Archive for May, 2017

Oil and Gas sabotage Trump’s solution for Palestine

May 23, 2017

Oftentimes, Presidential economics drive policy and Mr. Trump’s first overseas trip symbolizes his concerns about terrorism and the creation of US jobs, jobs, jobs. But his much-heralded goal of achieving what has eluded his eight predecessors, a Palestinian-Israeli settlement, is doomed even before its starts. It seems economics has trumped politics, and, a peaceful solution, despite the expected promises of money and security, is not even remotely possible.

If it involves the Middle East, it involves oil, and Palestinian statehood is no exception. Despite the Oslo Accords requirements, Palestinian-Israeli cooperation in the exploration, development, and sale of oil and gas from the West Bank, Gaza, and the Occupied Territories is non-existent despite the discovery and exploitation of billions of dollars worth of oil and gas.

The annexation of the Golan Heights of Syria, which Israel seized and has continuously occupied since 1967, signaled a final rejection by “Bebe” Netanyahu of any commitment of Israel to a settlement with the Palestinians. Despite the affirmations on both sides and the eternal optimism of the Americans that all are working toward a solution, it is just rhetoric to cash-in on American promises of aid.

Why such pessimism? Because it is no surprise that a Noa fields spokesperson announced the discovery of approximately trillions cubic meters of natural gas reserves in the newly annexed territory. This projection of known reserves could place Israel in the top ten of countries with gas/oil reserves.

The Israelis previously canceled the joint exploration operations for oil and gas fields in the West Bank boundaries (Israel has continued independently – despite Oslo prohibitions) claiming that putting large sums of money into the hands of the Palestinians would merely feed additional terrorism.

Furthermore, the announcement several years ago of the Leviathan Basin gas finds estimated 1.7 billion barrels of recoverable oil and a mean of 122 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas could lead Israel to an energy sufficient status and a net exporter of gas and probably oil.

The Israelis have contracted with Jordan and Egypt to build pipelines for direct export and are in negotiations with the EU for the development of an underwater gas line to service Europe via Cyprus.

While all this energy news is a big plus for Israel, there is one, little distraction – namely the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank. The EU precedent to limit or bar the importation to the EU of Israeli produced fruits and vegetables from the occupied territories could jeopardize the EU gas contracts.

There are reports circulating that the mineral and fishing grounds off Gaza have enriched the Israelis at the expense of the Palestinians. The latest energy discovery has created differing territorial claims by Israel, Lebanon, and Palestine. At the heart of the natural gas discoveries is Israel’s self-imposed naval blockade off the coast of the Gaza Strip, which has essentially denied the Palestinians’ access to their natural gas reserves as well as coveted fishing operations.

According to a May 2017 report by Stichting Onderzoek Multinationale Ondernemingen Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations, research results and analysis highlight that Noble (NYSE: NBL) Energy’s gas exploration and extraction undertakings in the Mediterranean could be linked to some human rights abuses in the Palestinian and Lebanon territories.

The Gaza Marine fields have also been estimated to contain about 1 trillion cubic feet of reserves. But Israel has long claimed the expansion of that field, while under Hamas’ control, is considered an “existential threat” therefore the Israeli militarily has blocked its development.

The Levantine Basin stretches some 200 miles into the Mediterranean Sea and goes through the heart of what the US Energy Information Administration claim holds six times more natural gas than regional countries.

By definition, the Law of the Sea specifically says coastal states have a right to 200 miles of maritime territory. Nevertheless, due to the concave shape of the Eastern Mediterranean, each country within that territory must negotiation and compromise, a process many Palestinian people feel they have been left out of the discussions.

Recently, James Stocker, a professor of International affairs at Trinity Washington University, claimed the Palestinian people may have a case at an international tribunal. “The point is that there is this whole space off Israel and Palestine and it hasn’t properly been divided yet. So we don’t actually know what the boundaries are. By failing to make a claim, Palestinians may be forfeiting their rights to their lawful territory and the natural resources within,” Stocker said. “If you aren’t making claims about the boundaries of these zones, if you are not making claims to these resources, then, in effect, you don’t have a right to them. Unless you claim that they are yours, other countries can claim them and say, ‘Well, no one else claimed this so, of course, we took it’,” he concluded.

