End Times and Current Events
May 18, 2021, 10:10:27 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Steps toward a North American Union

Shoutbox
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Steps toward a North American Union  (Read 15188 times)
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #330 on: February 19, 2015, 03:09:01 pm »

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jacoby-republicans-immigration-republicans-trap-20150219-story.html
Op-Ed Obama set the immigration trap, and the GOP walked in
2/18/15

On Monday, a federal judge in Texas blocked President Obama's latest executive actions on immigration. This is a short-term win for Republicans, who rightly believe the president lacked the authority to act unilaterally. But it does nothing to change the underlying political dynamic — Republicans have won a battle, but they're still at risk of losing the immigration war.

The contrast between Democrats and Republicans is stark and getting starker every day. A Democratic president is fighting to shield unauthorized immigrants from deportation. If it weren't for the court order, an additional 600,000 Dreamers who came to the U.S. illegally as children could have applied for legal status starting Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress headed into their sixth week trying to pass a measure that would pave the way for deporting not just the Dreamers, but all 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

It's a contrast sure to haunt the GOP through November 2016 and beyond.

The irony, particularly bitter for Republicans, is that it's not an accurate picture of the party. Most GOP representatives in Congress support relief for Dreamers, and many, perhaps most, support legal status for unauthorized immigrants.

But congressional Republicans are caught in a trap. They're fighting for a policy most of them don't believe in as a way, they think, to strike back at the president — but in the end they're hurting themselves more than they could ever hurt Obama.

Ten years ago, when the GOP-controlled House of Representatives passed a draconian immigration enforcement bill named for Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), most Republican lawmakers supported its provisions criminalizing immigrants and opening the door to mass deportations.

But the GOP has undergone a sea change since 2005: a slow, steady, bottom-up rethinking of the immigration issue. Today, not just national figures like Jeb Bush but most rank-and-file Republicans in Congress understand the need for far-reaching immigration reform. Last June, when reform advocates conducted an informal whip count, they found more than half of House Republicans prepared to vote for a path to legal status for some unauthorized immigrants.

So how did Republicans get trapped? Obama set the snare, but the GOP walked in of its own free will.

Obama surely knew that the immigration executive orders he issued in November would infuriate Republicans. He could have sent the same proposal up to Capitol Hill as a bill: legal status rather than citizenship for some but not all of those here illegally. That might just have passed if it had come up for a vote last year.

But that would have taken immigration off the table as a wedge issue, leveling the playing field between Republicans and Democrats. So instead, the president acted unilaterally, knowing the GOP would see that as a brazen abuse of authority — a violation the party had to fight, no matter what the consequences.

Republicans are right: The president overreached. But being right isn't always enough in politics — you also have to win the war of perceptions. And right now, the GOP is losing that war — big time. Americans aren't hearing the message about the president's abuse of authority. They're hearing the GOP say it hates immigrants.

What can Republicans do? How do they get out of the trap?

Turn the tables on Obama. Come together as a party and pass some constructive immigration measures, then send those bills to the president and let him look like the obstacle to progress.

This wouldn't have to be comprehensive immigration reform. It wouldn't even have to include legal status for unauthorized immigrants. A few small steps to fix the legal immigration system would signal that Republicans know there's a problem and want to be part of solving it — that they recognize the benefits immigrants bring, especially legal immigrants.

An ideal package would start with enforcement, on the border and in the workplace. But it would also include some answers for what's broken. Among the possibilities: streamlined visas for skilled professionals, some relief for produce growers who rely on migrant workers, and something to address the needs of employers in other sectors who depend on less-skilled immigrants to keep their businesses open and growing — perhaps a small temporary-worker program for cities and counties where the economy has bounced back to full employment.

The president would mock all these measures if they landed on his desk alone, without some form of legalization for unauthorized immigrants. But if he vetoed a bill, he'd be the problem — Democrats rather than Republicans would be the Party of No.

Of course, some conservatives on talk radio and elsewhere would also mock a change of course by Republicans — to them, any effort to get out of the trap would betray a lack of resolve. But when the course the party is on isn't working, sticking to it is just foolish, not brave or principled.

Republicans don't need to stand down. What they need to do is fight smarter. The good news: There's a better way to beat the president and vote for what you believe on immigration — to do the right thing and get credit for it from voters looking for lawmakers who can come through with solutions.

Tamar Jacoby, a registered Republican, is president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a national federation of small-business owners in favor of immigration reform.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #331 on: February 24, 2015, 08:43:33 pm »

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/02/the-cave-has-begun
2/24/15
The Cave Has Begun

The cave has begun. Last night, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) started the process of bringing up a standalone bill that would only overturn Obama’s executive amnesty issued last fall. It would leave in place the previous executive amnesty from 2012, DACA.  What Senate Leadership won’t tell you is that the standalone bill is designed to fail. Democrats will block the bill and then Senate Republicans will move either a long-term bill to fully fund Obama’s executive amnesty and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or only a short-term bill to fund Obama’s executive amnesty and DHS. Both are unacceptable options to conservatives.

The McConnell plan is designed to allow Senate Republicans to go back to their constituents saying they voted against executive amnesty, without really having to take a stand against it.

Senator John Thune (R-SD) foreshadowed this charade of a ‘drive by vote’ back in January, when he said, "Obviously we want to give our members an opportunity to vote to express their opposition to the president’s action.”

Don’t be fooled.

The liberal media and liberal Republicans would like for you to believe that they only have two options: get blamed for a partial “shutdown” of DHS or punt the attempt to stop Obama’s executive amnesty to a later date with a short-term bill. However, at this point if liberal Republicans keep funding it one has to ask “at what point does it become a bipartisan amnesty?”

Don’t punt. Republican Leadership should at least have the fortitude to admit they were dishonest with the American people in December. Don’t lie to the American people again and say in a few months time that Republicans will stop the president.

Let’s recap. Leadership claimed in December that by passing the 1,000+ page $1.1 trillion Cromnibus spending bill it would give them the upper hand to stop the president’s executive amnesty. To do this, the Cromnibus would temporarily fund DHS and Obama’s amnesty until February 27. Then the new Congress with a united Republican House and Senate would stop the president’s executive amnesty.

How has that plan worked out?

Congress is a co-equal branch of government. Congress has the power to stop the president’s executive amnesty; it is just a matter of willpower.

Now some Republicans are doing their best to run from their constitutional responsibility and authority to stop the president by outsourcing the conflict to the courts. Let the courts decide. The standard response has become to file a suit against the president and hope the court takes Congress’ side. How well did that work out for Obamacare? Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and the court liberals re-wrote Obamacare in an attempt to make it Constitutional.

Senators Ayotte (R-NH), McCain (R-AZ), and Graham (R-SC) are the latest examples of the “kick it to the court crowd.” They propose Congress fund DHS, and thereby executive amnesty, and then file an amicus brief to the current lawsuit working its way through the appellate courts. The contents of the potential brief will of course argue that the president’s executive order is unconstitutional; however, it will conveniently leave out that Republicans decided to fund said unconstitutional order. Not a winning argument or option.

