Trump supporters NEED to read & share this letter written by retired US Army Veteran, Ray Mckinney: June 16, 2017


The Honorable Donald J. Trump
President of the United States of America
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I am an 82 year old solider who loves his country but at this point in time, I am powerfully confused, and so are millions and millions of your other loyal supporters.

I entered the Army back in the early 1950’s when Dwight D Eisenhower was president and I earned the grand sum of 52 dollars a month as a private. Over time, I advanced in rank and eventually decided that I wanted to be an officer who could best serve the needs of my country.

With that said, Mr. President, I have laid the groundwork proving that my entire lifetime has been that of a dedicated soldier and patriot. I have loved my country dearly, all of my life. I still do. It is the only country I can call home. It is the only country I have ever wanted to call home. It is the only country that most of the people who now live here will ever know …yet there are many misguided fools who want to bring Ole Glory down and ‘turn the lights off in Georgia’.

But something is happening in my country today that causes great alarm in this old soldier. There is a movement afloat to unseat you, our legally elected president and install a “deep state coup” by any means possible. As you know, this movement has members of both political parties active in this goal. Treason knows no party or person.

You Sir are the target. If you can be removed by whatever means possible, then there will be no hope for our country. You are our last line of defense. Your opposition knows this, and the people who put you in office also know this …… there is an ‘undeclared war’ going on at this very moment for the control of America.

You Sir are in the eye of the storm.

If you fall, all of America will fall. Be strong Sir. Know that we are with you.

I have lived, and served under 11 presidents in my lifetime. You Mr President are the 12th. Most of them have been politicians. But, you Sir will be the first president who has ever had a successful business background. That is exactly why I decided to support you in the Republican Primary and the fully endorse you in the general election.

My daughter asks me before the primary season started who I would be supporting. I said, “Donald Trump”. She then followed up her question up by saying, “Daddy, are you crazy, Trump is not a politician”!

I said, “Debbie dear, that’s exactly why I’m voting for him”! … She said, “Daddy please explain your motives in detail”! I did.

I said, “Sweetheart would you agree that the United States of America is nothing but one great big business”? She agreed to that. I then ask, “OK, if America is the biggest business in world, does it not make good sense to elect a businessman to run that business, someone with a proven business record”? She had to agree with that too!

I then said, “The road to hell is paved with the souls of sleazy politicians with ‘good intentions’ but somehow they always went south … and so did the politicians”! My vote will go to the man who can make America into the greatness it use to be.

And anyone who can take 5 million dollars and turn it into 5 billion dollars has my vote and my loyalty. And that man was Donald John Trump.

Mr. Trump came along when America was in great trouble. For 35 years or more, the American people have been lead down the primrose path toward a ‘one world government’ where they would unwillingly lose their sovereignty, their birthrights, any and all freedoms and liberties that had been guaranteed by our Constitution.

Our forefather who gave us these rights must have been turning over in their graves as all this liberal nonsense progressed under the leadership of the ‘progressive’ democrat party, and the republicans who also thought and acted as democrats.

Mr. President, you are a breath of fresh air and the only hope for a decaying republic. You Sir are the only person who can save the future generations from the onslaught of what has been planned for them.

The veterans who supported you, the brave men who have died for our country and a cause, and the citizens of this country who voted and gave you a mandate to ‘clean that damn swamp out’ are now confused.

We do not understand how the picture has changed since you took office. We do not understand how the only way you get things done is by Executive Order. We cannot comprehend why members of the Republican Party refuse to work with you on things to improve America.

We do understand the hatred and viciousness that is currently being displayed by the democrats and their ‘progressive view’. We do understand that their goals and objectives are the only things that matter to them. In their simple minds, “the ends always justify the means”.

But, in the minds of the patriots, who number in the millions who care for this nation, and who call you Mr. President, the ends and these means of those acting to create a deep state are treasonous.

We have watch since you took office a steady and unrelenting stream of criticism of everything you do. We are amazed because those things have been for the betterment of America. To us, this is proof that your opponents are many in Washington, and they do not give a ‘tinker’s damn’ about the good of this country. They have one objective and one objective only … to bring you down.

In doing so, they knowing will destroy all hopes our nation has for rising from the ashes of the past. They do not care. For over a quarter of a century, their goal has been to ‘talk their trash’ and take this country into a one world government where America will be dragged down to the status of a ‘banana republic’ … or less.

I did not devote my entire life to seeing this happen. I have devoted myself to the principles contained in our Constitution, and by the grace of God, I am prepared to die defending those principles. And may I also add there are millions and millions of other veterans and patriots who feel the same as I do.

Mr. President, we understand you have no ‘bully pulpit’ as have all of your previous successors. We also understand the main stream media is now nothing but ‘bought and paid talking heads and political whores’ for those who wish to destroy our republic. We understand the anguish you must feel every day. And you do this with out drawing a single penny from the treasury. You Sir are a true patriot, and we thank you..

But Sir, remember that we are with you. Regardless of what the media try’s to convince the public to be true, always remember, ‘We Are with You’. The millions and millions of law abiding citizens who put you in office are still in your corner, and will be there for the full ‘15 rounds’ . And make no mistake my friends; … we are indeed in a fight.

We are in a fight for the very survival of this republic.

But your loyal patriots are confused, Sir. We are lacking direction and we are lacking orders. We are in need of guidance, and we are in need of how we can help in your struggle. After all, it’s our struggle too..

As a patriot, and as a law abiding citizen, and someone who deeply cares for his country, as does everyone else who voted for you, we ask that you step forward and tell us how we can help you in this apparent overt battle that is aimed to bring you and our country down with you.

Don’t tell us to donate money to any organization, tell us how to be active and vocal and how to ‘step up to the plate and take a swing at the ball’. Anyone can throw a dollar or two into a pot, but how many are willing and able to stand up and speak out … I, for one am, sick and tired of hearing of nothing but democrat propaganda 24 hours a day! If what they say was true, I may be more inclined to listen, but when it’s nothing but ‘fake news’, I am not inclined to listen, and neither are millions and millions more like me.

So Mr. President, the millions and millions who put you in office are powerfully confused. We do not understand how you are being investigated by a Special Prosecutor for no wrongdoing, and at the same time, the “real guilty from the previous administration” are ‘stoking the fires’ under your feet! Please explain.