On top of that, Farsnews reported that Israel has already signed a $4 billion agreement to sell the European Union oil/gas extracted from Palestinian shores.

The pipeline is expected to transfer gas from the occupied Palestinian coastline to the EU. It will pass through Cyprus, Greece, and Italy and is expected to rival the Russia/Turkey pipeline into Southern Europe.

The Israeli-EU deal could also adversely affect Lebanon by drilling into its Law of the Sea protected oil/gas territories.

A US Geological Survey estimated in 2010 that the Levant Basin comprises “a mean of 1.7 billion barrels of recoverable oil and a mean of 122 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas.” If these estimates are correct, it means the Eastern Mediterranean is amongst the world’s top producers of natural gas. The recovery of the gas/oil in the north side of the Levant Basin would put the Syrian port of Tartus in play. The corridor route flows along the coastlines of Lebanon, Israel, as well as the Gaza Strip.

Meanwhile back 2015, Afek, an Israeli subsidiary of Genie Energy and a US oil company, jointly announced they found vast oil/gas reserves under the Golan Heights. Genie’s principal geologist in Israel, Yuval Bartov said he believed the basin had the “potential of billions of barrels.”

“The Israeli energy and water ministry has licensed Afek to drill 10 experimental wells over three years in a 400-square kilometer area, about a third of the Golan’s total territory,” according to the Middle East Eye news agency.

At the time Afek claimed its discoveries could make Israel energy independent. However, the company did not include the Palestinian government in its assessments. But a report concluded that the discovery could turn Israel into an oil/gas exporter, something that Palestine says amounts to theft from its countrymen.

The issue pre-dates the Trump administration.

Under the Obama administration, the territorial dispute essentially indicated “(if) the US recognized Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan, it would likely clear the way for Israel to plunder any economically viable reserves located there. Netanyahu appears to have long harbored an interest in tapping the Golan’s potential for oil.”

Natural gas reserves were first discovered off the coast of the Gaza Strip in 1999. At the time, the Palestinian Authority awarded a 25-year exploration license to British Gas Group, to drill offshore of the Gaza Strip. In 2000, the Brits drilled two wells, Gaza Marine-1 and Gaza Marine-2. The original discovery of natural gas reserves estimated that approximately 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas were waiting to be extracted and sold to nearby countries.

Plus, a 2016 UN Special Rapporteur said: “Israel, the Occupying Power, effectively controls the economic and social development of the Palestinian territory […]. Measures that amount to violations of the right to development include the blockade of Gaza and the ensuing collapse of its economy, […] exploitation and appropriation of Palestinian natural resources, the regime of formal economic dependency, unilateral control over Palestine’s external borders, the encumbering of personal and business mobility, restrictions on the use of agricultural lands, limitations on Palestinian fishery.”

While there is a dearth of news on the evolving oil and gas exploration of the Levant, there can be no doubt that Israel has seized the momentum in exploiting this mineral wealth, which means the likelihood of Mr. Trump being able to negotiate any solution to the Israel-Palestine dispute is DOA. There is no likelihood Israel will grant concessions to the Palestinians that will render them eventual claimants for the oil and gas wealth the Israelis are enjoying.

Net neutrality –not so neutral

May 10, 2017

The Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) defines “Network neutrality—(as) the idea that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks fairly, without improper discrimination in favor of particular apps, sites or services—is a principle that must be upheld to protect the future of our open Internet. It’s a principle that’s faced many threats over the years, such as ISPs forging packets to tamper with certain kinds of traffic or slowing down or even outright blocking protocols or applications.”

Watch News Segment Here

The neutrality of the Internet is a principle that’s faced many threats over the years, lately, there have been many big Internet providers trying to interfere with certain kinds of traffic, slowing down the speed or outright blocking content they do not like. But under the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) rules all consumers require equal access to lawful content of their choice, and the FCC was supposed to ensure there were no gatekeepers deciding Internet content.

