month. Jose takes home $2000 in cash. Jose and his family share a house with his brother and they each pay $300 in rent. Jose pays $400 for food, shares the car with his brother and pays $100 for gas, $100 for clothing, $100 for drugs, and sends $1000 to his mother in Mexico.

Of Joe’s $2000, $400 is deducted for federal and state income tax and his share of Social Security and Medicare which are matched by his employer. Jose pays none of that. Both Joe and Jose’s rent money goes to their landlord as does cash for food, gas, and drugs. The federal and state government have $400 that goes to pay on government infrastructure for roads on which Joe drives, hospitals, and the schools which his children attend. The stores where he buys food and clothes and the utility company have money he pays them for THEM to spend paying their employees who in turn spend their checks in the town. Joe’s paycheck is spent 100% on goods and services from the federal and his state and local governments. Jose’s $2000 — with the exception of what he pays for rent, utilities, gas, and food — are paid to those in Mexico rather than being spent in his U.S. town. Just a small percentage of the portion of his local payments support government and public services he and his family use: roads, schools, medical facilities, etc. Yet he sends money home to Mexico that is paid into the economy there instead of the U.S.

If as economists claim payroll dollars roll over 5 times in the markets wherein employees work and live, Joe’s $2000 makes a $10,000 economic impact on his town and state. Of Jose’s $2000, only $1000 goes into that “rollover” cycle. The impact of his pay is just half of Joe’s, or $5000.

What’s wrong with that picture?

• Being in the U.S. without permission is a crime. I struggle to even in conversation get beyond that point. And it is stupefying that such illegalities are even allowed to occur every day in the U.S.! But they are. Many in our federal government simply turn their backs on the rule of law in this instance purely for political purposes;
• Illegals eat up the U.S. infrastructure with very little contribution for doing so while law-abiding Americans foot the bill. The two primary targets of their consumption without any (or very little) economic input on their part are medical facilities and public schools. The added weight of Spanish-speaking-only children in U.S. schools impacts how schools can even operate. It forces bilingual teachers to be provided which comes at additional taxpayer expense. And often children of illegals are significantly deficient in their level of education when enrolling in U.S. public schools. This forces schools to adjust curriculum and age/grade participation processes that impact U.S. children in major ways;
• We cannot forget one major consideration in this issue: Jose takes a job that would be available for an American who is abiding by all the rules and whose income is spent totally in the United States. Yes, there are those who maintain that Mexican illegals perform in jobs that Americans will not. There is no factual basis for that premise though there certainly are some of those positions to which it is pertinent. But even if 50% of those jobs end up with illegals, 50% could have gone to legal American citizens.

What’s The Fix?

1. Stop illegal immigration! There’s no substitute for that. Many conflate the issues purposely. It certainly is true that millions of people — not just from Mexico, but from almost every other country on Earth — want to live in the U.S., primarily for economic opportunity. The U.S. legally accepts 1 million immigrants annually into the U.S. legally. And that is more than do all the other countries on Earth combined! The U.S. really cares for the poor and needy. But the U.S. infrastructure cannot survive under the weight of those who soak up its resources with little if any economic contribution. That doesn’t even consider the social and criminal justice illegals bring to the U.S.
2. Stop giving financial incentives to those who come here. U.S. employers are just as guilty in many cases as the illegals. If they would not hire workers that are illegal, the incentive for their coming would be severely limited. Many of those employers do so to dodge paying payroll taxes, (they are paid in tax) and they are able to hire illegals at a much lower wage than they pay legal immigrants and Americans. Why? Illegals are not in the U.S. system as are legal immigrants and Americans, sho those employers can get away with shortcuts at not only the government’s expense but by not paying into benefits for illegals as they do for legal workers.
3. Minimize the massive amounts of dollars that leave the U.S. from these workers sending large portions of their pay back to Mexico. That could easily be accomplished by limiting the legal ways for them to do so. Several of those companies that process such payments internationally are listed above. Congress could easily pass legislation that would force these companies and all banking institutions to require full identity verification for all those who transfer money out of the U.S. AND could charge a percentage transfer fee for every transfer. Do the math: Of the $26 billion transferred each year, assess a 5% fee that would help make up the cost to America’s infrastructure used every day by these illegals that so far have been provided free. (Hey, that could even be applied to the cost of President Trump’s wall!)