I make no apologies for the length of this letter Mr. President. I have said what I and millions of others who voted for you strongly feel, and we still support you even stronger today. You need our help to defeat this scourge and drain that damn swamp. We The People are here to help you.

But ‘we the people’ need to fully understand how you would like to employ us! We cannot work on assumptions. We work with facts and only facts. So please find a way to tell us how we can help. We will not give this country up without a fight, with or without you. Talk to us, Sir. Let us help you.

Sir, I remain your loyal servant and a true patriot of these United States of America. Talk to us !!!

Ray McKinney

trump lions please go hard core

This additional comment is from Vladimir Alexander

President Trump is in all actuality a Receiver in a preemptive fight against the Bankruptcy of The United States due to mismanagement of the political and Global elite that want to milk it dry. The socialist nations of the EU, China and the elitist in the US that make $Trillions off of the US while the US elitist keep the population in working debt or welfare slavery as they offer, as the Romans did “Circus & Bread” which is now food, housing and entertainment to keep the masses placated until they have their One World Nation. During any business failure that leads to BANKRUPTCY there are those that fight to keep their power and wealth at all costs to the extent of killing the Golden Goose to claim all its Golden Eggs at once but end up with a Dead Goose. As the Slogan goes “Drain The Swamp” but there are numerous alligators from every part of the spectrum but all just want one thing “Status Quo”; a Bureaucratic Behemoth that allows the pilfering of $Trillions by the elitists: It is the one element in our institutions that sets up the pretense of having authority over everybody and being responsible to nobody. Being kept in place with exorbitant wages and pensions that force them to vote for a living rather than work for a living…. Right now they are fighting with every means possible to keep the “Status Quo” and the loser will be the people of the US including those Bureaucrats because; in the case of any business merger the removal of “headcount” is inevitable and that “headcount” will be the standard of living in the US… “RLTW”

 

The Battle of Athens, Tennessee 1946 Restored the Rule of Law by using The Second Amendment.


The Battle of Athens

1-2 AUGUST 1946

  • Those who took up arms in Athens, Tennessee:
  • wanted honest elections, a cornerstone of our Constitutional order;
  • had repeatedly tried to get Federal or State election monitors;
  • used armed force so as to minimize harm to the law-breakers;
  • showed little malice to the defeated law-breakers;
  • restored lawful government.

The Battle of Athens clearly shows:

  • how Americans can and should lawfully use armed force;
  • why the Rule of Law requires unrestricted access to firearms;
  • how civilians with military-type firearms can beat the forces of “law and order”.

GE DIGITAL CAMERA

I. Introduction: 

On 2 August 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud — forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff’s deputies — by the local political boss. They got no help.

These Americans’ absolute refusal to knuckle-under had been hardened by service in World War II. Having fought to free other countries from murderous regimes, they rejected vicious abuse by their county government. These Americans had a choice. Their state’s Constitution – Article 1, Section 26 – recorded their right to keep and bear arms for the common defense. Few “gun control” laws had been enacted.

II. The Setting 

These Americans were Tennesseeans of McMinn County, located between Chattanooga and Knoxville, in Eastern Tennessee. The two main towns were Athens and Etowah. McMinn Countians had long been independent political thinkers.

They also had long accepted bribe-taking by politicians and/or the Sheriff to overlook illicit whiskey-making and gambling; financed the sheriff’s department from fines – usually for speeding or public drunkenness – which promoted false arrests;put up with voting fraud by both Democrats and Republicans.

Tennessee State law barred voting fraud:

  • ballot boxes had to be shown to be empty before voting;
  • poll-watchers had to be allowed;
  • armed law enforcement officers were barred from polling places;
  • ballots had to be counted where any voter could watch.

III. The Circumstances

The Great Depression had ravaged McMinn County. Drought broke many farmers; workforces shrank. The wealthy Cantrell family, of Etowah, backed Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1932 election, hoping New Deal programs would revive the local economy and help Democrats to replace Republicans in the county government. So it proved.

Paul Cantrell was elected Sheriff in the 1936, 1938, and 1940 elections, but by slim margins. The Sheriff was the key County official. Cantrell was elected to the State Senate in 1942 and 1944; his chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, was elected sheriff. In 1946, Paul Cantrell again sought the Sheriff’s office.

IV. World War II Ends; Paul Cantrell’s Troubles Begin

At end-1945, some 3,000 battle-hardened veterans returned to McMinn County. Sheriff Mansfield’s deputies had brutalized many in McMinn County; the GIs held Cantrell politically responsible for Mansfield’s doings. Early in 1946, some newly-returned ex-GIs decided:

  • to challenge Cantrell politically;
  • to offer an all ex-GI, non-partisan ticket;
  • to promise a fraud-free election.
  • In ads and speeches the GI candidates promised:
  • an honest ballot count;
  • reform of county government.

At a rally, a GI speaker said, “‘The principals that we fought for in this past war do not exist in McMinn County. We fought for democracy because we believe in democracy but not the form we live under in this county.'” (Daily Post-Athenian, 17 June 1946, p. 1).

At end-July 1946, 159 McMinn County GIs petitioned the FBI to send election monitors. There was no response. The Department of Justice had not responded to McMinn Countians’ complaints of election fraud in 1940, 1942, and 1944.

V. From Ballots to Bullets

The election was held on 1 August. To intimidate voters, Mansfield brought in some 200 armed “deputies”. GI poll-watchers were beaten almost at once. At about 3 p.m., Tom Gillespie, an African-American voter, was told by a Sheriff’s deputy, “‘Nigger, you can’t vote here today!!'”. Despite being beaten, Gillespie persisted; the enraged deputy shot him. The gunshot drew a crowd. Rumors spread that Gillespie had been “shot in the back”; he later recovered. (C. Stephen Byrum, The Battle of Athens; Paidia Productions, Chattanooga TN, 1987; pp. 155-57).

Other deputies detained ex-GI poll-watchers in a polling place, as that made the ballot count “public”. A crowd gathered. Sheriff Mansfield told his deputies to disperse the crowd. When the two ex-GIs smashed a big window and escaped, the crowd surged forward. “The deputies, with guns drawn, formed a tight half-circle around the front of the polling place. One deputy, “his gun raised high …shouted: ‘You sons-of-bitches cross this street and I’ll kill you!'” (Byrum, p. 165).

Mansfield took the ballot boxes to the jail for counting. The deputies seemed to fear immediate attack, by the “people who had just liberated Europe and the South Pacific from two of the most powerful war machines in human history.” (Byrum, pp. 168-69).