Republican Leadership has yet to engage in a full court press on Senate Democrats. Just last week rather than ratchet up pressure on Senate Democrats, the Senate recessed for a week-long vacation. McConnell can force Democrats to hold the floor with a de facto talking filibuster and he and his leadership team can passionately take their case to the American people. Asking, “What is more important funding the Department of Homeland Security or social security numbers for illegal immigrants that one court has already ruled is unconstitutional?”

Moving forward, what does this mean? That Reid and Senate Democrats will have a veto over any good conservative policy that is added to must-pass bills. They simply have to filibuster and obstruct until they have their way.  This is why Speaker Boehner and House Republicans must make it clear that they will not blink when they have the law on their side.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #332 on: March 03, 2015, 03:10:40 pm »

Problem.

Reaction.

Solution.

http://news.yahoo.com/boehner-says-u-house-vote-security-bill-source-145318718--business.html
3/3/15
House passes security funding without immigration restrictions

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday voted to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security through Sept. 30 without any immigration restrictions, ending a standoff that had threatened a partial shutdown for the agency.

The House vote sends the $39.7 billion spending measure to President Barack Obama to be signed into law. It no longer contains provisions that previously sought to block Obama's executive orders lifting the threat of deportation against millions of undocumented immigrants.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #333 on: April 07, 2015, 06:38:15 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/u-appeals-court-rejects-challenge-2012-obama-deportation-195018351.html
4/7/15
U.S. appeals court rejects challenge to 2012 Obama deportation relief

(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday rejected a challenge to President Barack Obama's 2012 executive action granting deportation relief to immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children, upholding a lower court's earlier ruling.

A panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the plaintiffs in the case - the state of Mississippi and a group of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers upset by White House directives - had not shown they had been sufficiently harmed by the rule to keep the case alive.

"We conclude that neither the agents nor the state of Mississippi has demonstrated the concrete and particularized injury required to give them standing to maintain this suit," the decision stated.

The ruling comes as the same appellate court prepares to hear the Obama administration's appeal of a challenge to a landmark immigration overhaul unveiled last year that would let up to 4.7 million illegal immigrants stay without threat of deportation.

That overhaul was put on hold in February, when a federal judge in Texas ruled that Obama had failed to give adequate public notice of his plans.

In the case stemming from the 2012 executive action, Mississippi had sought to show it had standing as a plaintiff by arguing illegal immigrants drained state resources, while the ICE agents said they were being forced to violate their oaths to enforce the law.

A federal district court judge had earlier dismissed the case, but had found the ICE agents had standing as plaintiffs.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #334 on: April 07, 2015, 06:46:17 pm »

Illegal immigrant children surge across border at highest rate since last summer’s peak
4/6/15

The second wave of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children has begun, with more than 3,000 of them surging across the Mexican border into the U.S. last month — the highest rate since the peak of last summer’s crisis and a warning that another rough season could be ahead.

Immigration officials warned that they expected another surge as the weather improved. Although the numbers are down some 40 percent compared with last year’s frenetic pace that sparked a political crisis for the Obama administration, fiscal year 2015 is shaping up to mark the second-biggest surge on record.

Authorities report having captured 15,647 children traveling without parents who tried to jump the border in the first six months of the fiscal year. Through this point in 2014, they had apprehended 28,579.

PHOTOS: Masters 2015: Get caught up on PGA Tour WAGs

Just as worrisome is the rate of whole families — usually mothers with young children — who are crossing. So far this fiscal year, authorities have captured 13,911 “family units,” down 30 percent from last year.

“These statistics show that the surge of illegal arrivals from Central America was never really over,” said Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies.

She said the Obama administration and Congress have not taken steps to end the “pull factors.”

PHOTOS: See Obama's biggest White House fails

Among those is the policy that requires children from Central America to be released into the U.S. rather than quickly returned to their home countries. Once released, those children usually fail to appear for deportation proceedings.

The Congressional Research Service told Congress in late March that 62 percent of the children failed to show up for their cases before immigration judges from July through February. All of them were ordered deported, but the workload of officials made deportation unlikely in most cases.

The Obama administration last year initially blamed bad economies and growing gang violence in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala for sparking the surge, but later acknowledged that human traffickers were marketing the journey by pointing out a loophole in U.S. immigration system that requires non-Mexican children to be released into the U.S. while they await final immigration decisions. That gives them a chance to abscond and disappear into the shadows with the more than 11 million other illegal immigrants in the country.

“Those are pretty bad outcomes for immigration hearings,” Ms. Vaughan said. “Lots of no-shows and few people getting relief. These statistics show that the administration’s response has been a failure.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency that oversees the Border Patrol, didn’t return a message for comment Monday, but Homeland SECURITY spokeswoman Marsha Catron said the Obama administration has poured manpower and resources into trying to SECURE the border and vowed to update plans “to ensure we are as prepared as possible for any potential scenario.”

She said agencies now have more detention beds to hold families, which means they can be deported at a faster pace. She also pointed to a new PROGRAM that will allow Central American children to apply from their home countries to join their parents in the U.S., including those who are gaining tentative legal status under Mr. Obama’s deportation amnesty.

“We will remain vigilant and CONTINUE working aggressively to address underlying causes of unlawful migration,” Ms. Catron said.

More steps needed

Analysts have been debating what other steps are needed to stem another surge this year.

Story Continues →



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/6/illegal-immigrant-children-surge-across-border-at-/#ixzz3Wg60B65t
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #335 on: September 22, 2015, 03:48:33 pm »

Child migrants entering U.S. rises in August
9/21/15
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4703205,00.html

Children fleeing Mexico and Central America and arriving at the southwestern U.S. border accelerated in August, according to government data released on Monday, with 4,632 apprehended last month.
 
According to U.S. Border Patrol figures, the arrivals of undocumented children 17 and younger trying to get into the United States spiked last month.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #336 on: October 24, 2015, 12:12:49 pm »

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/23/hurricane-patricia-could-spell-massive-ongoing-border-crisis-for-u-s/
HURRICANE PATRICIA COULD SPELL MASSIVE ONGOING BORDER CRISIS FOR U.S.
10/23/15

The imminent landfall of Hurricane Patricia on Mexican shores could spark a massive border crisis for the U.S., as Mexicans flee the storm and its predicted devastating effects. The damaged infrastructure will likely continue to feed waves of U.S.-bound migrants for years to come. A look back at 1998’s Hurricane Mitch and its destruction in Honduras and surrounding nations shows that nearly 3 million people across Central America were left homeless–and an estimated 150,000 Hondurans and Nicaraguans were granted the ability to legally stay in the U.S. by 2003, according to a 2006 comprehensive study published by the University of Houston.