This is all just a piece of the big problem America’s federal government keeps dancing around: illegal immigration. There’s no need for us to discuss details further. We all know them. But it certainly is time to right the ship of immigration and takes our country back to the rule of law. Everyone who lives and visits the U.S. should abide by EVERY law in place in every city, state, and anywhere in the U.S. And those who violate laws should pay the legal penalty for doing so.

Short of doing that, the U.S. is headed toward certain anarchy. How long will law-abiding American citizens continue to standby and watch our federal government allow illegal migrants to soak up our tax dollars and break our laws with impunity? We have not reached a tipping point yet. But in American history, there are examples of Americans saying, “Enough is enough!” and doing something about government wrongdoing.

Let’s don’t go there. Let’s fix the problem…NOW!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Jim Acosta of CNN embarrassed himself while at the southern border in McAllen, Texas as President Trump met with local and state officials and Border Security personnel to discuss illegal crossings in their region. Acosta, while standing next to an exact example of the type of border wall the President has agreed would be part of his border wall if funded, said the following:

“No immigrants storming the border and no imminent danger.” Acosta’s explanation of there being NO need for beefing up border security, especially including a border wall.

The irony of Mr. Acosta’s report is the obvious explanation for “why” there are no immigrants climbing across the wall: The Wall Works. When a Border Patrol official was asked about it, the explanation was simple: first, (and the most obvious) is the difficulty illegals experience to get through or over a wall like this, and secondly, during the middle of the day, illegals do not attempt illegal entry at that site because of the difficulty of getting across creates excessive amounts of time for them in trying. They would be exposed more easily there being in plain sight for agents to see than elsewhere along the border in more desolate border sections where different types of border barriers exist.

Acosta is not alone in attacking the notion of there being a border crisis currently. The Washington Post can’t seem to make up its mind on whether there is a crisis at the southern border, initially declaring the situation a “bona fide emergency” before backpedaling once President Trump emphasized that very point in his Oval Office address.

The Post published a story on January 5th, “After years of Trump’s dire warnings, a ‘crisis’ has hit the border but generates little urgency.” Two reporters gave the story — Nick Miroff and David Nakamura — in which they stated there is a real emergency at the border that is happening for one reason and one reason only: border agents cannot handle the volume of illegals there as “record numbers of migrant families are streaming into the United States.”

In that report, Miroff and Nakamura said, “There has been little bipartisan urgency to examine the relatively narrow set of legal and administrative changes that could potentially make a difference in slowing illegal migration or improving conditions for families who arrive at the border.”

They also termed it a “humanitarian crisis.” If there was NO crisis at the southern border, why would President Obama’s Homeland Security posted this sign at Arizona’s southern border?

It probably will come as no surprise to you that The Post changed its tune after the President’s Oval Office address on the issue. Their political correspondent Dan Balz wrote HIS explanation of the issue that was titled, “Trump used the Oval Office to try to create a border crisis.” He said the President in his address was simply creating a narrative in which he could justify fulfilling a campaign promise by building a border wall.

Make what you will about the media flip-flops regarding there being or not being a crisis down South. Believe or don’t believe the numbers provided — and always questioned by Mainstream Media — of the atrocities committed all across the U.S. by illegals. Remember this TNT.com mantra: “Just because you believe something’s right doesn’t mean it’s right.” We DO know there is a plethora of illegals crossing the border every day. We DO know there is also a plethora of illegals committing crimes across the nation. No, all of those here illegally are not committing felonious acts against American citizens. But some do.

National Emergencies Act (NEA)

In the wake of all this, President Trump has floated a trial balloon regarding his enacting the National Emergencies Act (NEA), which was passed by Congress to address U.S. national emergencies and how the United States can and should respond, and the ability of a U.S. President to initiate these responses without Congressional approval.

The Act authorized the President to activate emergency provisions of law via an emergency declaration on the conditions that the President specifies the provisions so activated and notifies Congress. An activation would expire if the President expressly terminated the emergency, or did not renew the emergency annually, or if each house of Congress passed a resolution terminating the emergency. After presidents objected to this “Congressional termination” provision on separation of powers grounds, it was replaced in 1985 with termination by an enacted joint resolution.