Short of firearms and ammunition, the GIs scoured the county to find them. By borrowing keys to the National Guard and State Guard Armories, they got three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles. The armories were nearly empty after the war’s end.

By eight p.m., a group of GIs and “local boys” headed for the jail to get the ballot boxes. They occupied high ground facing the jail but left the back door unguarded to give the jail’s defenders an easy way out.

VI. The Battle of Athens

Three GIs – alerting passersby to danger – were fired on from the jail. Two GIs were wounded. Other GIs returned fire. Those inside the jail mainly used pistols; they also had a “tommy gun” (a .45 caliber Thompson sub-machine gun).

Firing subsided after 30 minutes: ammunition ran low and night had fallen. Thick brick walls shielded those inside the jail. Absent radios, the GIs’ rifle fire was un-coordinated. “From the hillside, fire rose and fell in disorganized cascades. More than anything else, people were simply ‘shooting at the jail’.” (Byrum, p. 189).

Several who ventured into “no man’s land”, the street in front of the jail, were wounded. One man inside the jail was badly hurt; he recovered. Most sheriff’s deputies wanted to hunker down and await rescue. Governor McCord mobilized the State Guard, perhaps to scare the GIs into withdrawing. The State Guard never went to Athens. McCord may have feared that Guard units filled with ex-GIs might not fire on other ex-GIs.

At about 2 a.m. on 2 August, the GIs forced the issue. Men from Meigs county threw dynamite sticks and damaged the jail’s porch. The panicked deputies surrendered. GIs quickly secured the building. Paul Cantrell faded into the night, almost having been shot by a GI who knew him, but whose .45 pistol had jammed. Mansfield’s deputies were kept overnight in jail for their own safety. Calm soon returned: the GIs posted guards. The rifles borrowed from the armory were cleaned and returned before sun-up.

VII. The Aftermath: Restoring Democracy in McMinn County

In five precincts free of vote fraud, the GI candidate for Sheriff, Knox Henry, won 1,168 votes to Cantrell’s 789. Other GI candidates won by similar margins.

The GIs did not hate Cantrell. They only wanted honest government. On 2 August, a town meeting set up a three-man governing committee. The regular police having fled, six men were chosen to police Athens; a dozen GIs were sent to police Etowah. In addition, “Individual citizens were called upon to form patrols or guard groups, often led by a GI. …To their credit, however, there is not a single mention of an abuse of power on their behalf.” (Byrum, p. 220).

Once the GI candidates’ victory had been certified, they cleaned-up county government:

  • the jail was fixed;
  • newly-elected officials accepted a $5,000 pay limit;
  • Mansfield supporters who resigned, were replaced.

The general election on 5 November passed quietly. McMinn Countians, having restored the Rule of Law, returned to their daily lives. Pat Mansfield moved back to Georgia. Paul Cantrell set up an auto dealership in Etowah. “Almost everyone who knew Cantrell in the years after the ‘Battle’ agree that he was not bitter about what had happened.” (Byrum, pp. 232-33; see also New York Times, 9 August 1946, p. 8).

VIII. The Outsiders’ Response

The Battle of Athens made national headlines. Most outsiders’ reports had the errors usual in coverage of large-scale, night-time events. A New York Times editorialist on 3 August savaged the GIs, who:

“…quite obviously – though we hope erroneously – felt that there was no city, county, or State agency to whom they could turn for justice.

… “There is a warning for all of us in the occurrence…and above all a warning for the veterans of McMinn County, who also violated a fundamental principle of democracy when they arrogated to themselves the right of law enforcement for which they had no election mandate. Corruption, when and where it exists, demands reform, and even in the most corrupt and boss-ridden communities there are peaceful means by which reform can be achieved. But there is no substitute, in a democracy, for orderly process.” (NYT, 3 Aug 1946, p. 14.)

The editorialist did not see:

  • McMinn Countians’ many appeals for outside help;
  • some ruthless people only respect force;
  • that it was wrong to equate use of force by evil-doers (Cantrell and Mansfield) with the righteous (the GIs).

The New York Times:

  • never saw that Cantrell and Mansfield’s wholesale election fraud, enforced at gun-point, trampled the Rule of Law;
  • feared citizens’ restoring the Rule of Law by armed force.

Other outsiders, e.g., Time and Newsweek, agreed. (See Time, 12 August 1946, p. 20; Newsweek, 12 Aug 1946, p. 31 and 9 September 1946, p. 38).

The 79th Congress adjourned on 2 August 1946, when the Battle of Athens ended. However, Representative John Jennings, Jr., from Tennessee decried:

  • McMinn County’s sorry situation under Cantrell and Mansfield;
  • the Justice Department’s repeated failures to help the McMinn Countians.

Jennings was delighted that “…at long last decency and honesty, liberty and law have returned to the fine county of McMinn…”. (Congressional Record, House; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1946; Appendix, Volume 92, Part 13, p. A4870.)

IX. The Lessons of Athens

Those who took up arms in Athens, Tennessee:

  • wanted honest elections, a cornerstone of our Constitutional order;
  • had repeatedly tried to get Federal or State election monitors;
  • used armed force so as to minimize harm to the law-breakers;
  • showed little malice to the defeated law-breakers;
  • restored lawful government.

The Battle of Athens clearly shows:

  • how Americans can and should lawfully use armed force;
  • why the Rule of Law requires unrestricted access to firearms;
  • how civilians with military-type firearms can beat the forces of “law and order”.

Dictators believe that public order is more important than the Rule of Law. However, Americans reject this idea. Criminals can exploit for selfish ends, the use armed force to restore the Rule of Law. But brutal political repression – as practiced by Cantrell and Mansfield – is lethal to many. An individual criminal can harm a handful of people. Governments alone can brutalize thousands, or millions.

Since 1915, officials of seven governments “gone bad” have committed genocide, murdering at least 56 million persons, including millions of children. “Gun control” clears the way for genocide by giving governments “gone bad” far greater freedom to commit mass murder.

Law-abiding McMinn Countians won the Battle of Athens because they were not hamstrung by “gun control”. McMinn Countians showed us when citizens can and should use armed force to support the Rule of Law. We are all in their debt.