To determine how long the waves of migrants will continue, we must consider the destruction Hurricane Patricia will bring to Mexico’s infrastructure. Looking at such matters through a historical lens provides some insight. Hurricane Mitch, in 1998, destroyed roads vital to struggling economies in Central America. Farms were destroyed, goods could not be delivered and sold. Economic opportunities became virtually non-existent for an already poor peoples. These immigration push factors were discussed in detail by the University of Houston’s Adriana Kugler and Mutlu Yuksel in their 2006 “Effects of Low-Skilled Immigration on U.S. Native, Evidence from Hurricane Mitch.” They wrote:

Hurricane Mitch is estimated to have generated a very high human and material cost. Mitch is estimated to have caused 20,000 deaths and 13,000 injuries; to have left 1.5 million homeless, and to have affected another 2 million in other ways (FAO, 2001). The hurricane also destroyed a large part of these countries’ road networks and social infrastructure, including hospitals and schools. Overall, FAO (2001) estimates that about 28,000 kilometers of roads and 160 bridges were destroyed. According to U.S. Aid, in El Salvador 60% of the paved roads were damaged, and 300 schools and 22 health centers were destroyed or damaged by the hurricane (US Aid, 2004). In addition, Mitch largely destroyed these countries’ crops and flooded agricultural land, reducing future production in the agricultural sector. The share of agriculture in the region’s GDP dropped from 21.2% before the hurricane to 17.8% after Mitch (FAO, 2001). The direct estimated damage to the farming sector inflicted by Mitch was of $960.6 million in Honduras, $264.1 million in Guatemala, $129.8 million in Nicaragua and $60.3 million in El Salvador. Two of the crops most affected were bananas and coffee, on which these countries’ export sector heavily depends on. According to ECLAC, the estimated damage totaled $6,18 billion or about 12% of the Regional GDP, 42% of exports, 67% of gross fixed investment, and 34% of the external debt of these countries. Even before the hurricane hit, the four Central American countries most affected by the hurricane were already among the poorest countries in all of Latin America. For example, the percent of households living below the poverty line reached 73.8%, 65.1%, 53.5% and 48% in Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador the year before the hurricane hit (ECLAC, 2001). Moreover, the hurricane hit the hardest in rural areas and, thus, is likely to have affected mainly individuals already living under or close to the poverty line.

According to the World Bank, the main way in which Central American men responded to the disaster was by migrating North (World Bank, 2001). According to information from Migration Departments in these countries, external migration from Honduras almost tripled and external migration from Nicaragua increased by about 40% (FAO, 2001). In January 1999, Reuters and the New York Times headlines announced “Desperate Hurricane Survivors Push[ing] North to [the] U.S. Border.” In January 1999, Honduran immigration director reported that about 300 Hondurans a day were leaving for the U.S. and visa requests for the U.S. were up 40% from the previous year. According to journalistic accounts many Central Americans crossed through Mexico to get to the U.S., which is reflected by the big rise in the “other than Mexican” apprehensions in the U.S.-Mexico border, which were close to 4,000 in January 1999 (i.e., a record high for a single month). Officials at the border in Brownsville, Texas area reported a 61% increase in the number of Hondurans apprehended after illegally crossing the border during the last three months of 1998. Likewise, in the Laredo, Texas area 583 “other than Mexican” foreigners were apprehended in December 1998 compared to 123 in December 1997.

Breitbart Texas spoke with Border Patrol Agent and National Border Patrol Council Local 2455 President Hector Garza on the matter. Agent Garza stated, “Clearly, there exists a high likelihood for a coming wave of people at our Southwest border. History shows us that we see an increase in crossings from people devastated by natural disasters.”

Agent Garza expressed dismay at the Border Patrol’s parent agency, Customs and Border Protection (CBP). He said, “Our agents haven’t received any advisement or notification of the possible increase in aliens that the Border Patrol is likely soon to be overwhelmed by after Hurricane Patricia. I’ve spoken with the agents we represent and we are all very concerned about the likelihood of such a massive wave of aliens.” Repeated attempts by Breitbart Texas to contact CBP for information were unsuccessful.

Agent Garza said that the transnational criminal organization in Nuevo Laredo, immediately south of the Laredo Sector, is extremely brutal and will find a way to exploit the migrants. Agent Garza did not name the criminal group, but he was referring to Los Zetas. “They will control where aliens can cross and by doing so they will control where Border Patrol applies resources. They will utilize other areas to get narcotics across our border. They will also find a way to exploit the aliens for long-term financial gain. They will  make them into indentured servants.”

Due to the storm’s location and predicted path, the U.S. border could begin to see waves of migrants from the San Diego Sector all the way to the Gulf of Mexico, encompassing, from West to East, the San Diego, El Centro, Yuma, Tucson, El Paso, Big Bend, Del Rio, Laredo, and Rio Grande Valley (RGV) sectors of the U.S.-Mexico border. The San Diego and El Centro Sectors are across the Gulf of California and Baja, thereby a much further trek for any waves of migrants. The Yuma Sector is far too secure and remote. Most of the Tucson Sector is less likely to see massive waves of migrants because it is controlled by the Sinaloa Federation or cartel and is far too valuable as a narcotics corridor for the criminal group to allow large waves of migrants to cross there and bring the increased law enforcement presence that such an increase in illicit border crossings brings. The Mexican cartels that control the regions of the U.S. border in the Del Rio, Laredo, and the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) sectors of Texas–the Gulf and Los Zetas cartels–are most prone to allow the influx and victimize the migrants, however, the migrants would have to cross mountains to get there. The Big Bend Sector, due to its own remoteness and similar factors south of the border in the region, is also unlikely to see massive waves of migrants. In regards to the differences between cartels and the regions they control, the Sinaloa Federation has the ability to organize and prevent their narcotics corridors from being overrun, while the Gulf and Los Zetas cartels are fragmented and fighting each other.

Sylvia Longmire, Breitbart Texas contributing editor, added valuable insight into the topic. She said, “We are likely to see more numbers at the ports of entry rather than in rural or remote desert areas. The individuals fleeing Hurricane Patricia would likely qualify as refugees and thus they would be accorded special status in the U.S. These corridors are areas with a heavy cartel presence and the concern is always that the criminal gangs would take advantage of the increased human flow through their territories. many of these people might realize that they don’t have to pay a cartel to cross between ports of entry. They could simply show up at a port of entry and ask for refugee status.”

Longmire added, “Parts of the Tucson Sector, in addition to the western region of the El Paso Sector, are the most likely landing spots for the people fleeing the aftermath of Hurricane Patricia.”
Report Spam   Logged
RickStudy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


View Profile
« Reply #337 on: October 25, 2015, 07:13:12 am »

Just to bring up an interesting sidebar, every time the US has pressured Israel to make concessions to Palestine a natural disaster has struck the US. The data goes back to the first time it happened during Carter`s time in the white house.

We have this huge hurricane, what just happened in Israel  Huh
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #338 on: October 25, 2015, 01:14:48 pm »

Just to bring up an interesting sidebar, every time the US has pressured Israel to make concessions to Palestine a natural disaster has struck the US. The data goes back to the first time it happened during Carter`s time in the white house.

We have this huge hurricane, what just happened in Israel  Huh

It hit Mexico(not the US) - with that being said, the Obama admit has really, really been pressuring Israel during his term. This country has consistently been hit with bad weather during his time.

Not to mention too these "churches" in America are siding with the Palestinians now.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #339 on: January 19, 2016, 04:31:38 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/u-top-court-agrees-review-obama-immigration-action-144027825.html
U.S. Supreme Court to decide major case on Obama immigration plan
1/19/16

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday paved the way for a major ruling on the limits of presidential powers, agreeing to decide the legality of President Barack Obama's unilateral action to shield more than 4 million illegal immigrants from deportation.

The court agreed to hear Obama's bid to resurrect his plan, undertaken in 2014 through executive action bypassing the Republican-led Congress, that was blocked last year by lower courts after Texas and 25 other Republican-governed states sued to stop it. A ruling is due by the end of June.