According to the Federal Register, 58 national emergencies have been declared since the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.
And 31 have been annually renewed and are currently still in effect, as listed in the Federal Register.

Here’s a list of the presidents who declared still ongoing national emergencies:

President Jimmy Carter

Nov 14, 1979: The National Emergency With Respect to Iran, in response to the Iran hostage crisis.

President Bill Clinton

• Nov 14, 1994: The National Emergency With Respect to the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, that combined two previous national emergencies focused on weapons of mass destruction.
• Jan. 2, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process placed economic sanctions in response to the Jerusalem bombing.
• March 15, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources was an effort to prevent potential deals between oil companies.
• October 21, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers Centered in Colombia was declared after increased reports of drug cartels laundering money through American companies.
• March 1, 1996: The National Emergency With Respect to Regulations of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels with Respect to Cuba was after civilian planes were shot down near Cuba
• November 3, 1997: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan implemented economic and trade sanctions.

President George W. Bush

• June 26, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Who Threaten International Stabilization Efforts in the Western Balkans imposed sanctions on those aiding Albanian insurgents in Macedonia
• Aug 17, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Export Control Regulations renewed presidential power to control exports in a national emergency since the Export Administration Act of 1979 lapsed.
• Sept 14, 2001: The National Emergency with Respect to Certain Terrorist Attacks was in response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.
• Sept 23, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism was in response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
• March 6, 2003: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe was an effort to punish associates of Robert Mugabe.
• May 22, 2003: The National Emergency With Respect to Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest was issued following the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
• May 11, 2004: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria was in response to Syria supporting terrorist activity in Iraq.
• June 16, 2006: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus was in response to charges of fraud in the Belarus presidential election.
• Oct 27, 2006: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was in response to violence around the Congolese presidential election runoff.
• Aug 1, 2007: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon was in response to a breakdown of the rule of law in Lebanon.
• June 26, 2008: The National Emergency With Respect to Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea cited the risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material. President Trump renewed this June 22, 2018, citing the “existence and risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula and the actions and policies of the Government of North Korea continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat.”

President Barack Obama

• April 12, 2010: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia was in respect to threats posed by Somali pirates.
• February 25, 2011: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya froze the assets of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
• July 25, 2011: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Transnational Criminals was in response to the rise in crime by specific organizations: Los Zetas (Mexico), The Brothers’ Circle (former Soviet Union countries), the Yakuza (Japan), and the Camorra (Italy).
• May 16, 2012: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen addressed political unrest within the Yemen government.
• March 16, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine was in response to the Russian invasion of Crimea.
• April 3, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to South Sudan was in response to the ongoing civil war.
• May 12, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic was in response to violence towards humanitarian aid workers.
• March 8, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela was in response to human rights violations.
• April 1, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities was in response to Chinese cyber attacks on the U.S.
• Nov 23, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi was declared after a failed coup.

President Donald Trump

• Dec 20, 2017: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption imposed sanctions on the Myanmar general for his role persecuting Rohingya Muslims.
• Sept 12, 2018: The National Emergency With Respect to Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election attempted to prevent any meddling with the 2018 midterm elections amid the ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
• Nov 27, 2018: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Nicaragua was declared by President Trump in response to violence and the Ortega regime’s “systematic dismantling and undermining of democratic institutions and the rule of law” that constitutes an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”

Here’s the deal: it is doubtful that Democrats in Congress are going to in any way cooperate with funding for the building of a wall along with other types of meaningful technology efforts to stop illegals from entering the U.S. It is certain their reasoning has nothing to do with what’s best for the American people. So what’s an alternative — the BEST alternative?

At this point, the ONLY alternative I can see is for the President to declare a National Emergency action necessary for national security reasons. Before my liberal friends and other partners here blast me for saying this, stating the President has NO authority to do so, consider this:

• The NEA (shown above) clearly states the basis for any president to do so;
• 58 times since the law was enacted presidents have done so;
• 31 of those declarations were never terminated AND ARE STILL IN FORCE (see those still active above);

Here’s the most amazing thing to me about the previous NEA’s implemented: NONE have anything to do with addressing a direct threat to the continental United States perpetrated or facilitated by its border neighbors!