However, last week Congress passed a bill allowing Internet providers to gather personal information of its customers and to sell it to interested third parties. Simply put, the cable companies can now sell your personal information, like shopping or viewing habits, and they collect more revenue!

So is the government playing favorites?

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) believes in the free market economy and wrote an OPED for the Daily Signal saying Americans want to watch, listen, and play any video whenever they want, wherever they want, and for as long as they want. And customers don’t want to pay a fortune for the privilege to do so.

“For most of the history of the Internet, companies have been free to find innovative new ways to meet America’s insatiable demand for data. But progressive activists have never been comfortable with the unregulated nature of the Internet. They have always wanted government bureaucrats to have more control over how the Internet is managed. After President Barack Obama installed like-minded progressives on the FCC, the Commissioners realized those progressive dreams when they introduced the agency’s first “net neutrality” regulations, called the Open Internet Order of 2010,” Lee concluded.

Last week, President Trump’s new FCC Chairman, Ajit Pai publicized that his staff would begin the process of repealing the 2015 Open Internet Order. “Going forward, we cannot stick with regulations from the Great Depression meant to micromanage Ma Bell.”

“Instead, we need rules that focus on growth and infrastructure investment, rules that expand high-speed internet access everywhere and give Americans more online choice, faster speeds and more innovation,” he explained.

For the moment, Pai’s decision to save the Internet from innovation-killing government regulations doesn’t mean a future administration could not change the Internet rules to suit their needs.

That is why Senator Lee introduced the ‘Restoring Internet Freedom Act’—“a bill that would nullify the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order and prohibit the FCC from issuing a similar rule in the future. Congress should be the one setting telecommunications policy, not federal bureaucrats, and I look forward to engaging in this debate in the months ahead.”

Tech giant Oracle said in a statement: “Given these technical and economic realities, we applaud your leadership [over the FCC] in considering restoration of the ‘information services’ classification to broadband Internet access service.”

While partisanship keeps cable ratings high, Lee suggested there is a simple bipartisan fix. “Congress could easily pass a bipartisan law to make net neutrality permanent and put enforceable rules in place for good. Support for this approach is building on the left and right and FCC Chairman Pai has indicated it may provide the simplest path forward.”

Internet and privacy watchdog group EFF has been an outspoken critic for Internet issues and the unnecessary collection of metadata, LPR (License Plate Readers) readers as well as customer information that is sold to third parties for profit. The co-founder of Apple as well as EFF, Steve Wozniak, said the FCC was simply “squashing the little guy.”

Watchdogs explained that with the 2010 rules the FCC attempted to fight the new threats by introducing a new set of Open Internet rules. However, their efforts contained many legal and practical holes. By 2014, a legal challenge from Verizon overturned many rules and fired-up the FCC to draft new rules that will better serve consumers.

Lastly in a letter to the FCC: EFF said: “the goal of the FCC is to effectively hand over the future of the Internet to the cable and telephone industry and abandon its duty to protect the public interest, we ask that you oppose such a plan.”

Once public comments were requested, millions of consumers weighed in with their concerns and demanded the FCC ensure that net neutrality was done right. Many of the respondents asked the FCC to issue rules that would hold up in court.

After intense public activism, the FCC finally created rules that EFF supports “in part because, in addition to the bright line rules against blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization of Internet traffic, they include strict ‘forbearance’ restrictions on what the FCC can do without holding another rulemaking.”

“There’s no silver bullet for net neutrality. The FCC order plays a role by forbidding ISPs from meddling with traffic in certain ways. But transparency is also a key (factor): ISPs must be open about how traffic is managed over their networks in order for both users and the FCC to know when there’s a problem. Local governments can also play a crucial role by supporting competitive municipal and community networks. When users can vote with their feet, service providers have a strong incentive not to act in non-neutral ways,” EFF said in a statement online. “We want the Internet to live up to its promise, (of) fostering innovation, creativity, and freedom. We don’t want regulations that will turn ISPs into gatekeepers, making special deals with a few companies and inhibiting new competition, innovation and expression.”