The case is not the first time Obama has asked the Supreme Court to rescue a major initiative. The court in 2012 and 2015 rejected conservative challenges to his signature healthcare law.

The White House expressed confidence the court would now deem as lawful Obama's immigration action, which was crafted to let millions of illegal immigrants whose children are American citizens or lawful permanent residents to get into a program that protects them from deportation and supplies work permits.

Texas and the other states contend Obama exceeded his presidential powers and usurped the authority of Congress. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, said courts have long recognized the limits to presidential authority.

"The court should affirm what President Obama said himself on more than 20 occasions: that he cannot unilaterally rewrite congressional laws and circumvent the people's representatives," Paxton said.

The nine justices will review a November ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld a February 2015 decision by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, a city along the Texas border with Mexico, to halt Obama's action.

With some of his major legislative initiatives suffocated by Republican lawmakers, the Democratic president has resorted to executive action to get around Congress on issues including immigration, gun control and the Obamacare law. The most recent executive action came this month when he acted unilaterally to expand background checks for certain gun purchases.

His executive actions have antagonized Republicans who accuse him of unlawfully taking actions by executive fiat that only Congress can perform.

The case raises several legal issues, including whether states have legal standing to sue the U.S. government over decisions on how to enforce federal laws.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #340 on: February 13, 2016, 10:50:16 am »

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/1400-people-learn-their-jobs-are-moving-to-mexico/ar-BBprYp2?ocid=spartandhp
1,400 people learn their jobs are moving to Mexico
2/12/16

A crowd of Carrier manufacturing workers erupted into anger Wednesday as they learned their plant was being relocated to Monterrey, Mexico.

Carrier, an Indianapolis-based heating, ventilation and air conditioning company owned by United Technologies, announced in a statement on Wednesday that the plant would undergo a three-year transition to Mexico starting in 2017.

A man identified as company president Chris Nelson was recorded on camera delivering the news to a large crowd of employees, who reacted with jeers and obscenities.

At one point, Nelson pleads with the crowd to quiet down so he can continue with the statement, saying "I've got information that's important to share as part of the transition."

Carrier employs roughly 1,400 people. There will be no immediate impact on jobs, according to local ABC affiliate RTV6.

"I want to be clear — this is strictly a business decision," Nelson continued, drawing another round of boos.

“This was an extremely difficult decision. It was made most difficult because I understand that it will have an impact on all of you, your families, and the community.”

Carrier is one of two United Technologies plants to announce a move to Mexico — the corporation announced on the same day it would also be moving a plant in Huntington, Indiana. The closing will eliminate about 700 jobs from the city in northeastern Indiana, according to the Indianapolis Star.

Shortly after the news broke, Indianapolis mayor Joe Hogsett said he would issue an executive order to help the workers affected by the move.

And yesterday, the Star reported that Indiana Governor Mike Pence authorized the state to offer job seeking, training and education services to the workers.

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #341 on: June 23, 2016, 10:57:02 am »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-immigration-plan-blocked-4-4-tie-supreme-143924528--politics.html?ref=gs
Obama immigration plan blocked by 4-4 tie at Supreme Court
6/23/16

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A tie vote by the Supreme Court is blocking President Barack Obama's immigration plan that sought to shield millions living in the U.S. illegally from deportation.

The justices' one-sentence opinion on Thursday effectively kills the plan for the rest of Obama's presidency. The outcome underscores that the direction of U.S. immigration policy will be determined in large part by this fall's presidential election, a campaign in which immigration already has played an outsized role.

People who would have benefited from the programs face no imminent threat of deportation because Congress has provided money to deal with only a small percentage of people who live in the country illegally, and the president retains ample discretion to decide whom to deport.

A tie vote sets no national precedent but leaves in place the ruling by the lower court. In this case, the federal appeals court in New Orleans said the Obama administration lacked the authority to shield up to 4 million immigrants from deportation and make them eligible for work permits without approval from Congress.

Texas led 26 Republican-dominated states in challenging the program Obama announced in November 2014. Congressional Republicans also backed the states' lawsuit.

The Obama administration announced the programs — protections for parents of children who are in the country legally and an expansion of the program that benefits people who were brought to this country as children — in November 2014. Obama decided to move forward after Republicans won control of the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections, and the chances for an immigration overhaul, already remote, were further diminished.

The Senate had passed a broad immigration bill with Democratic and Republican support in 2013, but the measure went nowhere in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives.

The states quickly went to court to block the Obama initiatives. Their lawsuit was heard by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas. Hanen previously had criticized the administration for lax immigration enforcement.

Hanen sided with the states, blocking the programs from taking effect. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also ruled for the states, and the Justice Department rushed an appeal to the high court so that it could be heard this term.

A nine-justice court agreed to hear the case in January, but by the time of the arguments in late April, Justice Antonin Scalia had died. That left eight justices to decide the case, and the court presumably split along liberal and conservative lines, although the court did not say how each justice voted.

Had Scalia still been alive, though, he almost certainly would have voted with his fellow conservatives to form a majority in favor of the states.

In practical terms, a victory by presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump could mean an end to the programs anyway, since he has vowed to deport the roughly 11 million immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

If Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, is elected, she could attempt to revive the programs or work with the new Congress on comprehensive immigration legislation.

If Clinton wins, the Senate will at some point fill the vacancy created by Scalia's death — either with Obama's nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, or a Clinton choice. In either case, legal challenges to executive action under her administration would come to a court that would have a majority of Democratic-appointed justices and, in all likelihood, give efforts to help immigrants a friendlier reception.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #342 on: August 24, 2016, 01:48:53 pm »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-says-hes-open-to-softening-immigration-law-170249802.html
Donald Trump says he’s open to ‘softening’ immigration law
8/24/16

Donald Trump now says he’d be open to “softening” some U.S. immigration laws already on the books if he were elected president.

The Republican presidential candidate’s hard-line stance and policy proposals surrounding illegal immigration have been a centerpiece to his campaign. But over the past week, he’s shown signs of rolling back the more extreme measures, most notably his support for the mass deportation of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

In a Tuesday conversation with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Trump said he would consider changing aspects of immigration law as it relates to people who immigrated to the U.S. illegally but have not otherwise broken the law.

“There certainly could be a softening because we’re not looking to hurt people. We want people. We have some great people in this country … but we’re going to follow the laws of this country,” he told the Fox News host during a town hall.

Trump described the two-tier policy toward illegal immigration that he touched upon the day before. He said his administration would follow the laws that are already in place to deport known criminals immediately and then deal with everyone else.

“If you start going around trying to make new laws in this country, it’s a process that is brutal,” he said. “We want to follow the laws of the country. And if we follow the laws, we can do what we have to do.”

Trump’s comments on Tuesday were only the latest in a series of recent statements in which he’s muddled his caustic tone toward illegal immigration. He infamously launched his campaign accusing the Mexican government of sending rapists over the border, and as recently as last week, he released his first general-election TV ad accusing rival Hillary Clinton of wanting to throw open the U.S. border.