What’s Going to Happen?

President Trump is going to get his wall

It will NOT be just a wall; it will NOT be a solid concrete wall; additional elements for security WILL be put in place.

How is that going to happen without Congress authorizing funds to take such actions? There’s only one other way, and that’s what we’ve mentioned above: President Trump, without approval from Congress for necessary funding, will invoke the National Emergency Act, find funding from somewhere else in the government, and initiate the wall and additional border security measures. Further, I feel the President will eventually do this. Why do I believe it will take the enactment of the National Emergencies Act (NEA)? Because Democrats in Congress flatly refuse to fund the border security detailed by the President in a report for one reason: the extreme left of the Democrat Party promised to vote for Pelosi as House Speaker because she promised she would NOT fund what President Trump wanted. And Schumer? Schumer simply cannot stand his fellow New Yorker who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. “Symbolism over Substance.” And who pays the price? Both 800,000 federal employees AND all those Americans who suffer wrongs at the hands of illegal criminals who infiltrate America. Oh, one more group will pay and IS paying: American taxpayers to the tune of $60-$100 billion a year.

Even if the President caved, approves the Democrat funding bill that does NOT fund new border security measures by Homeland Security, and get the government back to work, that would change nothing substantive at our southern border.

Let’s face it: political talking points aside, I doubt very seriously any on the left sincerely feel the lives of those murdered at the hands of illegals or “just” brutalized are not tragic. But what concerns me is that  when weighing the tragedies of those against the importance of the left winning political battles against the President and other conservatives,  they choose the political battles as their importance. In doing so they diminish the value of the lives of those killed and the rights of those brutalized by putting illegals first.

We can sum it up this way: “if” the left hold genuine concern for the health and well-being of American citizens above all others, and if their concerns center primarily on what’s best for the nation, they will back away from their open borders ideology and let President Trump do the right thing.

Unfortunately I think what matters most to Democrats and other leftists who are paying the debt they owe to their open borders constituents. It’s sad that would take the place of the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution, and the common decency to recognize and acknowledge the needs of Americans must come first. After all, we allow 1 million immigrants into the U.S. each year who pay the price to become U.S. citizens through the legal process.

Isn’t it ironic that any members of Congress would put breaking the law and those lawbreakers above those who live their lives legally?

But they are…

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

It is apparent that many in Washington D.C. — most of which lean left — look at the world through a different prism than many others. It is incredulous to watch and listen to claims that are made, most of which are political, without any factual basis or that are “alternate” facts.

Don’t take me the wrong way: Democrats do not have an exclusive on stretching the truth or bending it a little. Republicans have their fair share of callouts for sometimes stating facts that are not quite exactly as described. And this propensity is not exclusive to D.C. either. Human nature alone finds us all tempted to stray away from hardline facts to embellishment.

Here’s the problem with that: most people don’t live in a world in which they make life and death decisions daily, especially when each decision directly impacts the lives of millions of people. Members of Congress ARE in that position: their decisions directly impact us all. One would think the weightiness of that revelation would cause those folks to spend much time, thought, and prayer in objective contemplation before raising their hand on any issue placed in front of them. Throw into that group the President and members of his administration and those appointed to head departments like FEMA, the FCC, CMS, Veterans Administration, the Military, federal courts, etc., and the importance of those decisions being objective and well-thought through are literally empirical in their requirements.

In most cases, I’m sure they do think through those choices. But what we are daily witnessing as a nation are many of these leaders that have misplaced the truth in and the necessity of making those life-changing choices based strictly on the will of the American people. What are the causes for America’s leaders to go in that direction? There certainly are many. But the one that is front and center now and best illustrates the problem is the Illegals coming to the U.S. at our southern border. And it is not just their illegal entry and presence here, it is the unfathomable costs to Americans — not just in dollars but in infrastructure and manpower, and the personal injuries and even deaths that a segment of these undocumented illegals cause.