But an approach that censors, prioritizes content, and favors one class of users over another is not only unworkable as a practical and legal matter; it would be devastating for Internet freedom, economic opportunity, and innovation. We wouldn’t put the fox in the hen house… or would we?

Congress and federal judge hoodwink Trump on immigration

May 3, 2017

Using GOP tactics, the Democrats have successfully shut down President Trump’s agenda. The maxim? Stall, stall, stall then throw in a government shutdown and voilà, you have a recipe for success, for Democrats that is. The cherry on the top of this budget is sending the president legislation that specifically prohibits the government building that wall!

Relying on a Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) report, presidential candidate Donald Trump claimed taxpayers spend in excess of $52 billion annually to educate illegal immigrants. “The root cause of all the welfare payments to illegal aliens is the so-called ‘anchor baby’ phenomenon,” he explains.

It’s that kind of tough immigration rhetoric that added President of the United States to Trump’s resume. The other, of course, is building a wall, “a big beautiful wall.” However, Trump’s first official budget written by Speaker Ryan, provided zero dollars to build the wall, “no money is to be used for the construction of a border wall.” The joke from Speaker Ryan must be the slap for the face for the very voters who gave Trump the Oval Office and comes as no surprise that he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Despite the MSM open-border mantra, the immigration debate really resonates with middle-class American voters who believe the king of construction would actually follow through with his promises to secure the southern border with a big barrier.

It’s no surprise that the lack of “kept promises” angered the base. Executive Director for FAIR, Bob Dane said: “Notably, the late night closed-door budget deal provides no funding for President Trump’s signature promise of a border wall. Other provisions of the budget deal effectively sell out the very people who delivered key swing states to him last November, namely struggling American workers who have seen their jobs and wages decimated by bad immigration policies.”

Specifically, the omnibus budget bill includes:

  • Authorization of $1.5 billion for border security, but no funding for construction of a border wall, a cornerstone promise of President Trump’s campaign and integral component of regaining control of illegal immigration, drug smuggling and terrorism. The omnibus spending measure, in fact, rescinds $21 million that had previously been authorized for this purpose.
  • Reauthorization of the job-saving E-Verify program, but no funding for expansion of the program nor any move to make its use mandatory for all U.S. employers.
  • No restrictions on funding to sanctuary jurisdictions that defy federal law and actively impede immigration enforcement.
  • Authorization to increase the H-2B cap for low and unskilled guest workers at the discretion of the Secretaries of Labor and Homeland Security. Blue-collar American workers have been decimated by immigration, outsourcing, and automation in recent decades. Secretary Alexander Acosta has long been an advocate for business’s unfettered access to low-wage foreign labor.
  • Reauthorization of the scandal- and fraud-plagued EB-5 program, which has turned into a source of interest-free capital for some American businesses, but has failed to deliver promised jobs to American workers.

Dane also complained, “The budget deal hatched by congressional leaders with the consent of the White House amounts to a betrayal of American workers, taxpayers and the security of the nation. The Democratic minority in Congress got away with holding the operations of the federal government hostage – in the form of a threat to shut the government down – to the interests of illegal aliens and to the business lobby that wants to maintain a steady flow of low-wage labor. It was a hollow threat and the Republican leadership and the Trump administration should have called their bluff.”

It seems the Republicans relish the blame game and refuse to do the people’s work. Under Speaker Ryan, the lawmakers are keeping public school vacation calendars!

“The art of this new budget deal is nothing to be ‘happy about’ because it is a sell-out to the American worker and delays much needed border security. If the Trump Administration expects to make good on its immigration promises, this current budget negotiation should be a reality check; without forceful leadership from the president, a clear plan to properly resource enforcement, and an unwavering commitment to do so, Congress will continue to under-fund, obstruct, delay and derail needed immigration reforms for the American public,” Dane finished.

Unfortunately, Congress’ infamous “bait and switch tactic” ensures lawmakers can campaign on border security and pass the inaction blame game on the other guy.

To make matters worse California Federal Judge William H. Orrick of US District Court tried to make a name for himself in order to slow President Trump’s Executive Order financially punishing cities, mostly in navy blue states, for not adhering to federal immigration laws. The kicker? The Golden State judge that issued a temporary hold was an Obama appointee responsible for adding approximately $200,000 to the Democrat coffers.