But after Trump met last weekend with a Hispanic advisory council, some members said Trump told them he was open to granting legal status to some of the people who immigrated to the U.S. illegally. His campaign denied that Trump’s position had changed, but in a Monday interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, the GOP nominee said his focus would be on deporting criminals, and he even favorably cited President Obama’s own approach to deportation.

During his Tuesday interview with Hannity, Trump also said allowing people to stay in the U.S. after immigrating illegally would be unfair to others who obeyed the law and immigrated into the country using the appropriate channels.

“You have years and years of people waiting on line. They’ve gone through a process, and they’ve filed — legally — they filed,” he said. “They’re great people in some cases. I guess in some cases maybe not. But you have really great people wanting — and so proudly wanting — to come into our country. And now what you’d be doing is you’d take people away from that line.”

According to the Trump campaign’s website, he believes there are three core principles that would guide effective immigration reform: a nation without borders is not a nation, a nation without laws is not a nation, and a nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation.

“We are the only country in the world whose immigration system puts the needs of other nations ahead of our own,” his site reads. “That must change.”

Clinton has promised to introduce within 100 days of stepping into the Oval Office comprehensive immigration reform that provides a pathway to full citizenship.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #343 on: August 26, 2016, 07:07:58 am »

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-wavering-on-immigration-finds-anger-in-all-corners/ar-BBw3OZV?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
Donald Trump, Wavering on Immigration, Finds Anger in All Corners
8/25/16

Donald J. Trump, who captured the Republican nomination with a hard-line approach to immigration, faced anger and disgust from across the political spectrum on Thursday after he indicated he might retreat from his vow to deport all 11 million immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

In a town hall-style appearance broadcast on Fox News on Wednesday night, Mr. Trump appeared to suggest that he would now be open to some kind of path to legal status, if not citizenship, for undocumented immigrants.

“No citizenship,” Mr. Trump said. “They’ll pay back taxes. They have to pay taxes,” he added. “There’s no amnesty, but we will work with them,” he said at another point.

Mr. Trump said that while his supporters wanted to “get the bad ones out,” he also had heard from voters who took a less absolutist view. “They’ve said, ‘Mr. Trump, I love you, but to take a person that has been here for 15 or 20 years and throw them and the family out, it’s so tough, Mr. Trump,’” he said.

Several times, Mr. Trump turned to the audience in what he told his host, Sean Hannity, was “like a poll.”

“Number one, we’ll say throw out. Number two, we work with them,” Mr. Trump said.

Liberals who support an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws expressed horror at the spectacle.

“It’s not a small issue. It’s 11 million people,” said Angie Kelley, executive director of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. “He’s reducing a serious policy discussion to a pep-rally vote and cheering the loudest for your team. It’s insulting. It’s dangerous. It’s unprecedented.”

But for conservatives who have vocally opposed comprehensive immigration reform, and who had admired Mr. Trump’s calls for a border wall and  mass deportations, Mr. Trump’s words sounded dismayingly similar to those of former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, whom Mr. Trump drove from the Republican primaries in large part by deriding him as weak on immigration.

In an interview with Rita Cosby of WABC radio, Mr. Bush called Mr. Trump’s shifting speech “abhorrent.”

“I don’t know what to believe about a guy who doesn’t believe in things,” Mr. Bush said.

Mr. Trump’s shifting locutions also prompted some conservatives to compare Mr. Trump to Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a member of the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” in the Senate who led a failed attempt at immigration reform in 2013.

“For me, the two phrases that were the last straws were, ‘It’s not amnesty,’ and ‘back taxes,’” said Mark Krikorian, of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies. “Those things are terms of art for the Gang of Eight-type crowd.”

“Betraying his base and making clear that, a year after he launched his campaign, he still doesn’t know really what he wants to do on immigration, is really the last straw, it seems to me,” Mr. Krikorian added of Mr. Trump.

For Mr. Trump, the new, moderate talk on immigration could help convince some on-the-fence voters, particularly whites, that he has more compassion for Hispanics and other minorities than his previous, hard-line positions would suggest.

But whatever the possible gains, Mr. Trump risks offending millions of conservatives. A first-time candidate, he made himself a hero of the Republican right wing in large part by casting himself as more hard-core on the immigration issue than any of his rivals. He vowed to build a wall, called immigrants “rapists,” promised to establish a “deportation force” and said every immigrant in the country illegally would be forced out.

That fired up a part of the Republican base that had been frustrated with the party leadership in Washington, whom they saw as too willing to compromise and negotiate with President Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats.

Mr. Trump’s most devoted supporters have ignored his many other inconsistencies. But if they perceive Mr. Trump to be backing away from what drew them to him in the first place, they could stay home.

Ann Coulter, the conservative author — who is promoting a new book titled “In Trump We Trust” — seemed almost apoplectic Wednesday night during Mr. Hannity’s broadcast with Mr. Trump.

In her book, Ms. Coulter writes that the only unforgivable sin Mr. Trump could commit would be to shift on immigration.

Watching as Mr. Trump appeared to do just that, Ms. Coulter erupted in a series of Twitter messages. “It’s not ‘amnesty.’ It’s ‘comprehensive immigration reform’!!!! Trump: ‘they have to pay taxes, there’s no amnesty,’” she wrote in one post.

(On his daily radio show, the conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh choked over his laughter at Ms. Coulter’s expense, noting the timing of what he called Mr. Trump’s “near flip-flop” on immigration. “Poor Ann!” he said. Ms. Coulter did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

As aghast conservatives publicly warned Mr. Trump against any policy retreat — “Once you become an immigration enforcement hard-liner, there’s no going back!” the hard-line activist William Gheen told The Washington Times — Mr. Trump’s aides insisted that his policy proposals remained unchanged.

A spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson, said on CNN that Mr. Trump was merely changing the “words” he was using, not the proposals themselves.

Democrats and immigration-overhaul advocates made the same point.

“Details matter, and we have seen no actual policy shift to date,” said Todd Schulte, the president of FWD.us, the immigration-reform group backed by the Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Mr. Trump has frequently dangled vague phrases suggestive of policy shifts, only to accuse the news media of having wrongly interpreted them.

Still, Mr. Trump has been softening his language on immigration for several days, as he courts an electorate far less receptive to his harsher proposals, like for a wall along the Mexican border, than he faced in the primaries.

A new poll by the Pew Research Center, conducted from Aug. 9 through 16, found that while 91 percent of strong Trump supporters advocate building the wall, 61 percent of Americans are against it.

Mr. Trump has said he will give a speech on immigration next week in Arizona — an address originally set for this week, but that was delayed as he grappled with precisely what he would say.

Mr. Trump’s latest remarks would also appear to align him more closely to the policies pursued by Mr. Obama and endorsed by the Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton.

His suggestion that he would deport only “the bad ones” while letting law-abiding, but undocumented, immigrants stay in the United States is quite similar to the approach announced by Mr. Obama in November of 2014, when he directed the Department of Homeland Security to prioritize its immigration enforcement on violent criminals and people who have repeatedly violated immigration laws by crossing the border multiple times.

In a Fox News interview Monday night, Mr. Trump praised Mr. Obama for having aggressively deported immigrants in the United States illegally during his tenure in office, a reality that has long angered immigrants and Latino activists. “Lots of people were brought out of the country with the existing laws.,” Mr. Trump said. “Well, I’m going to do the same thing.”