Shocking

Quite honestly, the messaging from the Left on this topic is outright shocking. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in 2006:

• Americans don’t like illegal immigration
• “Illegal immigration is wrong”
• People illegally in the U.S. are “illegal aliens,” not “undocumented”
• Border fence made the southern border “far more secure…created a significant barrier to illegal immigration”

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):

Nancy Pelosi said on March 21, 1996, “I agree with my colleagues that we must curb illegal immigration responsibly and effectively.”

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA 96”), originally the “Immigration in the National Interest Act of 1995,” was signed into law by President Clinton on September 30, 1996, after the final conference bill passed the House 370-37 and the Senate by voice vote. How times have changed!

This bill essentially contained all the promises Trump has made, from the wall and clamping down on visa overstays to robust interior enforcement and expedited deportations, except that it was tailored for that time period. Many of the provisions failed because they were ignored by past presidents and state and local governments and twisted by the courts. This bill was designed to fulfill the wayward promise of the 1986 amnesty and to finally fulfill the pledge to protect Americans from the cost of illegal immigration. Those promises have not been met, and millions of illegals later, millions of pounds of drugs later, and trillions in costs later, these same politicians have no interest in rectifying the promise they helped break once again.

In this Republican-sponsored bill, one of their agenda items was to cut back on legal immigration, which was a failed promise of a 1990 bill. The other was to end illegal immigration – completely. It was the former goal that Democrats opposed, which is why Republicans originally attached their legal immigration cuts to the illegal immigration bill. Democrats gutted it. But they all broadly agreed on the goal of stopping illegal immigration. To be clear, Democrats weakened some provisions and only allowed for a ban on in-state tuition for illegals, not K-12 education per the original version of the bill, but they still all agreed on the core provisions of interior enforcement we are trying to implement today.

As the Washington Post explained at the time, “By shifting their focus to a crackdown on illegal aliens, the representatives seized an issue on which there is a broad agreement but did little to lower the overall influx of immigrants, most of whom come to the United States legally.”

To punctuate this point, don’t forget that the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, which was signed just one month earlier and born out of the government shutdown the year before, explicitly barred illegal immigrants from accessing welfare. The bill contained language expressing the sentiment that it was a “compelling government interest to remove the incentive for illegal immigration provided by the availability of public benefits.” The bill used the word “alien” 93 times.

Know what was in that bill?

• It provided for funding of 5,000 border agents and a 14-mile triple-layer border fence in San Diego, which worked well for years. Section 102 also gave the attorney general (now the DHS secretary) a general mandate that he “shall take such actions as may be necessary to install additional physical barriers and roads (including the removal of obstacles to detection of illegal entrants) in the vicinity of the United States border to deter illegal crossings in areas of high illegal entry into the United States.”
• The bill called for an automated entry-exit control system within two years to clamp down on visa overstays.
• The bill dramatically expanded deportations and explicitly stripped the courts of jurisdiction to adjudicate many of these cases. For example, the bill stated, “No court can accept jurisdiction in most cases where persons assert an interest under legalization provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act.” We are tragically paying for the results of courts ignoring these provisions to this very day.
• Section 531(4) updated the public charge laws by directing adjudicators of green card applications to consider factors such as age, health, family status, financial resources, education, and skills. All relatives bringing in immigrants were forced to sign a legally enforceable affidavit promising to provide financial support if needed. Unfortunately, none of this has been followed until the Trump administration, but it is still the law, a law that Pelosi and Schumer supported. Only .00008 percent of applications between fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2011 were disqualified on the public charge basis, even though overwhelming majorities of immigrants from a number of top sending countries are on welfare.
• The bill provided for new programs promoting employment verification. While E-Verify was developed from this bill, the intent of the law was never followed through. In fact, the IRS still explicitly invited illegals to work, file tax returns, and receive refundable tax credits, a violation both of this provision of IIRIRA and the welfare reform bill.
• The bill tightened up asylum requirements and barred asylum to all those who have access to another safe country, which in today’s cases means Mexico. It also permanently barred those applying under frivolous pretenses from ever immigrating here. The intent and letter of this law have now been flipped on their heads by the courts.
• The bill expanded the definition of “aggravated felony” as defined to trigger deportability of even legal immigrants. This is another provision that has been twisted by the courts. Congress also criminalized female genital mutilation, another provision that has been “struck down” by a wayward district judge.
• The 287(g) program was created to allow states to work with the federal government to train local law enforcement in helping enforce immigration law. Obama gutted the program, and now many sanctuaries have pulled out of it.
• It barred states from providing in-state tuition breaks to illegals. Nevertheless, this was never enforced, and at least 20 states were allowed to aid and abet illegal immigrants.

While Democrats opposed the idea of slashing legal immigration and some grumbled about increasing deportability of certain crimes for legal immigrants, none of them had the fortitude to side with illegal immigrants. Clinton’s chief of staff, Leon Panetta, who would later become Obama’s secretary of Defense and CIA director, best summed up the Democrat view at the time, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. “We all understand the problem of illegal immigrants. We’re all trying to ensure that we have additional enforcement to protect against illegal immigrants,” he said. “But I, for the life of me, do not understand why we need to penalize legal immigrants in that process.”

This is why Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Steny Hoyer, and James Clyburn, Democrat leaders who were all in the House at the time, voted for the bill. Only 13 Democrats in the House voted no. In fact, more Republicans voted no because they were upset that the bill was gutted too much in conference and wasn’t strong enough.

Terminology

Trying to understand the flip-flop moves of Democrats regarding illegals in our nation, and trying to reconcile their current messaging while comparing it to their messaging from some time ago, I have really struggled at how to deal with it. “I hate illegal immigration today,” and “Illegal aliens should never receive the same rights as Americans or legal immigrants,” and “We must fund necessary steps to stop illegal immigration,” ring constantly while listening to their “Politi-speak” today.

So instead of trying to comprehend their purposes, (although I’m certain it has to do with attracting illegals by the droves to give them votes to build the dying Democrat Party) I’ve decided to simply term “who” they are,”what” they say, and “what” they do regarding this issue with some new terms with their definitions. (I think some of you will probably adopt one or several of these):

1. Demorality:  Dems have their own version of morality. It’s not the same as Webster’s or mine. So whenever Lefties use the term “morality” in their talking points, I just consider it — “their” version — as “Demorality.” That way I don’t get confused;
2. Demotegrity: I honestly don’t think many Democrats understand the true meaning of “integrity.” Frankly, I do not remember in this discussion regarding immigration any of them ever using that word describing themselves — and they shouldn’t. Thus: their version of the word;
3. Demotruth: Do I even need to explain here? Saying the things said years ago then today saying the exact opposite without explanation for the changes proves Democrat leaders have abandoned “truth.” When they speak, we hear “Demotruth,” not REAL truth;
4. Demofact: Of course their facts often are not OUR facts or REAL facts. Nevertheless, they are important to know — even more important to understand. So, “their” facts are “Demofacts.” Maybe that way we can understand the differences in their minds.

Summary

You may have chuckled at the introduction of the above words. But isn’t it ludicrous that even needing to consider and create a Democrat reality about the words “morality,” “integrity,” “truth,” and “fact” as compared to the real meanings of those words is necessary?

Here’s the simple fact the meaning of which cannot be altered no matter what and no matter who tries: any person entering the United States without U.S. government approval is perpetrating a crime and therefore is a criminal. Sugarcoating the term as much as you want doesn’t change that fact. The only people that can change that fact into a REAL “NEW” fact are members of Congress.

The “Demorality” in which they live, the “Demotegrity” which they possess, the “Demotruths” they create for the media, and the “Demofacts” they throw out do not alter reality!

Actually, reality is absolute: what it is regarding everything is exactly that — “Reality.”

One more thing: Caring about Americans over illegal immigrants is not an idea invented by Trump. It was once a universal value until the elites completely betrayed us. That’s a reality!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Here is a picture of Officer Ronil Singh — a legal immigrant who served on the Newman, California, police force that was murdered by an illegal — and his wife Anamika and young son. Officer Singh did it the RIGHT way. He went through the legal process of coming to the U.S. He then went through the immigration process to obtain U.S. citizenship. He wanted to become an American police officer and went through all the training to be the best possible police officer he could be while being a good husband and father. Singh was born in Fiji and had been working for the Newman Police Department since 2011.

He was worried about his language difficulty with English. He wanted to be able to communicate freely with the citizens of Newman, California, who he wanted to serve and protect. To facilitate that commitment, he took English classes to be able to communicate well.

Christmas 2018 changed the lives of his wife and son for eternity when an illegal who had a record that included several DWI’s and deportations was stopped by Office Singh on a routine traffic matter. His life was snuffed and his family’s lives ruined in an instant.

A Note to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer

“Ms. Speaker and Mr. Minority Leader: how many is an O.K. number of Americans to be murdered, seriously wounded, paralyzed, raped, or just terrorized by illegals here in the U.S. because of the failure of Congressional Democrats to stop illegals from entering the U.S.? When will Democrats stop playing politics and bowing to left-wing donors and socialist politicians who want open-borders? When will you both cease your rhetoric and ridiculous claims that border walls do not work in ANY country that has them? Americans know that such walls on the borders of more than 100 countries around the world are amazingly successful at stopping illegal entry. When will you allow Congress to pass meaningful immigration laws without holding border security hostage for the legalization of DACA recipients? When will you two start honoring your personal oaths made to support the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States?

I shudder to think that you, Ms. Pelosi or you Mr. Schumer, would not take any and all actions necessary for the establishment of new immigration laws to solve this problem. Or, in the event that current immigration laws are sufficient as-is to do the job, would NOT provide all necessary infrastructure through your powers over the U.S. purse as House Speaker to support immigration law enforcement to ensure the swift and legal prosecution of ALL those who illegally find themselves in the U.S. These financial measures need to include budget sufficient for adjudication of the 700,000 cases back-logged asylum cases, 90% of which are bogus.

Please, Ms. Speaker, consider if  youngest daughter, Alexandra, her sisters Nancy Corinne, Christine, Jacqueline, or their brother Paul or any of THEIR children — your grandchildren — or, Mr. Schumer, your young grandson Noah Melvin would sustain personal attacks of any sort at the hands of illegals who you chose NOT to prosecute for their crimes and allowed them to walk free among your family members. How can you even look at those children and grandchildren who I am certain you love dearly, without thinking of the children and grandchildren of other Americans who have been kidnapped for human trafficking or killed by those whom your actions have allowed escape prosecution and deportation?”

I do not speak for all Americans, but I speak for most when I say that IF we really live in the greatest country in World history, and IF we really are a nation of laws in which all are protected from those who choose to ignore laws, and IF we really honor the foundation of the United States and its founding documents, it is time for those who work FOR us — members of the United States Congress — to start honoring the obligation to work FOR those who elected them.

Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer: lead your party in doing the right thing even when that is not the Democrat Party desire. It’s NEVER right to NOT obey the law. It’s NEVER right to not support enforcement of the law.

And if you don’t like the laws — CHANGE THE LAWS…LEGALLY!

Otherwise, please step aside to allow those who really are American and who really want to lead others in abiding by U.S. laws to take your seat at the Table of Government.

You owe us all that. You owe America that much!”

Below is the link to download the .PDF version that combines Parts 1 and Parts 2 of “The Terror to Americans”

Terror to Americans Parts 1 & 2

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

With the senseless slaughter of California Officer Singh, this illegal immigration battle is now front and center as never before. And it MUST be resolved! Americans who are in this country legally — either by birth, legal emigration, or through obtaining legal status in other ways — now demand our government take any and whatever steps are necessary to “defend, maintain, and protect all American citizens.”

But so far, our government has let us down. It’s not just the government: all those who promised to report the details of everything via the national, state, and local news reporting have let us down, too. Think about this: if there was a para-military organization, an organized criminal gang working nationally, or an identified foreign government spy operation that was being allowed to instigate, structure, and freely operate criminally in the United States, the media would be all over those operations and whoever in government was responsible to rid the nation of them. Imagine the pictures of slaughtered Americans we’d see daily in the nightly national news broadcast and each morning in newspapers.

That IS happening and is happening NOW. Those two entities — the federal government and the national news media — are quietly standing on the sidelines letting foreign criminals tear out country apart. American citizens by the thousands are being raped, murdered, vandalized, all watching as billions of their tax dollars are swallowed up by our government spending it on the care and compensation caring for whatever those criminals need. And the media is not just standing on the sidelines remaining silent for these travesties. Instead of exposing it and those who prop it up, they gloss over not the criminal acts, but the fact that those who commit those acts are criminals. Oh, they’ll tell us about a murder, a rape, a drug deal gone bad. But seldom do we hear the names or see the faces of the victims or how those crimes have destroyed the lives of the victims and their families. But no more!

Today we give you Chapter One of what is really an expose′. We will not be simply quoting numbers. We are going to show you faces and bullet point details of some of the actual travesties and crimes committed by illegals against Americans in the past few years.

Our purpose? Outrage! We are taking on our government officials and leaders in the media to start this new year. Something MUST be done!

You will see faces and read and hear facts that will shock you: not only to hear the facts but because you have not seen or heard them before. At the end of these two days, we will give you the manuscript of both in .pdf format to download to share. Of course, you can download the podcast each day by simply clicking on it. We want you to share both with everyone you know by forwarding the .pdf and the podcasts for today and tomorrow. Or you can simply forward the link to today’s and tomorrow’s stories.

Let’s get started!

The Stories

The following crime information is gathered from various news sources and refers to crimes other than terrorism. The criminal aliens mentioned are all identified as being in the country illegally. Many of them had come into the hands of law enforcement agencies prior to the crime that is described and were not deported or in some cases, deported but reentered the country.

• On May 6^th, 2017 on the way back from Disneyland, Ingrid Lake’s car was struck by a drunk driver. The accident severely injured her 6-year-old son Lennox. The driver of the vehicle Constantino Banda Acosta was previously deported over 15 times before the accident. This accident

  

  has forever altered the Lake family.

• On April 27, 2002, Ronald da Silva was standing with a friend in his driveway when he was shot and killed by an illegal alien who had been previously deported. The illegal alien was sentenced to 21 years in prison but will be released in 2020. Ronald da Silva’s mother, Agnes Gibboney, has made a powerful statement, “The guy that killed my son has a determinate sentence in prison but I have a lifetime sentence of grief and pain.” Since the tragedy occurred, Agnes has been on the front line pushing for immigration reform.
• Tessa Tranchant, 16, was killed on March 30, 2007, in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Tessa and her friend, Ali Kunhardt, were sitting at a stoplight when Alfredo Ramos, an illegal alien from Mexico who was intoxicated and speeding, rear-ended their car. Ramos had a history of prior convictions, but due to Virginia Beach’s sanctuary policies, he was never detained. He was charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to 40 years in prison.
• Sarah Root, 21, from Omaha, Nebraska was killed on January 31, 2016. Her SUV was rear-ended by Eswin Mejia, an illegal alien from Honduras, who was street racing. Sarah had just graduated from Bellevue University with a 4.0 GPA the day before she passed away. Omaha is in

  

  Douglas County, Nebraska which has sanctuary policies that impede local law enforcement’s ability to cooperate with ICE officers. Mejia was charged with motor vehicular homicide but posted a bond to get out of jail and was released. He is still on the run.

•  Igor Zubko, an illegal alien from Russia, killed Shayley on July 24, 2015, in Phoenix, Arizona. Shayley obtained an order of protection against Zubko just 10 days before her murder, but he entered her home and fatally shot her. Zubko entered the U.S. legally, but overstayed his visa and remained in the U.S. illegally. He is in police custody and faces first-degree murder charges.
• Roberto Galo, an unlicensed driver from Honduras who entered the U.S. illegally but earned temporary protective status (TPS), killed Drew Rosenberg, a second-year law student, on November 16, 2010, in San Francisco, California. Rosenberg was riding his motorcycle when Galo ran over him three times with his car. Galo was convicted of vehicular manslaughter and sentenced to 6 months in jail. USCIS refused to deport him and he was released after serving only 43 days. Thanks to the Rosenberg family’s activism, Galo was finally deported on April 4, 2013.
• Apolinar Altamirano, an illegal alien from Mexico, murdered Grant Ronnebeck on January 22, 2015, in Mesa, Arizona. Ronnebeck was shot over a pack of cigarettes while he was working his shift at a convenience store. Altamirano was out on bond from a previous conviction while ICE determined whether he should be deported when he killed Ronnebeck.

Grant Ronnebeck

Podcast: Play in new window | Download