Luckily, the order didn’t really have teeth, according to the Center for Immigration Reform (CIS).

  • The judge’s ruling doesn’t stop the administration from moving forward with publicly naming sanctuary cities and notifying them of their potential loss of federal revenues.
  • The judge’s ruling doesn’t stop the administration from withholding millions of dollars in key law enforcement grants administered by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security (SCAAP, COPS, and Byrne-JAG grants.)
  • The administration can still take legal action – led by the Department of Justice – against jurisdictions that adopt sanctuary policies, just as the Obama administration took legal action against Arizona for its attempt to assist with federal immigration enforcement.
  • Ironically, Judge Orrick is based in San Francisco the epicenter of the sanctuary city issue given this was the city that witnessed the killing of Kate Steinle. Steinle’s murderer, who had seven criminal convictions and five deportations under his belt, told officials that he kept returning to San Francisco because of its sanctuary city policies.

The main claim that Orrick made centers on a president’s ability to withhold funding for Justice Department grants. The decision allowed the Trump administration to withhold law enforcement grants but said “Trump’s threats to withhold all federal grants were coercive and violated several fundamental principles established in the Constitution. The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds,” Orrick wrote.

“Today the rule of law suffered another blow, as an unelected judge unilaterally rewrote immigration policy for our Nation,” Press Secretary Sean Spicer said. “This case is yet one more example of egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge. Today’s ruling undermines faith in our legal system and raises serious questions about circuit shopping.”

Of course, the technical term is called “forum shopping” and it is illegal according to the ABA rule ##. Just last year US District Court Judge Holmes ruled against 16 attorneys for judge shopping. “Having considered the matter, the Court finds that Respondents filed a stipulation of dismissal in this case for the purposes of seeking a more favorable forum (emphasis added) and escaping an adverse decision and that this mid-litigation forum shopping was objectively unreasonable under the circumstances,” he wrote.

In true Trump fashion, he tweeted: “…the Ninth Circuit, which has a terrible record of being overturned (close to 80%) They used to call this “judge shopping!” Messy system.” The president got one thing wrong; it wasn’t the Ninth Circuit judge.

However, San Francisco’s Mayor Edwin Lee and California’s new Attorney General Xavier Becerra were both happy with the judge’s ruling that effectively allowed local governments to fight back against President Trump. “Today’s decision is a historic affirmation of the U.S. Constitution’s core principles — that the President cannot usurp powers not given to him, and that the federal government cannot use federal defunding to coerce local governments into becoming federal immigration enforcers,” Santa Clara County counsel James Williams explained.

By the numbers

Between 2010 and 2014, 5.2 million new immigrants settled in the United States. Mexico had by far the largest immigrant population in the country, with 11.7 million legal and illegal Mexican immigrants living in the United States in 2014. After declining from 2010 to 2013, the number of Mexican immigrants in the United States rose by 130,000 by 2014.

Countries sending more than usual numbers to the US the last five years include Saudi Arabia (up 93 percent), Bangladesh (up 37 percent), Iraq (up 36 percent), Egypt (up 25 percent), Pakistan, India, and Ethiopia (24 percent). A new PEW Research report points out that roughly 14 percent of the US population is foreign born.

In a half-hearted attempt to stem the flow of migrants, the Obama administration has spent $1.2 million in advertising throughout Central America and Mexico warning migrants of the dangers of illegally entering the US. It’s been reported by Fusion/Huffington Post that coyotes (human traffickers) rape 80 percent of the women before they reach America. Despite warnings from US advertisements, illegal immigrants admit that they often bribe Mexican officials to skirt roadblocks that act as a deterrence.