It is unclear what Mr. Trump meant by that. Many of the deportations during Mr. Obama’s tenure were conducted under a program that often abruptly separated longtime undocumented residents from spouses or children who are American citizens. In 2014, Mr. Obama pledged to shift away from that approach to focus more on criminals.

But Mr. Trump has not said that he has reversed his opposition to Mr. Obama’s programs that aim to keep families together by allowing some immigrants to remain in the United States and work legally.

The statement about payment of “back taxes” in Mr. Hannity’s Wednesday night broadcast is very similar to the president’s “deferred action” proposals, which would have required millions of immigrants in the country illegally to pay taxes, among other things, in exchange for legal protections.

At the White House, officials who have spent years trying to find ways to overhaul the nation’s immigration system declined to be drawn into an examination of Mr. Trump’s latest comments.

Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said Thursday that the challenge for American voters as they consider the immigration positions of the two presidential candidates “is to listen carefully to the promises, agenda and priorities, as articulated by the two candidates.”

Mr. Earnest declined to say which of Mr. Trump’s immigration positions he believed voters should consider.

“That’s what makes that question more difficult than it otherwise would be,” Mr. Earnest said. “People are going to have to work through their own assessment of the situation. It means playing close attention to the extensive comments that both candidates have made on this issue.”

 

 
 
 
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #344 on: August 27, 2016, 07:47:42 am »

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-dollar600-billion-reason-trump-may-have-flip-flopped-on-deportation/ar-BBw6gJ1?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
The $600 billion reason Trump may have flip-flopped on deportation
8/27/16

But, in a stark midcourse correction on his immigration policy, Republican nominee Donald Trump this week backed away from a pledge to round up millions of undocumented immigrants and transport them outside the country.

In the end, the plan may have simply proved too costly — both politically and economically.

By one estimate the direct price tag for removing some 11 million undocumented workers could top $600 billion. And the economic impact of a such a sudden contraction in the U.S. labor force would lop $1.6 trillion from the nation's economy. That's roughly the gross domestic product of Texas.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #345 on: September 01, 2016, 11:29:03 am »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-hispanic-fans-abandoning-ship-000000609.html
Some of Trump’s Hispanic fans are abandoning ship after his immigration speech
9/1/16

Several of Donald Trump’s most prominent Hispanic supporters are reconsidering their support following his major speech on immigration Wednesday.

Jacob Monty, an attorney based in Houston, resigned from the Republican candidate’s National Hispanic Advisory Council after hearing the speech in Phoenix, Politico reported early Thursday morning.

“I was a strong supporter of Donald Trump when I believed he was going to address the immigration problem realistically and compassionately,” Monty told the news site. “What I heard today was not realistic and not compassionate.”

After weeks of toying with “softening” his deportation-based approach to illegal immigration, the GOP nominee on Wednesday gave a speech in which he embraced the hard-line policies and incendiary rhetoric that defined his primary campaign. He said that anyone in the United States illegally would be subject to deportation and vowed to bolster security at the U.S.-Mexico border.

For many Hispanic conservatives like Monty, who had advocated passionately for Trump, the speech was not merely a disappointment, but a betrayal. They hoped the candidate would lay out a plan for dealing humanely with the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the country, especially those with no involvement in violent crime.

Trump’s support among Latino voters is far beneath that of past Republican candidates, according to public polls, which presents a unique challenge for the mogul as he seeks to win key states — like Florida, Nevada and Colorado — with large Hispanic constituencies. On Thursday, Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign began to run ads in Arizona, a historically Republican state but with a large number of Latino voters.
View photos

Monty told the Texas Tribune that Trump’s speech was a “complete betrayal to Republican ideals and his [commitments] made” and that Republicans need to “reclaim our party from the [nativist] elements.”

When asked if he’d continue raising money for Trump, Monty replied, “No way José … It is pouring money down the drain.”

Monty was one of the Latino leaders who attended the Aug. 20 meeting in Trump Tower where the billionaire mogul reportedly softened his tone on illegal immigration.

“When we met [earlier in August], he was going to approach this issue with a realistic plan, a compassionate plan, with a plan that was not disruptive to the immigrants that were here that were not lawbreakers,” Monty told Politico. “He didn’t deliver any of that.”

Similarly, Alfonso Aguilar, the president of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, told Politico that he was “inclined” to drop his support for Trump after this week’s big speech.

“It’s so disappointing because we feel we took a chance, a very risky chance,” he said. “We decided to make a big U-turn to see if we could make him change. We thought we were moving in the right direction … we’re disappointed. We feel misled.”

Massey Villarreal, a businessman in Houston, told NBC Latino that he was finished supporting Trump after Wednesday night’s “awful” speech.

“As a compassionate conservative, I am disappointed with the immigration speech,” he said. “I’m going to flip, but not flop. I am no longer supporting Trump for president, but cannot with any conscience support Hillary [Clinton].”
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #346 on: October 24, 2016, 09:56:30 am »

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/23/politics/trump-2012-immigration/index.html
Trump in 2012 on deporting many undocumented immigrants: 'I don't believe in that'

By Andrew Kaczynski, CNN

Updated 9:48 PM ET, Sun October 23, 2016

CNN)Just four years ago, Donald Trump took a drastically different position on what is now his central issue: deporting undocumented immigrants in the United States.

Since he announced his candidacy last June, Trump has promised to build a wall on the US border with Mexico and at various times said he would, as president, deport all or many of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the country. However, in an June 2012 interview with CNBC's Squawk Box reviewed by CNN's KFile, Trump said he didn't believe in deporting undocumented immigrants who, he said, "had done a great job."

Asked about his views on immigrant labor, Trump said, "You know my views on it and I'm not necessarily, I think I'm probably down the middle on that also. Because I also understand how, as an example, you have people in this country for 20 years, they've done a great job, they've done wonderfully, they've gone to school, they've gotten good marks, they're productive — now we're supposed to send them out of the country, I don't believe in that, Michelle, and you understand that. I don't believe in a lot things that are being said."

Trump's comments came in the context of a discussion of the Supreme Court's decision a day before on the state of Arizona's tough immigration law. Trump said "both sides lost" in the ruling, which struck down key parts of the law but upheld a part of the law allowing law enforcement to check the immigration status of a person when enforcing other laws.

A Trump campaign spokesperson did not return a request for comment.

Trump kicked off his campaign in June 2015 by calling some of the undocumented immigrants from Mexico "rapists."

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," Trump said.

"They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

In a speech in September laying out his immigration plan, Trump reaffirmed his commitment to building a wall on the US southern border and deporting undocumented immigrants with a criminal background. Trump did not specify in his speech what he would do with those that remain in the country, but did say undocumented immigrants seeking legal status would have to first leave the country.

"For those here today illegally who are seeking legal status, they will have one route and only one route: to return home and apply for re-entry under the rules of the new legal immigration system," Trump said.

Full video of Trump's CNBC answer below:



Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #347 on: November 29, 2016, 06:52:12 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/obama-released-6051-unaccompanied-illegal-alien-children-american-communities-october/
Obama Released 6,051 Unaccompanied Illegal Alien Children Into American Communities In October

According to recent stats released by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, only about 45 percent of all immigration cases opened for unaccompanied minors since July of 2014 have been closed. EOIR data also shows that nearly 40 percent of all illegal alien children ordered to appear before an immigration judge won’t show up for their final court hearing.

