Congress and federal judge hoodwink Trump on immigration

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.”


  1. Trump could easily and legally stop reugees from coming to the U.S.. It is the president that decides on the number of refugees each and every year, not congress. The president only has to consult with congress on the subject. Congress has rubber stamped approval every year Obama was in office.

    Most Americans don’t stop and think abour refugees and what they get when we bring them here. First they get green cards (permanent residence status) for life. They also are entitled to all welfare/public assistance benefits, plus public school education for their children.

    We simply can’t keep taking refugees, especially those that are fleeing poor economies, fostered by corrupt governments that allow crime to flourish. This includes those coming from the African continent, and China.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s