For those seeking to reach the promised land, the trek is rife with many perils, including a Rape Tree on the US-side of the border near Campo, California. In the dead of summer, the throngs of illegal border crossers face heat exhaustion, long distances without hydration and a Rape Tree. (Story here)

The US/Mexico border fence is only a 15-minute walk away. It is here where females face the wrath of their coyote (smuggling) guides. The trail that leads to the Rape Tree is littered with plastic water bottles and female undergarments. Many think the majority of the illegals coming across the Southern border are simply here to seek a better life. Some are, but as the Rape Tree demonstrates, many are also in the US committing crimes and victimizing women. Many Border Patrol agents say the criminal aliens have no respect for the rule of law in this country, and the Rape Tree provides evidence.

The winding trail that leads to the Rape Tree is riddled with large rock-and-crevice hiding places that make it extremely difficult for Border Patrol agents to track and apprehend those crossing or assaulting women.

The average cost to illegally enter the US varies. According to Competitive Enterprise Institute, unauthorized Mexican immigrants usually pay $4,000-10, 000 to cross the border. “The smuggling fee for unauthorized Central American immigrants is currently between $7,000 and $10,000. The smuggling fee for an unauthorized Chinese immigrant is about $75,000 The most recently compiled averages in 2005 show that unauthorized Asian immigrants pay $26,041 to come to America, Europeans pay $6,389, and Africans pay $2,200. The smuggled migrants do not have a green card, work permit, or other legal work authorization waiting for them in the U.S. when they arrive, but they still pay enormous sums of money.”

Using Census Bureau numbers, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) found the US immigrant population, both legal and illegal, stood at 42.4 million. “The growth in the foreign-born population has accelerated over the past few years and immigrants now comprise about one out of every eight U.S. residents, the highest percentage in more than a century,” CIS latest analysis highlighted.

So, if the migrants are fleeing for economic reasons, where are they getting the travel money?  According to a Pew 2013 research report, a total of $52.9 billion in remittances were sent worldwide, but the bulk, $41.9 billion went to Latin America. Those remittances leave the US economy and often end up in the hands of drug cartels and coyotes.

On top of the $52.9 billion remittance figure, a nonpartisan Washington DC group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the US found immigrants benefit from America’s vast social welfare programs. The report found “the majority of households across the country benefitting from publicly-funded welfare programs are headed by immigrants, both legal and illegal. States where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates, are Arizona (62%), Texas, California and New York (61% each) and Pennsylvania (59%). The study focused on eight major welfare programs that cost the government $517 billion the year they were examined. They include Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the disabled, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), a nutritional program known as Women, Infants and Children (WIC), food stamps, free/reduced school lunch, public housing and health insurance for the poor (Medicaid). Food assistance and Medicaid are the programs most commonly used by illegal immigrants, mainly on behalf of their American-born children who get automatic citizenship. On the other hand, legal immigrant households take advantage of every available welfare program, according to the study, which attributes it to low education level and resulting low income. The highest rate of welfare recipients come from the Dominican Republic (82%), Mexico and Guatemala (75%) and Ecuador (70%), according to the report, which says welfare use tends to be high for both new arrivals and established residents.”

In a last ditch effort to fulfill his campaign promises President Obama unveiled his version of amnesty by using his well-worn amnesty pen. The plan grants legal status to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants. “If you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes,” the President said, “you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country.” Obama neglected to mention that the majority of illegal immigrants are so low income that they would pay no net income taxes; moreover, they are eligible for welfare benefits like Obamacare and Earned Income Credit worth thousands in “free” money from taxpayers. A 2006 report from the left-leaning Century Foundation said, “It is likely that the undocumented workers will end up receiving rather than paying the Treasury money.”

With a net loss of the costs associated with illegal immigration, American voters seem drawn to a strong president that would actually enforce laws on the books and turn off the spigot of freebies. One program that could eliminate illegal immigrants from working in the US is E-Verify. The electronic program allows employers to verify the employment eligibility of their employees. The program was authorized by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) and allows employers to submit information taken from a new hire’s Form I-9 (Employment Eligibility Verification Form) through E-Verify. The Social Security Administration and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) then determine whether the information matches government records and whether the new hire is authorized to work in the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security said, “we facilitate federal agencies and employers comply [sic] with U.S. immigration law.” While E-Verify is 98 percent effective, only a small fraction of employers use the program. Along with the Chamber of Commerce, Republican leadership also opposes mandating E-Verify and plays by the Chamber’s political dollars.