11/29/16

So that illegal alien immigration crisis you never hear about on your evening news? It’s not over. Not by a long shot.

EDITOR’S NOTE: With mere weeks to go, Obama is furiously increasing the number of illegals he has instructed his administration to be released into unsuspecting communities all across the United States. Only Donald Trump has displayed the courage to stand up to this and propose to do something to stop it. If you are a legal alien,welcome to our awesome country. If you are an illegal alien, pack your bags because you’re going back. Big league.

With only a few months left to go before a new president obtains the keys to the Oval Office, the Obama administration released another 6,051 unaccompanied illegal alien children into American communities in the month of October, averaging about 195 kids per day.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #348 on: December 19, 2016, 10:53:55 am »

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-this-is-going-to-be-a-browner-country-144322201.html
Obama: ‘This is going to be a browner country’
December 19, 2016

Regardless of what President-elect Donald Trump’s plans are for immigration, President Barack Obama says there will be “inevitable” changes to the demographics of the United States.

“If you stopped all immigration today, just by virtue of birth rates, this is going to be a browner country,” Obama told NPR’s Steve Inskeep in an interview that aired Monday. “And if we’re not thinking right now about how we make sure that next generation is getting a good education and are instilled with a common creed and the values that make America so special and are cared for and nurtured and loved the way every American child is treated, then we’re not going to be as successful.”

Obama said it’s natural for the nation to have “some growing pains” because of the substantial changes to the world during his eight years in office:

 

    I started my presidency inheriting a massive crisis of proportions that we haven’t seen since the 1930s. It laid bare some long-term and troubling trends about globalization, and technology, and rising inequality, and the fragility of our financial systems, and the way in which middle-class folks felt they were getting squeezed. And the fact that the ladders of opportunity seem to be farther and fewer between for people who are trying to get out of poverty.

    And throughout that process, we also then started seeing — because when the economy’s not doing well some other tensions get laid bare — changing attitudes about sexual orientation, and about race, and about the nature of families. And all of this has been amped up by the revolution in information, throwing through social media and the Internet. And so it’s a big dose. It’s been a lot of stuff that’s been coming at people really quickly, and it’s made folks anxious.

 

But Obama said the national conversation about race is “long overdue.”

“All these smartphones suddenly taking pictures are not documenting a suddenly worsening relationship between the African-American community and the police,” the president said. “They are recording what has been a long-standing tension and the sense on the part of police that they’re put in a very difficult situation of trying to manage law enforcement in poor communities where guns are easily accessible, the African-American community being rightly convinced that there is a long history of racial bias in our criminal justice system.

“And as painful as it is, that conversation is long overdue,” he continued. “So, my feeling is that if everybody takes a breath, and if we can structure a conversation that is less about how somebody else is trying to take advantage of me, and structure the conversation around how can we work together to solve problems that makes everybody better off, that America can emerge stronger. But that requires leadership. It requires citizenship. It requires all of us doing self-reflection at the same time as we’re fighting on behalf of the things that we care deeply about.”

Obama said he plans to do that self-reflection after he leaves office.

“I can say, and I can demonstrate, I can document that the country is a lot better off now than it was when I took office in almost every dimension,” the president said. “But what I can also say is that we could be doing even better. There are times where I reflect and ask myself, ‘Is there’s something else I could have done, something that I could have said slightly differently that would have led to additional progress and less polarization?’ And I’ll probably, you know, as I reflect on my presidency, once I’m out of just the day-to-day scrum of this thing, I’m sure I’ll come up with a whole bunch of things to add to my list. But I think all of us have to do that.”

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #349 on: December 30, 2016, 09:29:17 pm »

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/central-americans-continue-to-surge-across-us-border-new-dhs-figures-show/ar-BBxJNrw?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
Central Americans continue to surge across U.S. border, new DHS figures show
12/30/16

U.S. officials are grappling with a 15 percent surge in illegal immigration, reflecting continued failures by the Obama administration to deter illegal immigration along the country’s southwestern border.

Homeland Security officials apprehended 530,250 illegal immigrants, and sent 450,954 people back to their home countries over the 12-month period that ended in September, according to figures released Friday by the Department of Homeland Security.

The majority of those apprehended come from Central American countries and include 137,614 families and unaccompanied children, part of an ongoing flight from high crime and violence in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, which human rights advocates have urged the administration to treat as a refu­gee crisis.

The number of families and children in the past year also exceeded figures from 2015 and 2014, when illegal migrants from Central America overwhelmed U.S. Border Patrol stations at the Mexican border, and President Obama called the flow of children an “urgent humanitarian situation.”

Administration officials said Friday that the latest “removal” figures reflect a concerted policy shift to target convicted criminals over others.

“We continued to better focus our interior resources on removing individuals who may pose threats to public safety — specifically, convicted criminals and threats to national security,” Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said in a statement. “This prioritization is reflected in actual results.” More than 99 percent of those forcibly removed from the country over the most recent 12-month period fell into the administration’s three priority categories.

Overall deportations have dropped over the past few years, from a peak of more than 400,000 during Obama’s first term.

Immigration human rights advocates, including J. Kevin Appleby, the senior director of international migration policy at the Center for Migration Studies, say the priorities were a good move — likely resulting in fewer deportations overall — but have come too late.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #350 on: January 03, 2017, 04:37:53 pm »

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/ford-cancels-dollar16-billion-mexico-plant-after-trump-criticism/ar-BBxQZmV?OCID=ansmsnnews11
Ford cancels $1.6 billion Mexico plant amid Trump criticism
1/3/17

Ford Motor said Tuesday it will cancel a planned $1.6 billion factory in Mexico and invest $700 million at a Michigan factory after President-elect Donald Trump had harshly criticized the Mexico investment plan.

The second-largest U.S. automaker said it would build new electric, hybrid and autonomous vehicles at the Flat Rock, Michigan plant and add 700 jobs.

Ford Chief Executive Mark Fields said the decision to cancel the new Mexico factory was the result of sagging demand for small cars in North America and not because Trump was elected president. He told Fox Business that the automaker would have made the same decision even if Trump had not been elected.

"There was no quid pro quo because there was no negotiation" with Trump over the decision to cancel the plant, Fields said.

Fields told reporters the decision related to the need to "fully utilize capacity at existing facilities" amid declining sales of small and medium sized cars such as the Focus and Fusion.

Fields also endorsed "pro-growth" tax and regulatory policies advocated by Trump and the Republican-led Congress. "This is a vote of confidence for President-Elect Trump and some of the policies he may be pursuing," Fields said.

Trump repeatedly said during the election campaign that if elected he would not allow Ford to open the new plant in Mexico, which he called an "absolute disgrace" and would slap hefty tariffs taxes on imported Ford vehicles.

Ford executive chairman Bill Ford Jr. told reporters he spoke with Trump to notify him of the decision. The company said the decision was influenced by Trump's policy goals such as lowering taxes and regulations but that there were no negotiations over the decision announced on Tuesday.