This is a bare bones summary of a major report in JPFO’s Firearms Sentinel (January 1995). To learn how the gutsy people of Athens, Tennessee did the Framers of the Constitution proud, send $3 to JPFO, 2872 South Wentworth Avenue; Milwaukee, WI 53207; and request the January 1995 Firearms Sentinel. This document is from: chiliast@ideasign.com (A.K. Pritchard)


Press reports on the Battle of Athens and Chronology — From contemporary sources.

X. Videos

Source: http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm

9/11 Meme Collection


A meme collection concerning 9/11 WTC and 9/11 Benghazi for you to add to your collection

Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God! O men of blood, depart from me! They speak against you with malicious intent; your enemies take your name in vain. Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you? I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies. (Psalm 139:19–22)

In loving memory of those who lost their lives on 9/11 in the attacks on American soil as well as those at Benghazi. Loving thoughts and prayers going out to the families who lost their loved ones on these terrible days of senseless violence. May those families somehow find solace even as they grieve each day of each year missing those they love and lost. My prayer for our nation, her people and the people of the world, is that the islamic barbarians and NWO devils who brought this evil upon us all be soon ended and wiped from the face of the Earth once and for all eternity.

On Friday, July 29, 2016. It was revealed that the FBI does not actually have any evidence against the Bundy’s or their co-defendants.


Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore dropped a bombshell today in the Bundy case.

Citing personal anonymous sources, Fiore confirmed that the Federal government has no actual case against rancher Cliven Bundy, or any of the other defendants in the 2014 Bunkerville standoff case.

A lead FBI agent working with the prosecutor in the Bundy case revealed information about the case on Friday, July 29, 2016. It was revealed that the FBI does not actually have any evidence against the Bundy’s or their co-defendants.

The main reason that the judge has sealed the evidence is because there is none!

The only evidence in this case is from Facebook. There is no actual evidence of a crime being committed in Nevada.

The plan is to delay the trial for as long as possible so that the defendant’s spirit gets broken. The FBI is counting on these regular people needing to be home to take care of their families.

Being incarcerated for over six months is taking it’s toll on the cowboys and their families. Their parents, spouses and children are having to deal with the effects of not having the major breadwinner in the home. Some of them are said to be homeless.

It has been revealed that Joseph O’Shaughnessy was threatened with never seeing his 80 year old mother alive again.

Is it any wonder that these good Patriots are settling for making deals and plea bargains. The actions of the FBI are coercing the patriots to flip on the Bundy’s, as well as make up stories in order to straighten out their home situations.

Theses tactics make people believe they are in trouble, and could spend over 100 years in prison, when they haven’t done anything to warrant this, at all.

“However, when you have an authoritarian agent terrorizing you, and trained to do so,” Fiore explains, “one can become traumatized and cooperate believing that is the only way out.”

These American citizens are being held hostage in jail with no actual evidence. They are just hoping to break them into submission. They have sealed evidence from the press and the American people. They are frightening innocent men into taking plea bargains.

This is the country we have become. These tactics are against the very fabric of our law. Would you be able to handle this if one of your family members were locked up under these circumstances?

This must stop! The government is out of control and running as if they are above the law!

The Americans Are Coming!

View Video Here
https://vimeo.com/177442679/71ac6086a9

http://redoubtnews.com/blog/2016/08/03/fiore-reveals-bombshell-bundy-case/

Mohamed Biker and Boxing Clubs Promise To Conquer Your Country For Allah


It is past time to crush these Ottoman Headcutters.
DEATH TO MOHAMEDANS AND DEATH TO ISLAM
This is of one of the German biker gangs who have promised to, working in coalition with other Muslim groups, take over Europe. While European men have been sissifying themselves trying to become like women and the women have been trying to become like men, these Muslim gangs are literally preparing themselves for an aggressive, long, existential struggle to conquer Germany for Allah and Islam. https://www.facebook.com/americanbikers/videos/997459430343227/

muslim majority has no minority

Hey mohamed.
Stop singing it and start bringing it. I ain’t got all day.
CAIR Joins With Black Lives Matter And Calls For Islamic Revolution In The USA (Video) http://gopthedailydose.com/2016/05/06/cair-joins-black-lives-matter-calls-islamic-revolution-usa-video/

CAIR Leader Arrested in Major Child Sex Trafficking Ring Bust
“These are very dangerous people and they are after our children.”
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/cair-leader-arrested-major-child-sex-trafficking-ring-bust

Islamic State in France: “The French must die by the thousands”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/05/islamic-state-in-france-the-french-must-die-by-the-thousands

CONFIRMED: 117 of Obama’s Released Gitmo Detainees Returned to Terrorism So Far http://www.jewsnews.co.il/2016/02/25/confirmed-117-of-obamas-released-gitmo-detainees-returned-to-terrorism-so-far/

OUTRAGEOUS Feds Released Nearly 20K Criminal Aliens in 2015; 200 Convicted of Murder


As seen on Happening Now

Illegal Immigrant Goes Free After Fatal DUI Crash, May Now Be in Honduras

124 Illegal Immigrants Released by Obama Admin Later Charged With Murder


Lawmakers are grilling Obama administration officials on why Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has released more than 86,000 criminal aliens in the past three years.

The House Oversight Committee hearing comes after the release of statistics for 2015, which show that ICE released 19,723 criminal illegal immigrants, rather than deporting them.

The more than 64,000 convictions include 196 that were homicide-related, 216 for kidnapping, more than 600 sex offenses and more than 800 robberies, Fox News chief congressional correspondent Mike Emanuel reported.

ICE releases nearly 20,000 criminal aliens in 2015.The Center for Immigration Studies reports that those released totaled more than 8,000 convictions for violent crimes.

ICE releases illegal criminals 20000 feds 2015

The map above shows the releases state by state, with California and Texas leading the way.

Critics say the highest levels of the Obama administration are to blame for the lax policies.

“The law is crystal clear. You are making these discretionary choices in releasing these people out into the public and they’re committing more crimes. I don’t understand why you don’t deport them,” said committee chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah).

Emanuel said lawmakers are scheduled to hear from family members of those killed by illegal immigrants.

At the hearing, ICE director Sarah Saldana pushed back, arguing that the issue stems from countries like Haiti refusing to take back their criminals.

Saldana said it’s “absolutely unforgivable” to suggest that ICE law enforcement agents are choosing to put criminals back on the streets.

Watch Emanuel’s report above.

Last night on The O’Reilly Factor, Bill discussed the ongoing problem with Rep. Trey Gowdy, who chaired a House hearing last week on the issue.

