Placating Americans with Fake Immigration Law EnforcementHow our leaders create fantasy 'solutions' for our immigration-related vulnerabilities.
By Michael Cutler
FrontPageMag.com
Therefore the Visa Waiver Program should have been terminated after the terror attacks of 9/11 yet it has continually been expanded.
It is clear that the overarching goal of a succession of administrations and many members of Congress, irrespective of political party affiliation, is to keep our borders open and take no meaningful action to stop that flow of aliens into the United States.
. . .
The obvious question is why the Visa Waiver Program is considered so sacrosanct that even though it defies the advice and findings of the 9/11 Commission no one has the moral fortitude to call for simply terminating this dangerous program.
The answer can be found in the incestuous relationship between the Chamber of Commerce and its subsidiary, the Corporation for Travel Promotion, now doing business as Brand USA.
The Chamber of Commerce has arguably been the strongest supporter of the Visa Waiver Program, which currently enables aliens from 38 countries to enter the United States without first obtaining a visa.
The U.S. State Department provides a thorough explanation of the Visa Waiver Program on its website.
Incredibly, the official State Department website also provides a link, “Discover America,” on that website which relates to the website of The Corporation for Travel Promotion, which is affiliated with the travel industries that are a part of the “Discover America Partnership.
much more here:
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/12/amnesty-hoax-to-keep-wages-depressed.html
Immigration Opinions, 1/8/16
Support the Center for Immigration Studies by donating on line here: http://cis.org/donate
1. "Let Them Eat H-2B Visas," Mark Krikorian
2. "Hysterical Response to Immigration Enforcement Theater," Mark Krikorian
3. "Update on Sanctuary Jurisdictions," Jessica Vaughan
4. "Setting the Record Straight: NPR Corrects Mischaracterization of CIS Stance on ICE Operation," Jessica Vaughan
5. "No Evidence of Labor Shortage in H-2B Occupations," Steven A. Camarota
6. "On Immigration and Assimilation," Dan Cadman
7. "Don't Reward Illegal Cuban Arrivals with the Benefit of Adjustment," Dan Cadman
8. "Will the Supreme Court Take the DAPA Case?," John Miano
9. "Three Immigration Issues Unresolved in 2015," Jon Feere
10. " 'If You Are From the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Please Dial 8'," David North
11. "Social Security Data Points to Growth in 2nd-Generation Muslim Population," David North
12. "The New York Times' Radical Transformation on Immigration," Jerry Kammer
13. "First Group of U.S.-Bound Cubans Will Leave Costa Rica January 12," Kausha Luna
14. "New Obama Executive Action to Shred Immigration Caps," Sen. Jeff Sessions
15. "How the Republican Congress Expanded Guest-Worker Immigration," Elaina Plott
16. "Message to the GOP: Trump Supports Amnesty," Marc A. Thiessen
17. "The Immigration Maelstrom Engulfs America," Investor's Business Daily
18. "Illegal Aliens Use Fake Puerto Rican Birth Certificates to Get U.S. Passports, Licenses," Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles
19. "How Ted Cruz's New Immigration Ad Trumps Donald Trump's Ad," Peter Grier
20. "Ted Cruz, Unlike Donald Trump, Won't Let Deportees Back Into America," Ed Straker
21. "Muslim Male 'Refugees' Are Gang Raping Women in Europe," Katie Pavlich
22. "Vetting Isn’t All it’s Cracked Up to Be," Ron Edwards
23. "Political Theater is at the Heart of DHS Deportation Raids," Jorge Bonilla
24. "Muslim Mass Sexual Assaults in Germany on New Year's Eve," Carol Brown
25. "Fannie Mae Rolls Out Easy Mortgage, Catering to High-Risk Immigrants," Investor's Business Daily
26. "Obama Intends to Violate Federal Immigration Law. Again.," John Hinderaker
27. "Battening Down the Hatches, Reminiscent of the 1930s," Michael Barone
28. "Talking Truth to a Sanctuary City," Tammy Bruce
29. "Memo To My Fellow Jews: Immigration Restriction Is NOT Nazism," Charles Bloch
30. "Obama’s Covert Immigration Plan Underway," Michael F. Haverluck
31. "Donald Trump's Muslim Immigration Comments Are Not a Bridge Too Far," Benjamin Chevlin
32. "Merkel’s Germany: 'The Systematic Assaults on Women Are a New Type of Crime'," Steve Sailer
33. "A Gay Illegal Alien (and Fraudster) Can’t be Deported Because Mexico is Homophobic — Wait, What?...," Allan Wall
34. "How Trump-Style Politics Turned California Into a Blue State," Jason Riley
35. "Immigration Raids Would be a Big Error," KCCI.com (Des Moines, IA)
36. "Psst: Illegal Immigration is Actually Declining," Haley Sweetland Edwards
37. "Why Conservatives Praise Bernie Sanders on Immigration," Sam Frizell
38. "Whatever Happened to Latino Political Power?," Robert Suro
39. "Marco Rubio Doesn’t Add Up," Frank Bruni
40. "The Trump Effect, and How It Spreads," The New York Times
41. A Shameful Round-Up of Refugees," The New York Times
42. Europe: "The 'Refugee' Flood and the Rape of Europe," Investor's Business Daily
43. Sweden: "New Sweden," G. Perry
44. Germany: "Germany in Shock After 'Monstrous' Attacks, Rape by 1,000 Men 'Of Arab or North African Origin'," ZeroHedge.com
45. Germany: "Cologne Mayor to Victims of Migrant Sex Assaults: You Asked For It," Robert Spencer
46. Germany: "The Long Silence — The Cologne Sex Attacks and the German Media," Friedrich Zauner
47. Germany: "Rape Jihad Shows 'Germany is No Longer German'," WorldNetDaily.com
1.
Let Them Eat H-2B Visas
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, January 7, 2016
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/429408/guest-worker-visas-wheres-labor-shortage?target=author&tid=982
On the home page Elaina Plott has a behind-the-scenes look at how the increase in H-2B guestworker visas ended up in the omnibus spending bill. The provision potentially could quadruple the number of these visas for non-agricultural “seasonal” (up to 10 months per year) workers, but will more likely “only” double them.
Supporters of the increase say lawmakers should have known it was in there because the Appropriations Committee had already slipped it into the Homeland Security appropriations bill last summer. Putting aside the fact that the visa increase wasn’t even mentioned in the committee’s summary of the DHS funding bill and that Senate appropriations chairman Thad Cochran had assured Jeff Sessions that the provision wouldn’t be in the omnibus, it’s worth asking: Why was a guestworker visa increase put into an appropriations bill in the first place? Because the industry lobbyists pushing the measure knew they couldn’t get it passed any other way. It was pure donor service from the get-go.
But more important than the political machinations behind this latest example of corporate welfare is the policy question: why import more unskilled guestworkers at all? Paul Ryan and Steve Scalise justified the increase by claiming a labor shortage.
My colleague Steve Camarota looked for evidence of such a labor shortage in the wage data. He didn’t find any.
If there really were a labor shortage, wages should be rising as employers try to recruit and retain staff. In fact, most of the top H-2B occupations show a decline in real wages from 2007 to 2014. Even the occupation that did best – maids and housekeepers – on average saw their weekly earnings rise by a mere $2 each year, for a total seven-year earnings increase of 4.1 percent. Cooks, on the other hand, saw their wages drop 4.4 percent over the seven-year period; security guards, down 6.1 percent; and hotel, motel & resort desk clerks, down 7 percent.
Now, a tight labor market is the best social policy, so we should welcome increased wages for less-educated workers, rather than try to short-circuit such increases with surges of foreign workers. But even if you think that higher incomes for the poor are a bad thing, current immigration policy is taking care of that problem just fine – why add to it?
Return to Top
********
********
2.
Hysterical Response to Immigration Enforcement Theater
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, January 5, 2016
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/429276/central-american-deportations-hysterical-responses?target=author&tid=982
Over the weekend DHS took 121 Central American illegal aliens – adults plus their children – into custody to be deported. This is the initiative I wrote about last week, and it appears to be as inconsequential as I’d expected.
Considering the laughably small numbers and the very narrow range of targets (only Central American families who snuck in after January 1, 2014, and have been ordered deported and “have exhausted appropriate legal remedies, and have no outstanding appeal or claim for asylum or other humanitarian relief”), you’d think there would be little objection.
You’d be wrong.
The ACLU denounced the arrests as “a scare tactic… designed to deport as many as possible, as quickly as possible.” The National Immigration Forum said “Deportation raids instill fear in immigrant communities.” The group #Not1More Deportation called effort “disgusting” and has started a petition to “stop the terror.” The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles told a Guatemalan paper (in Spanish) that “It’s a new wave of terror against our community, it’s horrible and inhuman.” And BuzzFeed headlined its story yesterday on the arrests “Undocumented Immigrants Detained Across U.S. For Mass Deportation”.
The removal of one one-thousandth of one percent of the illegal population – recent arrivals who’ve run out of excuses to stay – is mass deportation? It’s been clear for some time that the left – the mainstream, ostensibly respectable left – rejects the very idea of enforcing immigration laws. Their hysterical outbursts at this tiny little dribble of enforcement confirm what we already knew.
Return to Top
********
********
3.
Update on Sanctuary Jurisdictions
By Jessica Vaughan
CIS Immigration Blog, January 7, 2016
. . .
Fed up with the unwillingness of California leaders to reverse sanctuary laws even after a string of violent acts committed by criminal aliens drew national attention to the problem, a California citizens group has launched a new ballot initiative that would overturn the state sanctuary law that went into effect on January 1, 2014. The initiative would direct all law enforcement agencies and jurisdictions to cooperate fully with ICE in a variety of ways. It also would clarify that all law enforcement officers in the state may inquire about a person's immigration status.
Outgoing Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, who had long maintained obstructive sanctuary policies, undid them before leaving office in December 2015. One of the very first acts of new Mayor Jim Kenney, within hours of his swearing-in, and after accepting some homemade bread baked by illegal aliens, was to insttute a new sanctuary policy.
In addition to Dallas County, other new sanctuary jurisdictions include the city of Lawrence, Mass., and five counties in Kentucky. In addition, in December, a committee of the Massachusetts legislature approved a strict and far-reaching sanctuary bill.
According to government documents I have obtained through FOIA requests and other channels, and independent research, I have been able to determine that there are approximately 340 sanctuary jurisdictions in the United States. These are cities, counties, and states that have laws, ordinances, regulations, resolutions, policies, or other practices that protect criminal aliens from deportation — either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, or otherwise impeding open communication and information exchanges between their employees or officers and federal immigration officers.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/vaughan/update-sanctuary-jurisdictions
Return to Top
********
********
4.
Setting the Record Straight: NPR Corrects Mischaracterization of CIS Stance on ICE Operation
By Jessica Vaughan
CIS Immigration Blog, January 7, 2016
On January 6, NPR's "Morning Edition" ran a story on the recent ICE operation to remove Central American adults and children who arrived illegally in the surge of 2014, who have failed in their request for legal status and been ordered removed in person by an immigration judge, but who have not departed. The story included comments from me that were over-edited and presented an incomplete and therefore misleading impression of my opinion on ICE's operation.
. . .
The four-minute story goes on to present strong criticism of the raids, with comments from advocates for illegal aliens and from a deportee. It includes no other comment or explanation that is supportive of enforcing the law. The listener is left with the impression that even pro-enforcement experts such as myself do not support these operations. That is a false impression.
NPR edited my comments so that the listener hears that I have reservations about the raids, but is not able to hear why. I do lament that the raids – not because I think our immigration system is broken, but because I believe that the administration has terribly mishandled the border surge crisis, and that the raids would not be necessary if the new illegal arrivals had not been released into the country to begin with. It is the administration's "catch and release" policy that is at fault, not ICE's careful and professionally conducted removal operations.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/vaughan/setting-record-straight-npr-corrects-mischaracterization-cis-stance-ice-operation
Return to Top
********
********
5.
No Evidence of Labor Shortage in H-2B Occupations
By Steven A. Camarota
CIS Immigration Blog, January 6, 2016
. . .
In a recent radio interview, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) justified the insertion of this provision on the grounds that without it businesses would face shortages of seasonal workers of the kind covered by the program.
Is there evidence for Ryan's claim of a labor shortage?
If there is a labor shortage, then wages should be rising rapidly for these occupations as employers struggle to recruit new workers or retain the ones they already have. In economics, the price of anything — steel, wheat, or workers — rises if demand outstrips supply, and of course the price of workers is primarily wages.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/a/no-evidence-labor-shortage-h-2b-occupations
Return to Top
********
********
6.
On Immigration and Assimilation
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, January 5, 2016
. . .
Here is my take:
First, Singer's article deliberately attempts to blur the line between legal and illegal immigration. This is unacceptable. Such distinctions aren't semantic niceties; they are the essence of a society of laws and the foundation for a nation that values its sovereignty.
Second, even as she and the NAS assert that the "obstacle" of lacking legal status impedes the assimilation process (thus implicitly suggesting that everyone should be made "legal" with a wave of the president's magic "executive action" wand so that they can integrate into society at large), others who advocate amnesty in any of its many forms have been going to great pains to tell us that the 11 or 12 million aliens living unlawfully in the United States are already "Americans in everything but name". So which is it? Assimilated in all but legal status, or outside the margins?
Third, if assimilation is, as she, the president, and the NAS suggest, a multi-generational effort, then it isn't "sudden" at all. This need for assimilative seasoning over the course of generations is, to my way of thinking, a strong argument in favor of a balanced immigration system that enforces its laws fairly and uniformly. The national community must have the time, space, and economic resources needed for this two-way process to be able to take hold successfully. Unbridled immigration makes it impossible to absorb individuals in a way that does anything but balkanize and ghettoize various populations coming to the country, and strains the social safety nets needed to stabilize these populations and permit them to bootstrap themselves into the mainstream.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/cadman/immigration-and-assimilation
Return to Top
********
********
7.
Don't Reward Illegal Cuban Arrivals with the Benefit of Adjustment
By Dan Cadman
CIS Immigration Blog, January 4, 2016
. . .
How should our government react? Unless they're interested in really exacerbating the already complicated mess involving Central American surge arrivals on our southern border (which has never abated, but just left the public's consciousness; see here and here) — and there are signs that the Obama administration realizes this would be a political disaster for Democrats in an election year — then the U.S. government needs to take firm steps, both now and upon arrival of any Cubans who have straggled northward as a result of the "deal" that's been cut, to put an end to the charade, deny the Cubans the ability to make such a mockery of our laws, and in the process ensure the trickle doesn't become a flood.
Assuming that, notwithstanding the lack of any immigration documents giving them the ability to seek admission, some show up at a southern border port of entry (POE), seek asylum, and are given a date and time to reappear at the POE for a "credible fear" threshold interview, they should not be paroled into the United States to permit that interview, for reasons I explain below. And, at the credible fear interview, it should weigh heavily — very heavily — in the asylum officer's mind that these individuals spent months in Costa Rica and transited through several other nations without claiming asylum. One of the prime requisites in both international and domestic law is that if you are truly fleeing persecution, then you seek refuge or asylum at the first opportunity. You don't get to be choosy about where you go. That smacks of abuse of the asylum process, and strongly suggests that such individuals are economic migrants, not people who truly fear persecution if returned to Cuba.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/cadman/refusing-reward-illegal-cuban-arrivals-benefit-adjustment
Return to Top
********
********
8.
Will the Supreme Court Take the DAPA Case?
By John Miano
CIS Immigration Blog, January 4, 2016
. . .
Here, I am going to play devil's advocate and explain why the Supreme Court should not hear Texas right now. I do not recommend placing bets on this analysis.
The Supreme Court should not hear Texas now because it a decision over whether to grant a preliminary injunction. The Supreme Court normally only takes cases that are final.
Step back a moment and ask, what was the scope of the Fifth Circuit's decision?
Really there were only two things. First, does the court have jurisdiction? In other words did the states have standing? I wrote about that previously. Second, did the District Court abuse its discretion when it granted the preliminary injunction?
That does not give the Supreme Court a whole lot to review if it were to hear the case.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/miano/will-supreme-court-take-dapa-case
Return to Top
********
********
9.
Three Immigration Issues Unresolved in 2015
By Jon Feere
TheHill.com, January 5, 2016
. . .
Though there are many immigration issues that came into greater focus in 2015 — from the highly controversial H-1B cheap labor agenda, to the H-2B controversies — the following still-unresolved issues were on the forefront of everyone's mind and must be addressed in 2016:
1. Kate Steinle's death in sanctuary city San Francisco. On July 1, Steinle was shot and killed, allegedly by an illegal alien with seven felonies who had been previously deported five times. San Francisco's sanctuary policy had previously allowed for suspect Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez to be released after appearing before police on another charge.
. . .
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/264667-3-immigration-issues-unresolved-in-2015
Return to Top
********
********
10.
"If You Are From the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Please Dial 8'"
By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, January 7, 2016
. . .
NPU, which the venerable Times of India says is engaging in a "massive academic rip-off", is an allegedly non-profit educational institution that, as we reported earlier, made a profit of $29 million from revenues of $40 million in tuition payments in 2014. Over a period of three years, NPU reported no help from volunteers, no receipt of gifts, and no government grants — yet it has the IRS status of a 501(c)3 charity.
Most of the students are from India and, according to other segments of the Indian press, as many as a hundred would-be NPU students have been turned back at U.S. airports or prevented from boarding Air India flights to California. The immigration inspectors apparently sense that some of the incoming students are not really nonimmigrants, coming to the United States for a temporary period, and that they plan to stay.
NPU has responded by saying that their entity has not been "blacklisted by DHS", which, as of today (January 7), is technically correct. NPU is run by a Chinese family named Hsieh.
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/if-you-are-us-department-homeland-security-please-dial-8
Return to Top
********
********
11.
Social Security Data Points to Growth in 2nd-Generation Muslim Population
By David North
CIS Immigration Blog, January 5, 2016
. . .
About a tenth of the total flow of new immigrants and about three tenths in the diversity lottery are from predominantly Muslim countries. But how about the next generation, the ones born here? Our government, unlike many in Europe, religiously avoids counting people by religion, so we must look for indirect measures.
One such indirect measure doesn't shed light on the size of the second-generation Muslim population but is suggestive of its growth, which has been huge over the last 50 years, based, admittedly, on a small base. And the data source is a highly reliable government system.
I am referring to the Social Security Administration's count of the names of newborn babies in the United States. A boy named Mohammed (or with one of a dozen other spellings) born here is likely to grow up in a Muslim environment and, at the same time, be a U.S. citizen. So we can get a rough proxy of the growth of the population of second-generation Muslim immigrants by noting how many of them carry these names. (Third-generation babies are also included.)
. . .
http://www.cis.org/north/social-security-data-growth-muslim-population
Return to Top
********
********
12.
The New York Times' Radical Transformation on Immigration
By Jerry Kammer
CIS Immigration Blog, January 4, 2016
. . .
In 1983, a Times editorial warned that failure to contain illegal immigration would inevitably produce a public backlash against immigration. "For reasons of vitality, humanity and history, America wants and needs immigrants," the editorial observed. "What it does not need is such an uncontrollable flood of illegal migrants that it tries public patience and foments a backlash against all newcomers. That's the genuine danger." That editorial was titled "Time to Turn the Illegal Tide".
. . .
How the Times has changed. In the editorial from last month cited above, the current editorial board praised the American Civil Liberties Union, which never met a worksite identifier it couldn't tie up in the courts, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which never saw an advocate of immigration controls that it couldn't label as intolerant and hateful. The paper hailed these obstructionists of effective reform as "civil rights groups ... defending the displaced against blatant discrimination."
The radicalized Times editorial policy is the creation of its publisher, Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr. Sulzberger, who inherited his job from his late father, regards attempts to regulate immigration as a sin against the inclusiveness that is his gospel.
Sulzberger preached that gospel in a 2006 commencement address at the State University of New York at New Paltz. In what Vanity Fair called "a vapid political message", he told the graduates that they would have to make fateful decisions regarding such issues as "the rights of immigrants to start a new life; or the rights of gays to marry; or the rights of women to choose."
He made no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants as he declared, "You will choose at each point whether to be bold or hesitant, inclusive or elitist, generous or stingy."
. . .
http://www.cis.org/kammer/new-york-times-radical-transformation-immigration
Return to Top
********
********
13.
First Group of U.S.-Bound Cubans Will Leave Costa Rica January 12
By Kausha Luna
CIS Immigration Blog, January 8, 2016
. . .
As indicated by the long title of the Cuban Adjustment Act ("An Act to adjust the status of Cuban refugees to that of lawful permanent residents of the United States "), the CAA was not intended for economic migrants. Nevertheless, both the Cuban migrants and the Central American countries have predicated the success of their plans upon the CAA and the "wet-foot/dry-foot" policy that stems from it. Why should they not? Over the years the U.S. has allowed Cubans to repeatedly and systematically abuse the CAC. Despite this ongoing abuse and the impending arrival of the latest group of Cuban, the Obama administration has said it has no intentions of changing its procedures, even though the president has the legal authority to prevent the islanders from taking benefitting from the CAA , as my colleague Dan Cadman recently explained. (In short, automatic residency is only available to those Cuban illegal aliens who are paroled into the U.S.; if they're kept in detention, the provisions of the CAA do not apply.)
. . .
http://www.cis.org/luna/first-group-us-cubans-will-leave-costa-rica-january-12
Return to Top
********
********
14.
New Obama Executive Action to Shred Immigration Caps
By Sen. Jeff Sessions
The Daily Signal, January 4, 2016
. . .
The number of aliens authorized to work in the United States each year is limited by law, according to the number of foreign work visas and green cards that are statutorily available. Under this breathtaking executive action, those limits set by Congress are waived.
Here is how the scheme works: Under current law, there is a statutory cap on the number of aliens who can receive green cards based on sponsorship from their employers, and thus a cap on the number who can receive the all-purpose work authorization those green cards provide. Under this new rule, the administration can bypass those caps with two easy steps.
First, it would simply approve as many aliens as it wishes to seek green cards in excess of the cap. Then, it would give those workers—and their spouses and children—a renewable all-purpose work permit while they wait for their green cards to become available, nullifying Americans’ statutory protections against job-threatening flows of excess foreign labor. Adding further to the pool of workers, it expands the number of H-1B visas exempt from the annual cap.
. . .
http://dailysignal.com/2016/01/04/new-obama-executive-action-to-shred-immigration-caps/
Return to Top
********
********
15.
How the Republican Congress Expanded Guest-Worker Immigration
By Elaina Plott
National Review Online, January 7, 2016
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429354/h-2b-guest-worker-immigration-expansion-republicans-congress
. . .
Much confusion has surrounded how the measure was included in the omnibus, with lawmakers and pundits alike claiming bitterly that the House slipped it in at the last minute. The truth is more complicated: The measure sat quietly for seven months after the Appropriations Committee approved it in July, never reaching the House floor for a vote. When it wound up in the massive omnibus spending package passed through Congress before Christmas, several lawmakers complained that they were blindsided by the provision, and they argued that Republican leadership was continuing to ignore voters’ concerns about immigration’s negative impact on wages.
. . .
But stripping the measure would have represented an abuse of the speaker’s power, says AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan. “Speaker Ryan committed to allow committees to take the lead in drafting legislation, and that’s exactly what happened with this provision. . . . He’s speaker of the House, not dictator of the House, and [he’s] not going to be in the practice of interfering with the will of his conference,” she says. Another Ryan aide refutes the charge that the speaker violated his promise not to push immigration reform: “He didn’t say the House would not touch programs related to visas, [but] rather that it wouldn’t pass comprehensive immigration reform. This is not that, and not even close.”
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429354/h-2b-guest-worker-immigration-expansion-republicans-congress
Return to Top
********
********
16.
Message to the GOP: Trump Supports Amnesty
By Marc A. Thiessen
American Enterprise Institute, November 13, 2015
. . .
Eric Trump is right. His father has been crystal clear that he wants all the illegals to return and live in America.
Listen closely to what Trump is actually proposing. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash earlier this year, Trump explained his plan this way:
. . .
This is a policy called “touchback” and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX). She offered a “touchback” amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special “Z visa” that would allow them to reenter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.
Her amendment lost by a relatively close margin, 53-45. It was supported by most Republicans and even got five Democratic votes — Sens. Claire McCaskill, Max Baucus, Jon Tester, Byron Dorgan and John Rockefeller all voted for it.
The idea was considered so reasonable that in an April 22, 2007 editorial entitled “Progress on Immigration,” the New York Times declared:
It’s not ideal, but if a touchback provision is manageable and reassures people that illegal immigrants are indeed going to the back of the line, then it will be defensible.
So what Trump is proposing today — sending illegal immigrants back to their home countries and then allowing the “good ones” to return in an “expedited” fashion — was endorsed by the liberal New York Times!
In fact, the idea even got the support of — wait for it — illegal immigrants.
In 2007, the Los Angeles Times did the first telephone poll of illegal immigrants and asked whether they would go home under a “touchback” law that allowed them to return with legal status. Sixty-three percent said yes, 27% said no and 10% were undecided. If they were promised a path to citizenship when they returned, the number who said they would leave and return legally grew to 85%.
. . .
https://www.aei.org/publication/message-to-the-gop-trump-supports-amnesty/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fdpaeideas
Return to Top
********
********
17.
The Immigration Maelstrom Engulfs America
Investor's Business Daily, December 29, 2015
. . .
On Monday, Costa Rica announced a "deal" with Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, Mexico and the International Organization for Migration to transport least 8,000 Cuban migrants holed up at its border to San Salvador by airlift. It will then transport them by bus through Guatemala and into Mexico, with the goal of depositing them at the U.S. border for illegal entry.
The Cubans, who had been been denied travel visas by Nicaragua, could then take advantage of the Cuban Adjustment Act for permanent residence in the U.S.
The 1995 rule, familiarly known as "wet foot, dry foot," was a relic of an earlier era, when Cuban refugees really did flee the horrors of communism for freedom.
Today, the migrants leave for economic reasons, according to a report Monday in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, which interviewed new Cuban arrivals.
This deal is notable in that Uncle Sam wasn't invited to it. Despite the cultural and language affinity that Cubans have with the rest of Latin America, it's just to dump them at the U.S. border and let the gringos pay. Win-win for them, lose-lose for us.
It's a significant story because the border surge is now bigger than ever. As word spreads about President Obama's unguarded border and the decades-long judicial backlog on deportations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has released new data showing that illegal immigration among unaccompanied kids and families soared in October and November.
. . .
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/122915-787300-the-immigration-maelstrom-engulfs-america.htm
Return to Top
********
********
18.
Illegal Aliens Use Fake Puerto Rican Birth Certificates to Get U.S. Passports, Licenses
Judicial Watch Corruption Chronicles, January 4, 2016
As if the country’s monstrous immigration crisis weren’t dire enough, an increasing number of illegal aliens are using fake Puerto Rican birth certificates to obtain authentic U.S. passports and driver’s licenses.
. . .
It turns out that fraud involving Puerto Rican birth certificates has been pervasive for many years, yet the U.S. government and its various agencies accept the documents blindly. The problem got so out of control that back in 2010 Puerto Rico’s government invalidated every birth certificate and issued new ones considered to be safer. One mainstream news report called it a “radical solution to what many say has been a serious and growing crisis involving Puerto Rican birth certificates, which are used to apply for everything from U.S. passports to Medicaid.”
The same report, published in April, 2010, revealed that the U.S. State Department was well aware of the problem. In fact, the agency estimated back then that a mind-boggling 40% of all U.S. passport fraud cases involved Puerto Rican birth certificates. Four years later, a separate news report confirmed that little had changed, that the fraud is still rampant. Here’s an excerpt of the story published in the summer of 2014 by a Florida-based nonprofit investigative journalism outlet: “Counterfeit, altered or stolen birth certificates coming from Puerto Rico are the Holy Grail to Florida’s undocumented. With a phony birth certificate you can live the American dream. You can also enroll in school, land a job and get a driver’s license.”
. . .
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/01/illegal-aliens-use-fake-puerto-rican-birth-certificates-to-get-u-s-passports-licenses/
Return to Top
********
********
19.
How Ted Cruz's New Immigration Ad Trumps Donald Trump's Ad
The ad’s careful construction may be yet more proof that Sen. Ted Cruz is attempting to slipstream behind Donald Trump while snatching some of his voters.
By Peter Grier
The Christian Science Monitor, January 5, 2016
. . .
The ad’s construction may be yet more proof that Cruz is attempting to slipstream behind Mr. Trump while snatching some of his voters. It combines two issues that are of great importance to the predominantly less-educated, lower-income core of Trump’s vote: economic insecurity, and immigration.
Plus, it slams the media, lawyers, and bankers – unpopular professions all. No mention of doctors or tech entrepreneurs racing across the Rio Grande, we notice.
Critics say Cruz’s assumptions here are bogus, however. Writing in Vox, Matthew Yglesias says it is “simply false to say that the current rate of immigration to the United States is an economic calamity.” Research shows that incomes of native-born Americans are higher, not lower, due to the economic activity generated by immigration, according to Mr. Yglesias.
But focusing on the economics of illegal immigration is less inflammatory than simply calling many Mexican immigrants rapists, as Trump has done. In that sense, Cruz’s approach is softer.
. . .
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2016/0105/How-Ted-Cruz-s-new-immigration-ad-trumps-Donald-Trump-s-ad
Return to Top
********
********
20.
Ted Cruz, Unlike Donald Trump, Won't Let Deportees Back Into America
By Ed Straker
American Thinker Blog, January 6, 2016
. . .
Ted Cruz has made the interesting argument that he is tougher on illegal immigration than Donald Trump. Trump has called for the mass deportation of illegals but promised to let the "good ones" back in. He has never described what percent of illegals are the "good ones," and many Trump supporters, caught up in the cult of personality for the candidate, don't seem interested in the details.
But Ted Cruz has said he will enforce the law, and the law requires the deportation of illegal aliens. If Cruz will enforce the law, and Donald Trump will allow illegals back into America, does this mean that Ted Cruz is tougher on illegal immigration than Donald Trump?
Not necessarily. It is true that Ted Cruz was the first to call for finishing the border fence, back when Donald Trump was still calling for amnesty for illegal aliens. But Donald Trump has called for legislatively ending birthright citizenship, something Cruz is doubtful of.
What it seems to come down to is that Cruz will order deportations, with no option to return, and Trump will order mass deportations, with options to return for an unknown number after an unknown period of time.
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/01/ted_cruz_unlike_donald_trump_wont_let_deportees_back_into_america.html
Return to Top
********
********
21.
Muslim Male "Refugees" Are Gang Raping Women in Europe
By Katie Pavlich
Townhall.com, January 7, 2016
Two weeks ago the New York Times ran a story about the need to host classes in Norway and Denmark for Muslim men new to the country. The topic? Rape is wrong and unacceptable.
. . .
During New Years Eve celebrations in the western city of Cologne, dozens of Muslim men allegedly participated in rape mobs. They surrounded young women, touched them, raped them and stole their wallets and cell phones. Tensions surrounding how the situation is being handled are rising by the day. From ABC News:
. . .
If you have to educate an entire influx of Muslim men about how rape is wrong, you probably shouldn't be letting them into your country.
. . .
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/01/07/muslim-male-refugees-are-raping-women-in-europe-n2100918
Return to Top
********
********
22.
Vetting Isn’t All It’s Cracked Up to Be
By Ron Edwards
NewsWithViews.com, January 1, 2016
. . .
For example, Syrian Refugees Offices must undergo a one week training course on Syrian-specific issues, including classified information. On top of that, scrutiny already is being applied to Syrians through the enhanced review for Syrian applicants process that put additional security and intelligence resources at the disposal of adjudicators.
Only at this point can an applicant be approved. For those that are approved, health screenings and orientations begin. The traitorous State Department and Office of refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services work with voluntary resettlement agencies to arrange for resettlement agencies to arrange for resettlement services and assistance. After an average of 12 to 18 months, this process ends with entry into the United States.
My concern amongst many is that President Obama in typical bigoted, progressive fashion has stepped up efforts to make sure tens of thousands of Muslims file into the United States, while denying entry to Christian refugees from Syria. It does not matter to Mr. Obama or other progressives in general that Christians are being slaughtered for sport, while the black African Christian that aren’t murdered are forced into brutal slavery, per instructions in the little quran.’
. . .
<a href="http://cis.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=11002b90be7384b380b467605&id=39a2c91269&e=b87c5fdd04" rel="nofollow" style="color: #336699; fo