By contrast, Trump's team held talks with United Technologies Corp in November before the company agreed to keep about 800 jobs at its Carrier air conditioning unit in Indiana out of 2,100 set to go to Mexico. Trump has also held high profile meetings with the chief executives of Boeing and Lockheed Martin to talk about the cost of military contracts.

Also on Tuesday, Trump threatened to impose a "big border tax" on General Motors for making some of its Chevrolet Cruze cars in Mexico.

The New York businessman, who has vowed to bring back American jobs that have been outsourced overseas and be tough on illegal immigration from Mexico, takes office on Jan. 20.

Fields said Ford will build a battery electric SUV with a 300-mile driving range at the Michigan plant by 2020 -- taking on companies like Tesla Motors Inc, Volkswagen AG and GM -- and will launch production there by 2021 of a fully autonomous vehicle without a steering wheel or a brake pedal for use in ride services fleets.

Ford also plans new hybrid versions of its F-150 pickup truck, Mustang and police vehicles by 2020 as the auto industry faces rising fuel efficiency mandates.

Ford will add 700 jobs at the Flat Rock plant, Fields said, to cheers from union workers gathered at the factory for the announcement.

TRUMP PREDICTION

Ford in April announced it would invest $1.6 billion in the new plant in San Luis Potosi, Mexico to build small cars. The company said it will shift production from Michigan of its Focus to an existing plant in Hermosillo, Mexico.

When Trump announced his campaign in June, 2015, he said Ford would cancel its planned Mexico investments. "They'll say,'Mr. President we've decided to move the plant back to the United States - we're not going to build it in Mexico.' That's it. They have no choice," Trump said.

Trump tweeted a link on Tuesday to a story about the decision.

Ford shares rose 3.3 percent to $12.54, up $0.41 a share, while the Mexican peso fell on Tuesday to touch its weakest level in seven weeks.

Ford said it will add two new unnamed products at its Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan, where the Focus is manufactured today.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #351 on: February 21, 2017, 02:09:01 pm »

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=64369
BREAKING: Supreme Court To Take Up MAJOR Case And It Can Could The US Forever
2/21/17

The U.S. Supreme Court is going to take up a case that will decide if non-citizens have constitutional rights.

From Lifezette: The Supreme Court on Tuesday is taking up a case that presents a critical question of law: Can a U.S. law enforcement officer be sued in American courts for the death of a foreigner outside the United States? For most of American history, the answer to that question has been a clear and emphatic “no.”

Courts for two centuries have held that constitutional rights do not apply to foreigners with no voluntary connection to the United States. That the high court even agreed to take Hernández v. Mesa casts doubt on that long-held understanding of the law, however. “That has been under a lot of pressure and challenge recently,” Fordham University School of Law professor Andrew Kent told reporters on a conference call last week.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #352 on: July 02, 2017, 04:58:39 pm »

http://truthfeed.com/de-blasio-using-16-mil-in-taxpayer-funds-to-pay-for-illegal-alien-lawyer-fees/87195/

Bill De Blasio Using $16 Mil in Taxpayer Funds to Pay for ILLEGAL Alien Lawyer Fees
Culture By Eren Moreno July 2, 2017

Bill De Blasio is designating $16 million in taxpayer funds to pay for illegals’ lawyer fees.

Meanwhile, the subways in New York are being held together by zip ties as infrastructure falls apart.

This is absolutely absurd.

From Breitbart

De Blasio earmarked $16 million in his budget proposal in April to pay the legal fees of people in the Big Apple illegally — part of a broader push from de Blasio to remove any serious distinction between legal and illegal immigrants.

Yet that budget, to be finalized this week, comes as the city’s commuters are struggling more than ever.

Horror stories of delayed trains and commuters being stuck in carriages for hours are becoming daily fare in New York news outlets.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared a state of emergency Thursday after a train partially derailed this week, injuring commuters. Cuomo pledged more money and reforms to help fix the crumbling system.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #353 on: July 12, 2017, 01:43:31 pm »

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=86266
Look What Was Just Discovered About Man Who Causes Horrific I-80 Crash!

The driver who caused the horrific I-80 crash is an illegal alien who was deported twice. His blood alcohol level was .247%.

From ketv.com:

Nemias Garcia-Velasco, the man arrested following a fiery, fatal crash on Interstate 80 in Omaha, has been deported from the United States twice, and was driving around 100 mph with a blood alcohol content of .243% according to Douglas County prosecutors.


Garcia-Velasco appeared before a judge Thursday, noticeably limping, and scarred from burns he received in the crash on July 5th at the I-80/680 interchange.

Bond was set at $2 million on charges including felony motor vehicle homicide, DUI, and operating without a driver's license.

Garcia-Velasco's van struck a guard rail on the curve before smashing into a bridge post. The van burst into flames, killing 58-year-old Silvano Torres, who riding in the back without any restraints.

A third man in the van, Jesus I Gonzalez, was treated for minor injuries.

7/11/17
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #354 on: August 25, 2017, 02:10:16 pm »

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=91645
8/24/17
Breaking: Look Who Just Lost Their U.S. Citizenship!!

According to reports, a mexican immigrant who pretended to be an immigration officer has had his U.S. citizenship revoked.

The Dailycaller reported: A Mexican national who had become a naturalized U.S. citizen has been stripped of her citizenship for impersonating an immigration officer and running a fraud scheme against unsuspecting illegal immigrants, the Department of Justice announced Wednesday.

Araceli Martinez, 53, was ordered to give up her certificate of naturalization and refrain from claiming any rights or benefits of U.S. citizenship, according to a DOJ news release.

U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California entered the order on Aug. 21, following a successful petition by prosecutors from DOJ’s Civil Division and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) lawyers.

“This order sends a clear message to individuals who commit fraud during the naturalization process — we will investigate you and seek you out to ensure that justice is done,” said acting ICE Director Thomas Homan in a statement. “ICE will continue to work with our partners at the Justice Department’s Office of Immigration Litigation, District Court Section to hold individuals responsible for their fraudulent conduct, especially those pretending to be government officials.”

Martinez impersonated a U.S. immigration officer between June 2011 and March 2012 and convinced illegal immigrants that she could assist them in obtaining legal status, according to the complaint to revoke citizenship. Prosecutors say Martinez ripped off her victims for thousands of dollars without ever submitting any paperwork on their behalf.

Meanwhile, Martinez was in the process of applying for U.S. citizenship. During an interview a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer, she swore under oath that she had never committed a crime for which she was not arrested. Based on the information she offered during the interview, USCIS approved Martinez’s application, and she subsequently became a U.S. citizen in April 2012.

Martinez was eventually arrested by the Los Angeles Sheriffs Office and charged with 11 counts of fraud. She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 32 months in prison.

Under U.S. immigration law, a person who gives false testimony for the purpose of obtaining an immigration benefit does not meet the bar for “good moral character” required to obtain citizenship. The Supreme Court recently limited the types of false statements that can be used to revoke citizenship, but prosecutors in the Martinez case were able to prove that her lies were material to the naturalization process and therefore grounds for denationalization.

“We will aggressively pursue the denaturalization of individuals who lie on their naturalization applications, especially in a circumstance like this one, which involved an alien who masqueraded as an immigration officer and was convicted of defrauding nine aliens of thousands of dollars in exchange for false promises of facilitating immigration benefits,” said said acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy