Month: April 2019

In an astonishing instance of judicial activism, a federal judge has ruled that unvetted Central American caravan migrants seeking U.S. asylum no longer have to wait it out on Mexico. 

According to NBC News:

A federal judge in California issued an order Monday blocking the Trump administration’s policy of returning some asylum-seekers to Mexico while they wait for a court appearance.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg’s nationwide ruling will not go into effect until Friday, to give the administration time to appeal.

Outgoing Homeland Security chief Kirstjen Nielsen announced the launch of the Migrant Protection Protocols in San Diego, the country’s busiest border crossing, in January. Under the policy, Customs and Border Protection officers and agents have the authority to turn around asylum-seekers crossing in the San Diego and El Paso sectors. Families seeking asylum had previously been allowed to stay in the United States while awaiting their court hearings.

A lawsuit filed on behalf of 11 asylum-seekers from Central America had argued that being sent back across the border could expose them to “undue risk to their lives or freedom.”

So they can all come live and work here to wait out their nearly always meritless asylum cases in court, something that gives them a minimum of several free years of worry-free U.S. residency at zero cost. Legal immigrants, on the other hand, will continue to have to wait it out in their home countries with their applications to move here, with ten-year or more backlogs, as well as pay high administrative costs if they want to do it the legal way.

Any questions now as to why a million people are planning to enter the U.S. without papers in this year alone? With a ruling like that, it’s an open bar for those who want to enter the U.S. without vetting.

President Trump railed against the illogic of it all here:

 

A 9th Circuit Judge just ruled that Mexico is too dangerous for migrants. So unfair to the U.S. OUT OF CONTROL! https://t.co/XF8o3jMDle

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 9, 2019

 

Not only is it profoundly unfair to those who seek to enter the U.S. the legal way, it’s stunningly unfair to Americans here who will inevitably fall victim to the crimes and costs of this legally sanctioned unvetted migration. The judge’s ruling allows all askers in, premised on a pontification about asylum seekers being unsafe in Mexico. The reality is, they aren’t unsafe in Mexico, if they go to a city such as Guanajuato, which has less crime than the U.S., but yes, they have some risks in border areas, precisely because they have involvement with gangs, smugglers and cartels at the edge of the U.S. border. Fact is, all borderlands, worldwide, areunsafe. They’re unsafe because people there are unsorted and unvetted. The U.S. border areas of the U.S. are as unsafe as the ones in Mexico. Telling the asylum seekers – and the criminals they have paid to smuggle them in – that they can all come into the states now and everyone will just naturally be safe isn’t going to happen. What will happen is that the so-called asylum seekers will bring the unsafeness of the borderlands to the U.S. heartland. The judge doesn’t address that issue, or the rights of Americans to be safe in their homeland, too. Supposedly, we have invincible cops to take care of the whole thing and it’s not his job to consider whether they will be overwhelmed by a million unvetted people rolling in.

As Richard Fernandez notes in a must-read essay from a couple days ago, vetting matters, and walls matter – walls are there to rationalize information, to sort out people fleeing from people persecuting. A judge’s rejecting of the legitimacy of walls renders actual asylum meaningless:

What’s the use of fleeing to the United States if MS-13 murderers can simply follow in the victims’ wake? As someone noted on Twitter, ”If America is to be a place of asylum then there has to be a way to discriminate between those who flee danger and those who are the danger. The border is the only place for that to happen.”

With an open border and all askers now entitled by a leftist judge to enter, the question now is ‘asylum from what’?

 

 

 

Image credit: AFP via YouTube, screen shot

In an astonishing instance of judicial activism, a federal judge has ruled that unvetted Central American caravan migrants seeking U.S. asylum no longer have to wait it out on Mexico. 

According to NBC News:

A federal judge in California issued an order Monday blocking the Trump administration’s policy of returning some asylum-seekers to Mexico while they wait for a court appearance.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg’s nationwide ruling will not go into effect until Friday, to give the administration time to appeal.

Outgoing Homeland Security chief Kirstjen Nielsen announced the launch of the Migrant Protection Protocols in San Diego, the country’s busiest border crossing, in January. Under the policy, Customs and Border Protection officers and agents have the authority to turn around asylum-seekers crossing in the San Diego and El Paso sectors. Families seeking asylum had previously been allowed to stay in the United States while awaiting their court hearings.

A lawsuit filed on behalf of 11 asylum-seekers from Central America had argued that being sent back across the border could expose them to “undue risk to their lives or freedom.”

So they can all come live and work here to wait out their nearly always meritless asylum cases in court, something that gives them a minimum of several free years of worry-free U.S. residency at zero cost. Legal immigrants, on the other hand, will continue to have to wait it out in their home countries with their applications to move here, with ten-year or more backlogs, as well as pay high administrative costs if they want to do it the legal way.

Any questions now as to why a million people are planning to enter the U.S. without papers in this year alone? With a ruling like that, it’s an open bar for those who want to enter the U.S. without vetting.

President Trump railed against the illogic of it all here:

 

A 9th Circuit Judge just ruled that Mexico is too dangerous for migrants. So unfair to the U.S. OUT OF CONTROL! https://t.co/XF8o3jMDle

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 9, 2019

 

Not only is it profoundly unfair to those who seek to enter the U.S. the legal way, it’s stunningly unfair to Americans here who will inevitably fall victim to the crimes and costs of this legally sanctioned unvetted migration. The judge’s ruling allows all askers in, premised on a pontification about asylum seekers being unsafe in Mexico. The reality is, they aren’t unsafe in Mexico, if they go to a city such as Guanajuato, which has less crime than the U.S., but yes, they have some risks in border areas, precisely because they have involvement with gangs, smugglers and cartels at the edge of the U.S. border. Fact is, all borderlands, worldwide, areunsafe. They’re unsafe because people there are unsorted and unvetted. The U.S. border areas of the U.S. are as unsafe as the ones in Mexico. Telling the asylum seekers – and the criminals they have paid to smuggle them in – that they can all come into the states now and everyone will just naturally be safe isn’t going to happen. What will happen is that the so-called asylum seekers will bring the unsafeness of the borderlands to the U.S. heartland. The judge doesn’t address that issue, or the rights of Americans to be safe in their homeland, too. Supposedly, we have invincible cops to take care of the whole thing and it’s not his job to consider whether they will be overwhelmed by a million unvetted people rolling in.

As Richard Fernandez notes in a must-read essay from a couple days ago, vetting matters, and walls matter – walls are there to rationalize information, to sort out people fleeing from people persecuting. A judge’s rejecting of the legitimacy of walls renders actual asylum meaningless:

What’s the use of fleeing to the United States if MS-13 murderers can simply follow in the victims’ wake? As someone noted on Twitter, ”If America is to be a place of asylum then there has to be a way to discriminate between those who flee danger and those who are the danger. The border is the only place for that to happen.”

With an open border and all askers now entitled by a leftist judge to enter, the question now is ‘asylum from what’?

 

 

 

Image credit: AFP via YouTube, screen shot

Sometimes a story comes along that leaves you not knowing whether to laugh or cry. This is one of them.

It seems like something that was ripped from a satirical news site, like Babylon Bee or The Onion: Democrats in Washington have voted to help protect kittens from cruel treatment, just a month after voting down legislation to save live human children from even worse situations.

But it’s not a parody. It’s real life, and it just happened in our nation’s Capitol.

“Four Democratic senators who voted against protecting newborns sponsored a bill designed to protect baby cats,” the Washington Free Beacon reported on Thursday.

“Senators Jeff Merkley, Cory Booker, Gary Peters, and Tom Udall cosponsored (the KITTEN Act of 2019) designed to put an end to animal testing using kittens.”

TRENDING: Time for Comey To Sweat: Rep. Nunes Confirms Multiple Criminal Referrals on Witch Hunt Going to DOJ

Recognize those names? They’re all Democrats, but they have something else in common.

The KITTEN Act “was introduced about a week after all of those Democratic senators voted to block legislation that would have required doctors to provide medical care to newborns who survive abortion,” the Free Beacon noted.

In February, nearly all Democrats voted against the Born Alive Abortions Survivors Protection Act. As you may recall, that measure wasn’t about “routine” abortions, but was meant to treat live-born children from failed abortions as human beings who have a right to emergency medical care.

Yes, we’re officially at a point where the left feels more compelled to protect baby cats than baby humans — something that several conservatives were quick to lament.

“There is nothing more valuable than human life, and as a society we must defend it at every stage,” noted Lauren Fine, a spokeswoman for Rep. Steve Scalise, the Louisiana Republican who almost lost his own life to a gunman in an attack in Alexandria, Virginia, in 2017.

“It’s unfathomable that Democrats can find time to defend the lives of kittens, but at the same time are vehemently opposed to even the consideration of legislation designed to protect infants born alive during an abortion from being killed,” Fine continued, according to the Free Beacon.

Follow the money, as they say. While animal testing is certainly something that should be reduced, the spending focused on continuing research using tissue from aborted human beings at the same time is rather sobering.

Over $100 million of taxpayer money is spent every year on projects involving fetal tissue — or to put it bluntly, research using organs and parts from aborted babies. Liberals want to increase it, while the current administration has pushed to cut that spending back.

“I find it appalling that Democrats are so out of touch that they refuse to stand up for defenseless babies but are more than eager to defend animals,” Rep. Sean Duffy, a Republican from Wisconsin, told the Free Beacon.

RELATED: NBC Drama Surprises with Pro-Life Argument After Rape Victim Wants To Abort Baby: ‘Not Their Fault’

“When Democrats want to talk about ending ‘taxpayer-funded kitten slaughter,’ they say it’s just common sense,” a Republican aide commented to Free Beacon. “When millions of pro-life Americans want to end taxpayer subsidies to the nation’s largest abortion business, Democrats rush to call it an extremist agenda.”

If there was any doubt about how messed up our society and representatives are in 2019, this should clear it up.

Something has gone terribly, appallingly wrong in Washington — and unless America changes course, we could be headed down a very dark path.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Instead of calling for a border wall that would protect them from rock-wielding illegal migrants, Univision anchor Enrique Acevedo believes border agents should just duck.

Acevedo appeared Monday on Fox News with Martha McCallum and she launched the segment by asking Acevedo if he agreed with a border agent who claimed a newly refurbished section of the wall had kept him and his fellow agents safer.

“Just listening to the women with the border patrol, Enrique, describing that they had rocks getting thrown at their agents; she said this is so much better having the wall that they can see through because they can see what’s coming at them from the other side, and that helps keep them safer in their job. That’s a good thing, right?” MacCallum asked.

“Well, it’s always a good thing when we can keep border patrol agents, federal agents safer,” Acevedo replied. “I would just ask you, Martha, is it worth $25 billion to keep people 100, 200, 300 yards away from the border to throwing rocks at agents on the other side when you just do this [Acevedo then physically ducked out of camera range]. Is that worth $25 billion?”

McCallum could hardly believe it.

“They should dodge the rocks?” she asked. “You think they should just dodge the rocks?”

“I’m not saying that,” he said, even though that was exactly what he was saying.

He then returned to his tired talking point, saying, “Is it worth $25 billion to do that or can we invest that money in just smarter ways? I think we can.”

Acevedo was responding to what Sector Border Patrol Chief Gloria Chavez said on Friday when President Trump visited the border, specifically a 2.25-mile area of renovated border fencing.

“We’re very appreciative of this wall,” Chavez said. “These men and women out here in the area of two miles were experiencing a high number of assaults and use-of-force incidents. This was prior to this wall being built.”

Outside of his inhuman lack of concern for America’s border patrol agents, Acevedo’s talking point about spending $25 billion is just as disingenuous. According to a 2017 study released by Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), illegal immigration costs the American taxpayer $116 billion per year. That is a net loss that even takes into account the taxes some illegals pay.

Building a border wall is like building a bank safe. The initial investment more than covers the staggering losses if you don’t build a deterrent. A steel safe won’t put an end to all bank robberies, just as a border wall won’t put an end to all illegal immigration, but that it will pay for itself rather quickly is beyond dispute.

If Acevedo is concerned with using tax dollars for “smarter ways,” how about that $116 billion we are wasting on people who never should have been allowed in our country?

What’s more, why in God’s name would we welcome people who hurl rocks at our border agents, who try to maim and kill America’s law enforcement officers, into our country?

There is a legitimate way to claim asylum in this country.

Jeff Dunetz at the Lid asks a key question, “If a person threw a rock at your home, would you invite them in or would you sic your dog on them?”

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

The United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is hosting a hearing on the ongoing “unprecedented migration” to the U.S. through the southern border.

A number of Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials are speaking on the soaring illegal immigration crisis currently occurring at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The hearing starts at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. A live stream will appear above. Please refresh the page.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder. 

A group of Democratic and GOP legislators will stand with business owners at 9:30 a.m. EST to jointly demand the government provide more H-2B seasonal visa-workers.

The demand at the Capitol Hill press conference for more workers comes as many employers have begun competing for workers by offering higher wages, after many years of flat or declining blue-collar wages.

The live stream above will begin as soon as the event is underway.

Business owners, plus the labor brokers which supply seasonal workers to many employers, say they need imported seasonal workers because they cannot hire Americans for seasonal landscaping, forestry, resort, and restaurant work.

The owners also say they cannot afford to hire Americans at the wages needed to hire Americans away from other jobs and say they cannot raise prices because their sales will fall.

Studies suggest the H-2B workers are paid less than local wages earned by Americans. American wages likely would also rise if the companies had to compete for productive American workers.

DHS Nielsen OKs 30K extra H-2B visa workers, so 2019 inflow is 96K. Expands summer biz for CEOs by cutting blue-collar wages. Not ‘Hire American’ – but gives cheap crab-meat to DC media! BTW, US has 1.5M+ white-collar visa workers who lower grads’ salaries https://t.co/jyoKaiUHoS

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) March 30, 2019

Turning Point USA director of urban engagement Brandon Tatum told Breitbart News Democrat politicians — such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasi0-Cortez — “don’t care about black people or people in general” and use fake accents to pander to a group of people in an attempt to “get power and votes.”

Tatum offered his remarks in a Sunday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Sunday with host Amanda House.

“I don’t know what [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] is doing, but it’s disrespectful,” said Tatum of the rookie congresswoman’s fake accent that she was heard using in front of a black audience at Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network conference on Friday.

“There is no reason in the world that a person has to be so fake that they need to create an accent to try to pander to a group of people,” continued the urban engagement director, “First of all, she’s using a southern accent in a northern area, so, she’s wrong in all ways.”

“But this is just an example of what the liberals are doing, and what the Democrats are doing, and how they really don’t care about black people or people in general,” said Tatum, “They just pander to get power and votes.”

House noted that former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is also known to have adopted a fake accent. “What is the strategy behind this type of performance?” inquired the Breitbart News Sunday host.

“Unfortunately, I believe that some of this stuff must work,” said Tatum, “I feel like the reason why these people continue to do this pandering type of behavior MS-13is because somebody’s buying into it — I think that it’s embarrassing, but unfortunately, some people are still swayed and get convinced.”

Tatum added that he has seen people get upset on both sides of the aisle over Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s fake accent, which he refers to as “fraudulent behavior.”

House and Tatum went on to discuss a second Democrat politician, Robert “Beto” O’Rourke, who had recently stated that granting amnesty to illegal aliens would make the Angel families in the United States “demonstrability safer.”

“To me, [Robert ‘Beto’ O’Rourke] is one of the fakest politicians that has jumped into this clown car of Democrats running for president,” said Tatum, adding that the illegal aliens O’Rourke had been referring to “aren’t the ones that are creating Angel Moms.”

“The criminals, the people who are MS-13 gang members, they are the ones creating Angel Moms,” affirmed Tatum, “Giving them amnesty is not going to make them not criminals.”

“I believe that Beto is losing major ground in Texas — spewing rhetoric like that to Angel Moms, people who have lost their loved ones to these convicted felons and these people that have been deported five or six times? That’s not going to bode well,” added Tatum.

Tatum, who works for Turning Point USA, a conservative student organization active on high school and college campuses across the country, also offered his remarks in response to an incident last week, in which an 11-year-old student was reportedly told by her teacher that she could not choose President Donald Trump as the subject for her “hero” project.

Believe it or not, these people [school staff] are doing this on a day-to-day basis, whether it’s high school, whether it’s college, they are demonizing conservatives — and the reason that I have such a problem with this, is that we’re not talking about Hitler — we’re not talking about somebody with a track record of murdering people and being a hateful, devilish individual. We’re talking about a person, who, politically, people just don’t like. President Trump, responsible for the lowest unemployment, for five million people getting off food stamps, we have a great economy, he’s securing the border — and for [the left] to compare Donald Trump to somebody as despicable as Hitler — is absolutely asinine.

“If [Turning Point USA] didn’t exist, these kids would be losing battles every day,” added Tatum, “[The teacher] is supposed to be an educated person who is speaking life into young people, and she’s doing something that’s so partisan and ignorant — This is an example of what’s going on all over the country.”

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo and on Instagram.