And finally, an overlooked financial burden placed on Americans is the cottage identity theft industry. Millions of average Americans fall victim to identity theft by illegal job seekers who use their social security numbers to obtain jobs or access government benefits.

One case reported by the Associated Press involved a Kansas resident, Candida Gutierrez, whose total identity was allegedly stolen by illegal alien Benita Cardona-Gonzalez. The perpetrator used the identity to get a job; a driver’s license, a mortgage and medical care for the birth of two children. Gutierrez said, “When she claimed my identity and I claimed it back, she was informed that I was claiming it too. She knew I was aware and that I was trying to fight, and yet she would keep fighting. It is not like she realized and she stopped. No, she kept going, and she kept going harder.”

The common practice forces victims to spend many hours cleaning up their credit history. Mrs. Gutierrez tried to get the Social Security Administration to give her a new number only to find out that the illegal immigrant did this as well, so the agency ended up issuing a new number to the criminal and forced Gutierrez to file federal income tax forms using an ITIN, which illegal aliens normally use.

Officials say identity thieves become more confident when they remain undetected over time. Assistant US Attorney Brent Anderson, who is prosecuting the Cardona-Gonzalez case said, “And so that is a natural progression, and that is what we are seeing.” Anderson said more cases of total identity theft will be litigated “because we all know what is going on out there — which is thousands and thousands of people who are working illegally in the United States under false identities, mostly of U.S. citizens, and very little is being done about it. But we are doing something about it, one case at a time.”

While most Republican voters vehemently oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants, in the past the GOP’s leadership team has supported the 2013 “gang of eight” comprehensive amnesty bill. After President Trump made illegal immigration a staple on the campaign trail, Middle America sophomorically believed Congress would finally defund Obama’s executive amnesty programs.

Despite the arguments from the MSM, the claims that the US does not have an immigration law are misplaced. The US admits more than a million LEGAL immigrants each year after they file an application, pay a fee, submit to medical records, undergo economic scrutiny, study civics, take a language test, swear an oath to the US, and denounce their former homelands. Some immigrants wait years to obtain legal immigration status by following the legal process, which oftentimes results in long periods of separation from their family members. Many illegal immigrant supporters claiming due process for border crashers forget or ignore the due process and hardship endured by legal immigrants in their rush to the border.

Sadly, it looks like the middle-class worker won’t see a reprieve under the status quo establishment Republicans or the open border Democrats!

Even a leading supporter of Trump has pulled the plug:

After months of activism efforts to encourage President Trump to honor his campaign promises, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is regretfully announcing the revocation of the organization’s endorsement of Donald Trump originally issued February 29, 2016.

ALIPAC’s supporters have endorsed, contributed to, volunteered for, and attended events and rallies to help Trump in response to his promises to enforce all existing immigration and border laws while ending Obama’s DACA Amnesty and building a wall on our southern border.

While Trump promised these things, he quickly caved and retreated on budget negotiations with Congress on funding for the wall this week, while continuing Obama’s overtly unconstitutional DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) Amnesty for illegal immigrants! Trump is sending a message that most illegal aliens have nothing to fear from federal law enforcement and that implementation of US law will be based on his personal feelings instead of the Rule of Law. Trump has also issued an executive order setting dangerous refugee resettlement programs he promised to end at 62,000 imported per year, which is the same average Obama brought in during his terms. ALIPAC has also recently discovered Trump administration spokeswoman and Bush family ally Helen Aguirre Ferre promising future amnesty to illegal aliens on KJZZ radio! (Listen)

“We were so hopeful that Donald Trump would be a man of his word because the campaign promises he made to Americans were the things America needs to do to survive and thrive, but unfortunately, Trump has made it clear he cannot be trusted on his most powerful campaign issue of stopping illegal immigration and amnesty,” declared William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. “Our organization’s supporters have been fighting against illegal immigration and Amnesty for many years, and they say it is time for us to end our endorsement of Trump because close inspection of his actual immigration policies show he is similar to Bush and Obama on Amnesty for illegal immigrants.”