O’Reilly asked Gowdy about the status of Kate’s Law, which the host proposed last year after the murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco.

Watch the interview below.


CA Cops: Illegal Immigrant with 4 Prior Arrests Charged in Fatal Sex Attack

Former Border Patrol Officer: U.S. Heroin Epidemic Fueled by Illegal Immigration

Father of Man Killed by Illegal Immigrant: San Fran Sheriff ‘Belongs in Jail’

New Security Concerns After Syrian Refugees Reach Texas Border


http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/04/28/feds-released-nearly-20k-criminal-aliens-2015-200-convicted-murder

WERE MUSLIM REFUGEES RESETTLED IN YOUR TOWN IN 2015? We’ve Got The Surprising List


By 100% FED Up – Feb 27, 2016

STATE AND CITY REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 2015 STATE ~ TOTALS  76,972 

MUZZY WEFARE SCUMBAGS

AK Anchorage 125

AL Mobile 125

AR Springdale 10

AZ Glendale 895
AZ Phoenix 1,459
AZ Tucson 935

CA Anaheim 175
CA Fullerton 10
CA Garden Grove 150
CA Glendale 1,420
CA Los Angeles 490
CA Los Gatos 144
CA Modesto 250
CA Oakland 615
CA Sacramento 1,276
CA San Bernardino 65
CA San Diego 3,103
CA San Francisco 5
CA San Jose 142
CA Turlock 120
CA Walnut Creek 90

ONE MUSLIM FAMILY MOOCHING OFF U

CO Colorado Springs 138
CO Denver 1,690
CO Greeley 150
CT Bridgeport 100
CT Hartford 285
CT New Haven 205
DC Washington 15
DE Wilmington 5

FL Clearwater 200
FL Delray Beach 95
FL Doral 160
FL Jacksonville 895
FL Miami 1,056
FL Miami Springs 133
FL Naples 115
FL North Port 30
FL Orlando 360
FL Palm Springs 150
FL Pensacola 20
FL Plantation 75
FL Riviera Beach 50
FL Tallahassee 50
FL Tampa 660

pope leo built this wall to fend off muslim pirates

GA Atlanta 2,100
GA Savannah 100
GA Stone Mountain 685

HI Honolulu 15
IA Cedar Rapids 55
IA Des Moines 585
ID Boise 720
ID Twin Falls  300
IL Aurora 190
IL Chicago 1,595
IL Moline 200
IL Rockford 300
IL Wheaton 2,660
IN Fort Wayne 200
IN Indianapolis 1,285

KS Garden City 80
KS Kansas City 200
KS Wichita 510
KY Bowling Green 310
KY Lexington 410
KY Louisville 990
KY Owensboro 135

barry calls it immigration i call it invasion

 

LA Baton Rouge 125
LA Lafayette 30
LA Metairie 185
MA Boston 300
MA Framingham 8
MA Jamaica Plain 100
MA Lowell 275
MA South Boston 260
MA Springfield 230
MA Waltham 10
MA West Springfield 340
MA Worcester 443

MD Baltimore 775
MD GlenBurnie 150
MD Rockville 39
MD Silver Spring 845
ME Portland 350

MI Ann Arbor 80
MI Battle Creek 140
MI Clinton Township 650
MI Dearborn 640
MI Grand Rapids 740
MI Lansing 617
MI Troy 1,215

MN Minneapolis 730
MN Richfield 340
MN Rochester 130
MN Saint Paul 695
MN St. Cloud  215
MO Columbia 140
MO Kansas City 540
MO Saint Louis 725
MO Springfield 75
MS Biloxi 5
MS Jackson 20

NC Charlotte 655
NC Durham 380
NC Greensboro 385
NC High Point 405
NC New Bern 165
NC Raleigh 475
NC Wilmington 80

ND Bismarck 45
ND Fargo 270
ND Grand Forks 90
NE Lincoln 335
NE Omaha 990
NH Concord 245
NH Manchester 445
NJ Camden 100
NJ East Orange 6
NJ Elizabeth 300
NJ Jersey City 506

NM Albuquerque 220
NV Las Vegas 640
NY Albany 360
NY Amityville 20
NY Binghamton 40
NY Brooklyn 55
NY Buffalo 1,442
NY New York 240
NY Rochester 643
NY Syracuse 1,030
NY Utica 410

OH Akron 575
OH Cincinnati 140
OH Cleveland 510
OH Cleveland Heights 190
OH Columbus 1,300
OH Dayton 210
OH Toledo 40
OK Oklahoma City 170
OK Tulsa 395
OR Portland 995

PA Allentown 95
PA Erie 625
PA Harrisburg 200
PA Lancaster 480
PA Philadelphia 750
PA Pittsburgh 470
PA Roslyn 20
PA Scranton 150

thomas-jefferson-on-immigration

PR San Juan 5
RI Providence 210
SC Columbia 160
SC Spartanburg 220
SD Huron 90
SD Sioux Falls 490
TN Chattanooga 85
TN Knoxville 190
TN Memphis 200
TN Nashville 1,225

TX Abilene 200
TX Amarillo 442
TX Austin 930
TX Corpus Christi 5
TX Dallas 1,765
TX El Paso 35
TX Fort Worth 1,503
TX Houston 2,605
TX San Antonio 750

UT Salt Lake City 1,126
VA Arlington 500
VA Charlottesville 250
VA Falls Church 450
VA Fredericksburg 120
VA Harrisonburg 140
VA Newport News 300
VA Richmond 243
VA Roanoke 177
VT Colchester 325

WA Kent 985
WA Richland 230
WA Seattle 714
WA Spokane 510
WA Tacoma 276
WA Vancouver 127
WI Green Bay 20
WI Madison 90
WI Milwaukee 890
WI Oshkosh 135
WI Sheboygan 35
WV Charleston 50

TOTALS  76,972

Read more about where these so-called refugees came from: Welcoming America Watch 

http://100percentfedup.com/were-muslim-refugees-resettled-in-your-town-in-2015-find-out-here/

 

Globalists Continue To Push The Lie That Treaties Are Binding Upon The United States Citizens: Treaties Can Be Nullified By States Or Statutes & Obama Removed From Office!


Our Senate and President (not to mention that he is a usurper) lack lawful authority to enter into a treaty that conflicts with The Constitution so even signed and ratified it would not be a valid treaty.

Reblogged from Political Vel Craft dated July 2012

The following qualifies as one of the greatest lies the globalists continue to push upon the American people. That lie is: “Treaties supersede the U.S. Constitution“.

The Second follow-up lie is this one: “A treaty, once passed, cannot be set aside”. HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution. 2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last, 3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you’ve read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone — anyone — claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth. “This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.” – Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution? Keep reading. The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,

“… No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, “This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land…’

“There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result…

“It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See:Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. – pgs 500-519).

“In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article VI. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined.”

Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question! At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that,

“The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent.”

Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it. The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:

“This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument.”

The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIESDO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT !!! CASE CLOSED. Now we must let our elected “representatives” in Washington and the State legislatures know that we no longer believe the BIG LIE… we know that we are not bound by unconstitutional Treaties, Executive Orders, Presidential Directives, and other such treasonous acts.

[Note: the above information was taken from Aid & Abet Police Newsletter, with limited revision. P.O. Box 8712, Phoenix, Arizona. Acknowledgment given to Claire Kelly, for her good assistance and in depth treaty research. The use of this information is not to be construed as endorsement of Aid & Abet Police Newsletter. Claire Kelly is a trusted and knowledgeable friend. – CDR]

__________________________________________

Here’s what Thomas Jefferson said on the right to renounce treaties:

“Compacts then, between a nation and a nation, are obligatory on them as by the same moral law which obliges individuals to observe their compacts. There are circumstances, however, which sometimes excuse the non-performance of contracts between man and man; so are there also between nation and nation. When performance, for instance, becomes impossible, non-performance is not immoral; so if performance becomes self-destructive to the party, the law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others”.

pg 317 – “The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” A. Koch & Wm. Peden, Random House 1944, renewed 1972. Jefferson also said in a letter to Wilson C. Nicholas on Sept. 7, 1803, Ibid. pg 573

“Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction [interpretation]. I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty making power as boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.” ______________________________________________________________Further evidence:

Excerpt from a letter from U.S. Senator, Arlen Specter, (R. Penn.) to constituent, November 3, 1994.

“Dear Mr. Neely:”Thank you for contacting my office regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. … I have signed on as a cosponsor of Senator Bradley’s resolution [SR 70, which urges the president to seek the advice and consent of the Senate for ratification] because I believe that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child is an appropriate step in the direction of promoting the well-being of children throughout the world. [he goes on to mention concerns that the treaty would subjugate familial and parental responsibility to an international entity, which he denies] “… Secondly, the Convention would not override the U.S. Constitution; rather, as in the case of any treaty, any provision that conflicts with our Constitution would be void in our country… “

[CDR Note: It is our belief that Arlen Specter would not have been as truthful regarding Constitutional Supremacy over treaties if he had a clue that this letter to a constituent would have found its way into the hands or eyes of the public.]

_________________________________________________

Logical deduction:      No law or treaty supersedes the Supreme Law of the Land.  ‘Supreme’… meaning ‘highest or greatest’.  What is higher than highest or greater than greatest, other than our Creator?  The Constitution acknowledges our God-given, unalienable rights, and secures those rights in that acknowledgement.         The Constitution gives the US Senate authority to ratify treaties with other nations. Americans have been propagandized into believing that those treaties become the supreme law of the land superseding the Constitution. Let’s examine this deception closely and dispel the myth once and for all. Article VI of the Constitution states:

Clause 2 – “This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution [of any state] or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.”Clause 3 – “The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executives and judicial officers, both of the United States and the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation to support this Constitution .”

Laws made in pursuance of this Constitution are laws which are made within the strict and limited confines of the Constitution itself. No federal, state, or international law, rule or bureaucratic regulation and no state constitution can supersede B or be repugnant to B this Constitution.

Treaties made under the authority of the United States… the United States (federal government) was authorized by and on behalf of the people and in pursuance of this Constitution to enter into certain treaties with other governments. The United States (federal government) obtains its authority solely from the Constitution. It would be ludicrous to think that it has the power to circumvent (via treaties) that which grants it its authority.

In Clause 3, it is made clear that every elected official, both federal and state, is bound by oath to support this Constitution. Who can rightly, and genuinely claim to be given the power to destroy that which they are elected and sworn to uphold?

The powers granted by the Constitution cannot sanely be construed to provide the authority to usurp, pre-empt or eradicate it.       The U.S. Supreme Court as cited above correctly ruled that the supremacy of the Constitution overrides treaties. It should be noted that if any Court, be it a State, Federal or the U.S. Supreme Court, should ever rule otherwise, the decision would be repugnant to the Constitution and the ruling would be null and void.

The answer to this question is self-evident.

The Constitution authorizes the United States to enter into treaties with other nations B the word Anation@ although not explicit, is certainly implied. The United Nations is an Organization – a Global Corporate Bureaucracy.The ‘experts’ in international law, commerce, banking, environment, etc.; and a cadre of alleged conservative / Christian-conservative leaders — lawyer, Dame of Malta, Phyllis Schlafly being a prime example — have been spewing forth propaganda to instill and further the myth of ‘treaty-supremacy’ for decades.

Their ‘expertise’ is an illusion created apparently with hopes to instill a sense of inferiority in the ‘common man’ (their term) so we will all defer to their superior intelligence. Let’s not go there. Here’s a perfect example of ‘expert’ propaganda on the supremacy question: On April 11, 1952, Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles (cfr), speaking before the American Bar Association in Louisville, Kentucky said…

“Treaties make international law and also they make domestic law. Under our Constitution, treaties become the supreme law of the land…. Treaty law can override the Constitution. Treaties, for example, …can cut across the rights given the people by their constitutional Bill of Rights.”

Mr. Dulles is confused about the People’s rights. To repeat an earlier statement of fact: the Constitution doesn’t ‘give’ us rights. The Constitution acknowledges and secures our inherent, Creator-endowed rights. What Creator gives, no man can take away. The Dulles brothers worked (lied) long and hard to firmly establish the treaty-supremacy myth. And they realized it would have to be done by deceit — propaganda. Admittedly by propaganda.

“There is no indication that American public opinion, for example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit American membership in it. In other words, time – a long time – will be needed before world government is politically feasible… This time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country…”

Allen W. Dulles (cfr) from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 (New York: The Foreign Policy Association., Sept.-Oct., 1946) pg 46.      The question of “nationhood” in reference to the United Nations seems to have been addressed by the errant Congress.  A quick fix apparently took place in the U.S. Senate on March 19, 1970. According to the Anaheim (Cal) Bulletin, 4-20-1970, the Senate ratified a resolution recognizing the United Nations Organization as a sovereign nation. That would be tantamount to recognizing General Motors as a sovereign nation. Are we beginning to get the picture? Case Closed Sweet Liberty

Second Important Article About The Treaty Myth.

Treaties do not override the Constitution.
By Don Fotheringham In anticipation that our president may sign one or more treaties that conflict with the U.S. Constitution’s limited grant of power, several voices of alarm are contending that a treaty can override, or in effect amend, our Constitution. Although that view has gained some currency, it is a myth that contradicts the intent of those who framed the Constitution. And it violates any reasonable interpretation of that document. Origin of the Myth The frightful idea that U.S. treaties with foreign nations supercede the Constitution has been regularly promoted since the Eisenhower era.
 divider gif
1 It was given a big boost in 1952 when Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, a founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), made the following statement:
divider gif
2 … congressional laws are invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution, whereas treaty laws can override the Constitution. Treaties, for example, can take powers away from Congress and give them to the President; they can take powers from the states and give them to the Federal Government, or to some international body and they can cut across the rights given the people by the Constitutional Bill of Rights.
 divider gif
3 It would be hard to find a more preposterous assertion. Sadly, however, many citizens have been led to believe that treaties do override the Constitution. Could anyone really think our founding fathers spent four months in convention, limiting the size, power and scope of government, and then provided for their work to be destroyed by one lousy treaty?
 divider gif
But one might object, what about Article VI? Article VI establishes the supremacy of U.S. laws and treaties made within the bounds of the Constitution. It is called the Supremacy Clause, because it places federal laws and treaties that are made pursuant to the Constitution above state constitutions, laws. and treaties. Some Important History This was needed because, contrary to their agreement under the Articles of Confederation, certain states had violated their trust and entered into treaties with foreign powers.
 divider gif
During the convention,
Madison said: “Experience had evinced a constant tendency in the States to encroach on federal authority; to violate national Treaties, to infringe the rights and interests of each other.”
divider gif
4 State-made pacts often conflicted with peace and trade treaties wanted by the Confederation Congress for the benefit of all thirteen states, making it hard for Congress to consummate better agreements with other nations. This also led to fierce contention between the states in their effort to monopolize the import of goods from Europe and the Indian tribes. But more serious dangers arose in matters of security, for should one state be at war with a foreign power while a sister state honors its peace agreement with the same enemy, the security of the entire Confederation would be threatened.
divider gif
5 In an effort to head off such dangers, the Confederation Congress frequently attempted to nullify
state-made treaties in the state courts (there were no federal courts). But as might be expected, the state judges ruled inevitably in favor of their own states, pursuant to the state laws and constitutions.
divider gif
The 1787 Convention corrected that problem by making certain only federal treaties would be recognized as valid. In this light, it is not hard to understand why paragraph two of Article VI is worded as follows: This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. Upon ratification of the Constitution, the state treaties were nullified.
divider gif
Thereafter, only federal treaties were recognized as supreme, regardless of any remaining state provisions to the contrary. Moreover, under the new Constitution the founders established a Supreme Court, granting it original jurisdiction over treaty controversies, and thereby removing from state judges jurisdiction over treaty cases. In addition to quelling strife among the states, Article VI accomplished a major objective of the Convention, mainly that of placing the United States in a position to speak to the world with one voice.
 divider gif
United States treaties are created when proposed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The power of the President and the Senate, in their treaty-making capacity, was never intended to be a power greater than the Constitution. Citizens who met in the state ratifying conventions (1787 to 1790) to examine with great care the provisions of the proposed Constitution had a correct understanding of the Supremacy Clause.
divider gif
During the ratifying debates, James Madison answered questions regarding the new national charter and commented on the extent of the treaty-making power under Article VI: “I do not conceive that power is given to the President and Senate to dismember the empire, or to alienate any great, essential right. I do not think the whole legislative authority have this power. The exercise of the power must be consistent with the object of its delegation.”
 divider gif
6 In the same discussion
Madison said: “Here, the supremacy of a treaty is contrasted with the supremacy of the laws of the states. It cannot be otherwise supreme.” That is, a treaty cannot in any other manner or situation be supreme. Thomas Jefferson: “I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of treaty- making to be boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.”
divider gif
But we do have a Constitution. Its life and viability depend entirely on the small number of citizens who 1) understand the document, and 2) who equally understand the forces at work to destroy it. At this point enough time has passed, and enough false teachings have been promulgated, to cause modern Americans to fall for the treaty power ploy. It is not surprising that John Foster Dulles, a ranking member of the CFR, should in 1952 circulate the treaty-power heresy that yet prevails.
divider gif
It is time for serious reflection on the words of Edmond Burke, “The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.” Those who seek to preserve the sovereignty of the United States must work energetically to expose the Dulles delusion — the ridiculous idea that treaties have intrinsic powers greater than the Constitution.
 divider gif
1 In decades immediately prior to the Dulles speech, Supreme Court decisions had already begun to enunciate the idea (see, for example, Missouri v. Holland in 1920 and United States v. Pink in 1942).
 divider gif
2 Dulles actually made this statement during a speech in Louisville on April 2, 1952, shortly before Eisenhower appointed him Secretary of State.
 divider gif
3 Quoted by Frank E. Holman, Story of the Bricker Amendment, (New York Committee for Constitutional Government, Inc., 1954), pp. 14, 15.
divider gif
4 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, Farrand, Vol. I, p. 164.
 divider gif
5 Benjamin Franklin’s Plan of Union, America, Vol. 3, p. 47.
 divider gif
6 Debates on the Federal Constitution, Jonathan Elliot, ed., second edition, Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1907, Vol. III, p. 514. Robert Welch University
divider gif
Founding Fathers

divider gif

Related articles:

Border Patrol Agents Are Being Ordered To Stand Down By Obama Administration


Published on Feb 4, 2016

Video Transcript:

Trey Gowdy and the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing Thursday about the Obama administration’s inability to secure the southern border.

The Obama administration has revived the maligned illegal immigrant “catch-and-release” policy of the Bush years, ordering Border Patrol agents not to bother arresting and deporting many new illegal immigrants, the head of the agents’ labor union revealed Thursday.
 
Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, told Congress that Homeland Security was embarrassed by the number of illegal immigrants not showing up for their deportation hearings, but instead of cracking down on the immigrants, the department ordered agents not to arrest them in the first place — meaning they no longer need to show up for court.
immigration senate hasnt read
 
Mr. Judd said the releases are part of President Obama’s “priorities” program, which orders agents to worry chiefly about criminals, national security risks and illegal immigrants who came into the U.S. after Jan. 1, 2014. Mr. Judd said illegal immigrants without serious criminal convictions have learned that by claiming they came before 2014 — without even needing to show proof — they can be released immediately rather than being arrested.
 
“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions,” Mr. Judd testified to the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “That fact is well known in other countries.”
 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol, did not deny Mr. Judd’s claim but said agents have been instructed to prioritize whom they arrest.
 
“The Border Patrol’s resources are most effectively focused on the border — prioritizing the apprehension and removal of individuals attempting to unlawfully enter the United States,” said Michael Friel, a CBP spokesman. “Our removal numbers reflect that. Border Patrol agents are issuing notices to appear, consistent with law, regulation and the department’s enforcement priorities.”
deport illegals no moslem refugees
 
The White House declined to comment. Spokesman Josh Earnest said he hadn’t seen the testimony.
 
Mr. Obama has pushed for Congress to grant citizenship rights to most illegal immigrants, but after Capitol Hill failed to deliver he took action on his own to carve most illegal immigrants out of danger of deportation.
 
He and Mr. Johnson said deportation and border agents should worry chiefly about dangerous immigrants and new arrivals. Those with deeper ties to the U.S. who have not amassed criminal records should be passed over, Mr. Obama said.
 
Mr. Judd said there are holes in that policy. He said agents have been ordered not to ask for proof when an immigrant says he or she has been in the U.S. since 2013, and migrants have quickly learned to assert that claim without having to worry about having it challenged.
thomas jefferson on immigration
 
He said on the northern border, where he is stationed, agents arrested an illegal immigrant who had recently been charged with felony domestic violence. He had to be released because he hadn’t gone to trial yet, so he hadn’t been convicted.
 
“Under the law, he should have been set up for removal proceedings, but under the policy he was let go,” Mr. Judd testified. “And he was let go even though he first proved that he cared so little about our laws that he entered the United States illegally, and once here, he proved further disdain by getting arrested for a serious violent act against another.”
 
Mr. Judd was testifying at a hearing called to examine the surge of illegal immigrants — unaccompanied children and families traveling together — who have overwhelmed agencies. After peaking in early summer 2014, the numbers dropped. But 2016 is on pace for a record year.
 
Mr. Judd and Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said criminal cartels are using the families and children to flood the border to distract agents and create chances to smuggle drugs.
 
The cause of the surge is heatedly debated.
 
Immigrant rights advocates said the children and mothers are fleeing horrific violence and should be considered asylum-seekers, not illegal immigrants. The advocates point to spiking homicide rates.
 
El Salvador leads the Western Hemisphere with 103 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Honduras is third worst with a rate of 57 homicides, and Guatemala is fifth worst with 30 per 100,000 people.
 
San Pedro Sula in Honduras recorded 885 homicides out of a population of just less than 800,000 people last year, according to a Mexican nongovernmental organization that tracks the statistics. San Salvador, the capital of El Salvador, recorded 1,918 homicides among its 1.8 million people — a rate of 109 per 100,000.
 
The U.S. city with the highest homicide rate per capita, St. Louis, recorded a rate of 59 per 100,000 inhabitants.
 
Wendy Young, president of Kids in Need of Defense, which handles cases of children applying for protection in the U.S., detailed horrific stories of children being enslaved by gangs, tracked down if they try to leave and being killed as retribution for crossing the gangs.
 
She recounted the story of one 14-year-old girl who was abducted by a gang and gang-raped for four days before she escaped. Her family fled to another location inside the country, but the gang tracked her down, and her family sent her north to the U.S.
 
“These children are doing the only thing they can — they are running for their lives,” Ms. Young said.
 
Mr. Judd said children wanting to claim asylum can go to a border entry point and present themselves to CBP officers. Instead, the cartels deliver them to some of the remote parts of the border before sending them to find Border Patrol agents, keeping the agents occupied while the cartels smuggle their goods, the agent said.
 
Border Patrol agents used to interview the children and ask them why they came, and the overwhelming majority said they believed enforcement was lax and they would be allowed to stay.
 
Ms. Young said the children were likely frightened by agents and officers in uniforms, so the information they gave was not to be trusted.
 
Regardless, Mr. Judd said, agents have now been banned from asking those questions.
 
⦁ Dave Boyer contributed to this report.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Published on Feb 4, 2016

Video Transcript:

Trey Gowdy and the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing Thursday about the Obama administration’s inability to secure the southern border.

TREY GOWDY: Secretary [Jeh] Johnson testified before the appropriations committee: “The message we are sending to people crossing the border is you will be sent home.” Either that message has not been communicated or it has not been received because the border cross, the unlawful border crossings continue.

According to U.S. Border Patrol, the Obama administration is ordering the release of illegal immigrants, effectively allowing them to stay.

BRANDON JUDD: The willful failure to show up for court appearances by persons that were arrested and released by the Border Patrol has become an extreme embarrassment for the Department of Homeland Security. It has been so embarrassing that DHS and the U.S. Attorney’s office has come up with a new policy. Simply put, the new policy makes mandatory the release, without an NTA, of any person arrested by the Border Patrol for being in the country illegally, as long as they do not have a previous felony arrest conviction and as long as they claim to have been continuously in the United States since January of 2014. The operative word in this policy is “claim.” The policy does not require the person to prove they have been here which is the same burden placed on them during deportation proceedings. Instead, it simply requires them to claim to have been here since January of 2014. Not only do we release these individuals that by law are subject to removal proceedings, we do it without any means of tracking their whereabouts. In essence, we pull these persons out of the shadows and into the light just to release them right back to those same shadows from whence they came. Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions. There are little or no consequences for breaking the laws and that fact is well known in other countries. If government agencies like DHS or CBP are allowed to bypass Congress by legislating through policy, we might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether. In the absence of consequences and enforceable laws innocent people are hurt, criminals are rewarded, chaos abounds, and cartels reap huge financial benefits.

Are you concerned that the Border Patrol is being prevented from doing its job? Share and comment below.

%d bloggers like this: