Immigration; weaponized immigration

[DougMacG]

Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau plans to welcome at least 100,000 Syrian Muslims, refugees, into his country. This is in addition to the 25,000 he has already admitted.

13% 'support' ISIS, 33% 'sypathize' with ISIS.
http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/13-percent-syrian-refugees-support-isis-poll
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/shock-poll-third-of-syrian-refugees-isis-sympathizers-13-percent-support/

Mr. Trump, it looks like we may need a couple more walls.

The Canada–United States border is the longest international border in the world, 5500 miles, 4000 across the lower 48 + 1500 going up Alaska.  I wonder if Canada will pay for it...

I have never driven or flown into Canada but have been over the border many times on foot, boat and snowmobile.

As an aside, Crafty, may I recommend you take your son or family on a trip into the Boundary Waters before the border is closed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_Waters_Canoe_Area_Wilderness
That portion of the wall will be most difficult to build, a million acres non-motorized, bringing in workers and cement blocks by paddle and portage.  (3 million acres of lakes and forests counting the Canadian side, Quetico Park.)

[Crafty_Dog]

 

Please post in the Homeland Security thread as well.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzTgqksQT0Y#t=29

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article75164957.html

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435274/immigration-elites-support-illegal-immigration-working-class-suffers?BpQgygT4QMu6uybp.01

[DougMacG]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435274/immigration-elites-support-illegal-immigration-working-class-suffers?BpQgygT4QMu6uybp.01

No one except criminals should support illegal immigration.

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.myafricanow.com/african-immigrants-lead-with-the-highest-academic-achievements-in-the-us/

[G M]

http://www.myafricanow.com/african-immigrants-lead-with-the-highest-academic-achievements-in-the-us/

Won't be picked up by the MSM.

[ccp]

I've heard some minorities making a distinction between African Blacks and American Blacks.

In the medical field probably half of new doctors are either foreign born or children of foreign born.

Many are women.  It seems to me in NJ that at half are women.

I guess the evil white male racist society is not out to get them and "keep them down".

I don't recall seeing insurance reimbursement rates and corporate salary rates specify lower pay for females.

Of course as a white male I just can't see it.

[Crafty_Dog]

Many years ago economist Walter Williams noted that blacks immigrated from the Caribbean or of Caribbean descent (e.g. Colin Powell)  scored equal with whites.

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/05/19/airlines-now-offering-free-reduced-airfare-cuban-migrants-texas/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

[ccp]

We cannot continue to let the Left change the language from accurate to disingenuous descriptions that serve their agenda.   What part of the description "ILLEGAL" is not understood?:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-telemundo-president-shuts-down-221600617.html

[G M]

We cannot continue to let the Left change the language from accurate to disingenuous descriptions that serve their agenda.   What part of the description "ILLEGAL" is not understood?:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-telemundo-president-shuts-down-221600617.html

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/immigration-terms-and-definitions-involving-aliens

Illegal Alien

Also known as an "Undocumented Alien," is an alien who has entered the United States illegally and is deportable if apprehended, or an alien who entered the United States legally but who has fallen "out of status" and is deportable.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325


8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

US Code
Notes
prev | next
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

(b) Improper time or place; civil penaltiesAny alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.
(c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than $250,000, or both.

(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, or both.

(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title II, ch. 8, § 275, 66 Stat. 229; Pub. L. 99–639, § 2(d), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3542; Pub. L. 101–649, title I, § 121(b)(3), title V, § 543(b)(2), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4994, 5059; Pub. L. 102–232, title III, § 306(c)(3), Dec. 12, 1991, 105 Stat. 1752; Pub. L. 104–208, div. C, title I, § 105(a), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–556.)

[ccp]

Mitch McC on immigration on a talk show yesterday again cannot say what needs to be said.  He is so worried about insulting the largest and fastest growing voting block - latinos.

Why the heck can he not say look this is not about Latins, or Mexicans.  No one has any problem with them .  It is about the millions of people of all faiths, ethnicities, cultures who are either coming into this country illegally or coming here with visas legally but then overstaying their visas illegally.  Some are from Europe, Asia , Australia, South America, Central America, Africa.  It doesn't matter.  What does matter is we as American citizens have laws and have a solid right to enforce those laws.

Simple.

no one hates mexicans etc.  We do have a right to resent anyone from other countries who come here and break our laws. Period.  And we will enforce them.  Periods

Why can no one ever say this?  Stop making it about Mexicans.  It is about ILLEGALS.  Yes they are undocumented but they are undocumented because they are here illegally period.

And we should not budge on that issue and we are going to enforce out laws and these people will have to leave and get on line.

[Crafty_Dog]

It does not help when Trump makes an ass of himself and farts all over those of us intending to vote for him with stupid, stupid comments like he made about the judge in his Trump U. case.

[ccp]

"It does not help when Trump makes an ass of himself and farts all over those of us intending to vote for him with stupid, stupid comments like he made about the judge in his Trump U. case."

Agreed. 

As for the judge, if there is a conflict of interests due his affiliations then let his lawyers bring it up in a way that will not insult Mexicans and is in accordance with the justice system.

OTOH I don't know if there is a tactful legally acceptable way to do that.  I suppose if his decisions or actions taken seem to not be impartial or objective to the law then a case can be made?
What say attorney on the board?

[Crafty_Dog]

I say Trump should let his lawyer do the talking on this.

[ccp]

Why couldn't you do this in Mexico?

Why can't you get a legal student visa?

Why am I supposed to conclude good grades makes it all good?:

What is it about 'illegal' you as a valedictorian you cannot understand?

"what about a poor American who gets good grades whose spot you now have?"

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/06/09/illegal-alien-high-school-valedictorian-texas-blames-u-s-takes-swipe-trump/

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.facebook.com/TheKellyFile/videos/1813461242202066/

[G M]

https://www.facebook.com/TheKellyFile/videos/1813461242202066/

Hey, only 10% will wage violent jihad.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.facebook.com/WesternJournalism/videos/10154442393108984/?pnref=story

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/us/politics/donald-trump-immigration.html?emc=edit_th_20160619&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193&_r=0

[ccp]

@ the expense of Americans.  What does she care?  It is all about her.  No matter what:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/22/clintonsimmigrationpolicyundermineseconomicnarrative/

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/6PzT8vEvYPg

[DDF]

Was talking with Cynthia this morning. A member of the government here is actively campaigning, for immigrants in the States, to not support Trump. It's a fact. It's happening. Cynthia had included that fact in a news story that she just wrote and the owner took it out, for a few reasons. One reason is to be respectful of American politics, but the other reason might be to avoid American press from getting their hands on that. They would have a field day with it.


I have mixed feelings about it. I would die for the Mexican flag and people. That cannot be argued. I proven it far too many times. Having said that, I also have no political voice here, nor should I. I should accept Mexico as it is, or I should leave, because the people that were born here have a right to live as they wish excluding outside interference.


It is true that Mexico is attempting to campaign against Trump, which is blatantly hypocritical, because they don't allow it here, and they are involving themselves in foreign politics. The reason I have mixed feelings is because the money that people send back here matters. It matters because the poverty here would be even greater than it is currently, and having come to know Mexicans (not Latinos, but the people here), individually one cannot help but care for them. They have given me so much; love, opportunities that even my own government would not give to me.... the truly are a magnificent people as a whole.


The difficulty lies in the fact that I am a hypocrite, because I truly believe in national sovereignity, as does Mexico, and does the US, and many other individuals, and still, if I had to help someone better their life, maybe bending the rules, even though I myself follow them in the case of Cynthia and I, I would. How can one not help someone that legitimately is attempting to do nothing other than feed themselves? At the same time, how can one help everyone that needs help, without risking that which their own family needs to survive? Additionally, Mexicans have a right to their own land, as do Whites, and while it is obvious that Blacks and Latinos also inhabit the US, racism, "institutional racism" specifically, is always levied at Whites in particular, which is wholly unfair, if not just completely ignorant.


Many of us have grown up together in mixed communities. Texas is a great example of that, where Whites, Latinos, and Blacks have existed together for centuries, and while Latinos and Whites get along for the most part, the stain of slavery remains an excuse to many, as does the vitriol hatred that exists because of it.


Where do we go from here? No one woke up this morning and paid someone else's household bills, there are people of every color that make far more than anyone reading this ever will, and we sit here and fight amongst ourselves... to what end? How do we all fix this? How do any of us cease being a hypocrite, especially when we want to do the humanitarian thing, but also safeguard our own welfare as well? There really isn't very much racism. It's more often than not, people (of all colors) either being greedy, or people of all colors having the need to eat, and wanting to protect the security of their own family and themselves. That's what it is. How do we fix it?

[Crafty_Dog]

Enforce the rule of law, which most certainly includes defending our borders and deporting those who are here illegally.  With this in place, it will be time to amend the rules.  America is an unusually kind, forgiving, and generous country.

[DDF]

Enforce the rule of law, which most certainly includes defending our borders and deporting those who are here illegally.  With this in place, it will be time to amend the rules.  America is an unusually kind, forgiving, and generous country.

I agree 100%.

I do think (especially in the age of Facebook), that individuals and that sovereign entities involving themselves in the sovereign politics of another nation, especially when they don't allow it themselves should be addressed though. That's out of bounds.

[ccp]

out of both sides of her mouth as usual:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/07/11/hillary-were-not-holding-people-accountable-for-hiring-illegal-immigrants-which-creates-unlevel-playing-field/

[ccp]

   Because they congress won't:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/08/states-cannot-sue-obama-on-immigration-policy-but-guess-who-can

[Crafty_Dog]

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2016/08/12/the-doj-is-funneling-tons-of-money-to-sanctuary-cities-n2203847

[DDF]

I've been going over the Mexican Constitution for some things concerning myself and my work here (the Mexican Constitution is rather sizeable).

Being that the bulk of illegal aliens in the United States of America are from Mexico, and "gringos" are often referred to as racists for attempting to enforce immigration law, it is pertinent.

Some key points:

Article 2 - specifically recognizes the rights of "indigenous peoples," but given that people with Spanish blood wrote the Constitution, proclaims Mexico as a "multicultural nation" and gives the people with Spanish blood and surnames, dominion in the same land that they took from the indigenous people.

Article 8- "Public functionaries and employees will respect the public exercise to their right to petition, as long as it is formulated in writing, in a peaceful and respectful manner. In political petitioning, only citizens of the republic have this right."

Article 9 - "Only citizens of the Republic may take part in the political affairs of the country."

Article 32 - "Mexicans shall have priority over foreigners under equality of circumstances for all classes of concessions and for all employment, positions, or commissions of the Government in which the status of citizenship is not indispensable."

Article 33 - "The Federal Executive shall have the exclusive power to compel any foreigner whose remaining he may deem inexpedient to abandon the national territory immediately and without the necessity of previous legal action." It also states: "Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.

This is the Constitution for non Spanish speakers as translated by the most respected university in Mexico . UNAM

http://www.juridicas.unam.mx/infjur/leg/constmex/pdf/consting.pdf

It brings to light the blatant hypocrisy and effectively shuts off any argument that anyone from Mexico or any other Latin American country might use in order to attempt to justify illegal immigration.

[Crafty_Dog]

Nice to have this for future reference.  Thank you.

[DougMacG]

We already vet.  We don't treat them all equally.  We discriminate.  Why not gear the process to this time of security crisis?

https://gborjas.org/2016/08/16/on-vetting-immigrants/

The 1917 Immigration Act, which listed the many traits that would make potential immigrants inadmissible, including:

All idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded persons, epileptics, insane persons; persons who have had one or more attacks of insanity at any time previously; persons of constitutional psychopathic inferiority; persons with chronic alcoholism; paupers; professional beggars; vagrants; persons afflicted with tuberculosis in any form or with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease; persons not comprehended within any of the foregoing excluded classes who are found to be and are certified by the examining surgeon as being mentally or physically defective, such physical defect being of a nature which may affect the ability of such alien to earn a living; persons who have been convicted of or admit having committed a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; polygamists, or persons who practice polygamy or believe in or advocate the practice of polygamy; anarchists, or persons who believe in or advocate the overthrow by force or violence of the Government of the United States, or of all forms of law, or who disbelieve in or are opposed to organized government, or who advocate the assassination of public officials, or who advocate or teach the unlawful destruction of property; persons who are members of or affiliated with any organization entertaining and teaching disbelief in or opposition to organized government, or who advocate or teach the duty, necessity, or propriety of the unlawful assaulting or killing of any officer or officers..of the Government of the United States or of any other organized government.
http://library.uwb.edu/static/USimmigration/39%20stat%20874.pdf

[Crafty_Dog]

Nice find.

"polygamists, or persons who practice polygamy or believe in or advocate the practice of polygamy" , , , hmmm , , ,

[ccp]

Making a constructive recommendation to Trump on immigration.  Maybe the editors finally smell the chemical gas coming from the Democrat trenches seeping in.

Yes, time to put on the gas masks.  We are in a fight against the Dems:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439228/donald-trump-immigration-plan-amnesty-option

[DougMacG]

1500 undocumented Americans floated into Canada, were discovered and put on buses back their country of origin.

Is there anything we can learn here?

http://www.thetimesherald.com/story/news/local/2016/08/22/nearly-1500-float-down-participants-land-canada/89092424/

If only we could slow the flow of Canadian hockey players coming here...

[ccp]

What about the term "illegal" do you not understand Gary Johnson?   

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/08/only-a-statist-like-gary-johnson-would-rage-over-the-term-illegal-immigrant

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/09/droves-african-migrants-mexico-awaiting-u-s-asylum-secret-pact/

[objectivist1]

Trump Calls for More High-Skill Immigration

By Michael Barone
September 07, 2016

Would he go hard or go soft? That was the mainstream media template for judging Donald Trump's speech on immigration in Phoenix last Wednesday. The verdict: hard. "How Trump got from Point A to Point A on immigration," was the headline in the Washington Post's recap.

Similarly, the often-insightful Talking Points Memo blogger Josh Marshall characterized Trump's discourse as "hate speech." "Precisely what solution Trump is calling for is almost beside the point."

That's precisely wrong. Marshall found the Phoenix crowd's raucous shouts distasteful, and so did I. But a search through Trump's prepared text and his occasional digressions fails to disclose anything that can be fairly characterized as "hate speech."

Instead it discloses some serious critiques and proposals for recasting our immigration laws, which almost everyone agrees need changing.

Start near the end, with the 10th of Trump's 10 points. He notes that we've admitted 59 million immigrants since the last major revision of immigration law in 1965, and that "many of these arrivals have greatly enriched our country." No asides about criminals or rapists.

Then he proposes a major policy change: "to select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society, and their ability to be financially self-sufficient ... to choose immigrants based on merit, skill and proficiency."

That's not racism or hate speech, and it's not out of line with American tradition.

Emma Lazarus' oft-quoted poem commends America for welcoming "your tired, your poor, your huddled masses" and "the wretched refuse of your teeming shore." But during the great wave of immigration from eastern and southern Europe from 1892 to 1914, the Ellis Island inspectors, in line with national policy, excluded those deemed incapable of supporting themselves as well as those with communicable diseases.

And the United States deported immigrants judged to be terrorists. American immigration policy even then wasn't completely open door.

Trump seems to be calling, in non-provocative language, for changing immigration law to give priority to high-skill immigrants, as do the immigration laws of Canada and Australia. That's not racist: Those countries admit plenty of non-whites. But they do require proficiency in English (or French in Canada).

Both have higher foreign-born percentages of population than the United States, and both have students who score higher on PISA international achievement tests than U.S. students do. No wonder a diplomat from one of those countries told me, half in jest, "Please do not adopt our immigration system."

Every serious expert concedes that the 1965 immigration act resulted in an unexpected huge flow of low-skill immigrants, especially but not only from Mexico. Most serious scholars agree that has tended to reduce, at least a little, wages for low-skill Americans. Do we really need another inrush of unskilled workers in the next few decades?

Near the beginning of his speech, Trump said, "The media and my opponent discuss one thing, and only this one thing: the needs of people living here illegally." That's an exaggeration, but not by much: mainstream media judges Trump hard or soft depending on what he says about illegals. "The central issue is not the needs of the 11 million illegal immigrants -- or however many there may be," he went on. "The only one core issue" is "the well-being of the American people."

To some, this sounds like bigotry, prejudice against foreigners, a preference for a mostly (but far from totally) white populace over a vastly larger (and mostly non-white) humanity. They instinctively prefer Hillary Clinton's version of open borders, allowing anyone who gets here and isn't criminally convicted to stay.

Trump's answer came earlier in the day, in Mexico City, as he shook hands and spoke cordially with President Enrique Pena Nieto. I like and admire him, Trump said; he loves his country and I love mine. Nieto's invitation, much criticized in Mexico, was prompted by his need to get along with whoever is elected U.S. president. That need likewise prompted his cautious remarks about Trump in a joint news conference with Barack Obama earlier this summer.

Trump's threats of trade retaliation and suggestion he might not honor NATO obligations provide rationales for voting against him as irresponsibly reckless. His immigration proposals don't.

His proposals for visa tracking and E-Verify validation of job applicants -- similar to Marco Rubio's -- would marginally reduce the illegal population, as would his deportation of some illegals.

More important, though ignored by mainstream media, is that his policies would produce more high-skill immigrants and Hillary Clinton's plan would produce more low-skill immigrants. Which is better for America?

COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM

Michael Barone is senior political analyst for  the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.

[Crafty_Dog]

I do not have a citation, but am I correct that Baraq is looking to bring in over 100,000 "Syrians" in 2017?   

[G M]

I do not have a citation, but am I correct that Baraq is looking to bring in over 100,000 "Syrians" in 2017?   

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kerry-us-accept-85-000-refugees-2016-100-160512384.html?ref=gs

Got tourniquets?

[Crafty_Dog]

U.S. government “mistakenly” granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants, many from countries of concern to national security
September 19, 2016 11:40 am By Robert Spencer Leave a Comment


“Mistakenly awarding citizenship to someone ordered deported can have serious consequences because U.S. citizens can typically apply for and receive security clearances or take security-sensitive jobs.”
What could possibly go wrong, you racist, bigoted Islamophobe?

In any case, this shows the quality of the Obama “vetting” process.

 
“More than 800 immigrants mistakenly granted citizenship,” Associated Press, September 19, 2016:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government has mistakenly granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants from countries of concern to national security or with high rates of immigration fraud who had pending deportation orders, according to an internal Homeland Security audit released Monday.

The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found that the immigrants used different names or birthdates to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and such discrepancies weren’t caught because their fingerprints were missing from government databases.

DHS said in an emailed statement that an initial review of these cases suggest that some of the individuals may have ultimately qualified for citizenship, and that the lack of digital fingerprint records does not necessarily mean they committed fraud.

The report does not identify any of the immigrants by name, but Inspector General John Roth’s auditors said they were all from “special interest countries” — those that present a national security concern for the United States — or neighboring countries with high rates of immigration fraud. The report did not identify those countries.

DHS said the findings reflect what has long been a problem for immigration officials — old paper-based records containing fingerprint information that can’t be searched electronically. DHS says immigration officials are in the process of uploading these files and that officials will review “every file” identified as a case of possible fraud.

Roth’s report said fingerprints are missing from federal databases for as many as 315,000 immigrants with final deportation orders or who are fugitive criminals. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not reviewed about 148,000 of those immigrants’ files to add fingerprints to the digital record.

The gap was created because older, paper records were never added to fingerprint databases created by both the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI in the 1990s. ICE, the DHS agency responsible for finding and deporting immigrants living in the country illegally, didn’t consistently add digital fingerprint records of immigrants whom agents encountered until 2010.

The government has known about the information gap and its impact on naturalization decisions since at least 2008 when a Customs and Border Protection official identified 206 immigrants who used a different name or other biographical information to gain citizenship or other immigration benefits, though few cases have been investigated.

Roth’s report said federal prosecutors have accepted two criminal cases that led to the immigrants being stripped of their citizenship. But prosecutors declined another 26 cases. ICE is investigating 32 other cases after closing 90 investigations.

ICE officials told auditors that the agency hadn’t pursued many of these cases in the past because federal prosecutors “generally did not accept immigration benefits fraud cases.” ICE said the Justice Department has now agreed to focus on cases involving people who have acquired security clearances, jobs of public trust or other security credentials.

Mistakenly awarding citizenship to someone ordered deported can have serious consequences because U.S. citizens can typically apply for and receive security clearances or take security-sensitive jobs….

[G M]

Strange, we usually see lots of competence from an agency run by the qualified Jeh Johnson.

U.S. government “mistakenly” granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants, many from countries of concern to national security
September 19, 2016 11:40 am By Robert Spencer Leave a Comment


“Mistakenly awarding citizenship to someone ordered deported can have serious consequences because U.S. citizens can typically apply for and receive security clearances or take security-sensitive jobs.”
What could possibly go wrong, you racist, bigoted Islamophobe?

In any case, this shows the quality of the Obama “vetting” process.

 
“More than 800 immigrants mistakenly granted citizenship,” Associated Press, September 19, 2016:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government has mistakenly granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants from countries of concern to national security or with high rates of immigration fraud who had pending deportation orders, according to an internal Homeland Security audit released Monday.

The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found that the immigrants used different names or birthdates to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and such discrepancies weren’t caught because their fingerprints were missing from government databases.

DHS said in an emailed statement that an initial review of these cases suggest that some of the individuals may have ultimately qualified for citizenship, and that the lack of digital fingerprint records does not necessarily mean they committed fraud.

The report does not identify any of the immigrants by name, but Inspector General John Roth’s auditors said they were all from “special interest countries” — those that present a national security concern for the United States — or neighboring countries with high rates of immigration fraud. The report did not identify those countries.

DHS said the findings reflect what has long been a problem for immigration officials — old paper-based records containing fingerprint information that can’t be searched electronically. DHS says immigration officials are in the process of uploading these files and that officials will review “every file” identified as a case of possible fraud.

Roth’s report said fingerprints are missing from federal databases for as many as 315,000 immigrants with final deportation orders or who are fugitive criminals. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not reviewed about 148,000 of those immigrants’ files to add fingerprints to the digital record.

The gap was created because older, paper records were never added to fingerprint databases created by both the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI in the 1990s. ICE, the DHS agency responsible for finding and deporting immigrants living in the country illegally, didn’t consistently add digital fingerprint records of immigrants whom agents encountered until 2010.

The government has known about the information gap and its impact on naturalization decisions since at least 2008 when a Customs and Border Protection official identified 206 immigrants who used a different name or other biographical information to gain citizenship or other immigration benefits, though few cases have been investigated.

Roth’s report said federal prosecutors have accepted two criminal cases that led to the immigrants being stripped of their citizenship. But prosecutors declined another 26 cases. ICE is investigating 32 other cases after closing 90 investigations.

ICE officials told auditors that the agency hadn’t pursued many of these cases in the past because federal prosecutors “generally did not accept immigration benefits fraud cases.” ICE said the Justice Department has now agreed to focus on cases involving people who have acquired security clearances, jobs of public trust or other security credentials.

Mistakenly awarding citizenship to someone ordered deported can have serious consequences because U.S. citizens can typically apply for and receive security clearances or take security-sensitive jobs….

[Crafty_Dog]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-im-investing-500-million-in-migrants-1474344001

[ccp]

This will just promote more migration which is what he wants.

Why not invest to make people do better just where they are.

He is a one world nation guy.   He knows what is best for the rest of us.

[DDF]

This will just promote more migration which is what he wants.

Why not invest to make people do better just where they are.

He is a one world nation guy.   He knows what is best for the rest of us.

Excellent point. It isn't "Soros" either. It's Soros and whoever is the owner of the 7th heart he's had transplanted. To think, he would have been gone long ago.

Edit: My mistake. That was David Rockefeller.

[Crafty_Dog]

Fast-Tracking Immigrants for Votes
 

In light of the recent revelation that at least 858 individuals and maybe twice that many who had been slated for deportation were accidentally granted citizenship, one would expect that the Department of Homeland Security would be working overtime to shore up its vetting process and do its due diligence to reassure Americans that it will work carefully to prevent such a blunder from happening again. The DHS is indeed working overtime — not to get all its paper finger print records digitalized, but to processes as many immigrant citizenship applications as possible before the election.
An email from a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services field office chief stated, "The Field Office due to the election year needs to process as many of the N-400 cases as possible between now and FY 2016." The email continued by "encouraging" employees to take advantage of overtime opportunities in order to meet the processing goal. The level of disconnect is simply stunning. In a letter sent to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) stated, "Your department seems intent on approving as many naturalization cases as quickly as possible at a time when it should instead be putting on the brakes and reviewing past adjudications."
The real problem is a mindset. Last week, one of Hillary Clinton's campaign staffers sent around a tweet quoting Donald Trump: "No one has the right to immigrate to this country." The staffer responded by writing, "We disagree," and said that Trump would have kicked his family out for immigrating from Libya. Whether this ends up being Clinton's official policy is almost irrelevant. This staffer revealed an attitude espoused by many on the Left: The U.S. has no right to reject or limit people from immigrating to America, whereas immigrants have an unfettered right to come here. This globalist, open-borders mindset is the main reason it has been so difficult to get Democrats on board with stopping illegal immigration. This fact is made even more obvious by their refusal to refer to illegal immigrants as "illegal," preferring the moniker "undocumented" immigrant. The truth is, Trump is exactly right that any sovereign nation is obligated to its citizens to regulate immigration, whether this be through limits or prevention. No non-citizen has the right to demand the privilege of citizenship, and to claim that such rights exist is to do violence to the rights of actual citizens.
Comment | Share
Texas Puts Refugee Program on Notice
 

The Obama administration plans to resettle 110,000 refugees into the U.S. over the coming year, but Texas is having none of it. The Lone Star State, which saw an influx of some 7,000 refugees over the last 12 months, has announced plans to sever its participation in the Obama administration's refugee program.
The Washington Free Beacon explains that the reason has to do with a lack of safeguards: "Texas officials drafted a plan that would require federal national security officials to provide assurances that none of the individuals being resettled pose a terror threat. The administration has declined to approve this plan."
Gov. Greg Abbott says, "Despite multiple requests by the state of Texas, the federal government lacks the capability or the will to distinguish the dangerous from the harmless, and Texas will not be an accomplice to such dereliction of duty to the American people. Therefore, Texas will withdraw from the refugee resettlement program. I strongly urge the federal government to completely overhaul a broken and flawed refugee program that increasingly risks American lives."
Abbott is right to be concerned. Around 30,000 migrants from terror hot spots managed to infiltrate the southern border last year. Barack Obama can insist, as he did this week, that "refugees are subject to more vigorous screening than the average tourist." But why should we believe anything he says? Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton asserted, "I think we've done a really good job securing the border."
How good? Well, a newly uncovered DHS memo says, "Refugee fraud is easy to commit, yet not easy to investigate." In fact, "bad actors ... have exploited this program." You don't say. Remember that next time Democrats say we have nothing to worry about.

[G M]

Hey, bigdog declared Jeh Johnson qualified for this position.

Fast-Tracking Immigrants for Votes
 

In light of the recent revelation that at least 858 individuals and maybe twice that many who had been slated for deportation were accidentally granted citizenship, one would expect that the Department of Homeland Security would be working overtime to shore up its vetting process and do its due diligence to reassure Americans that it will work carefully to prevent such a blunder from happening again. The DHS is indeed working overtime — not to get all its paper finger print records digitalized, but to processes as many immigrant citizenship applications as possible before the election.
An email from a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services field office chief stated, "The Field Office due to the election year needs to process as many of the N-400 cases as possible between now and FY 2016." The email continued by "encouraging" employees to take advantage of overtime opportunities in order to meet the processing goal. The level of disconnect is simply stunning. In a letter sent to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) stated, "Your department seems intent on approving as many naturalization cases as quickly as possible at a time when it should instead be putting on the brakes and reviewing past adjudications."
The real problem is a mindset. Last week, one of Hillary Clinton's campaign staffers sent around a tweet quoting Donald Trump: "No one has the right to immigrate to this country." The staffer responded by writing, "We disagree," and said that Trump would have kicked his family out for immigrating from Libya. Whether this ends up being Clinton's official policy is almost irrelevant. This staffer revealed an attitude espoused by many on the Left: The U.S. has no right to reject or limit people from immigrating to America, whereas immigrants have an unfettered right to come here. This globalist, open-borders mindset is the main reason it has been so difficult to get Democrats on board with stopping illegal immigration. This fact is made even more obvious by their refusal to refer to illegal immigrants as "illegal," preferring the moniker "undocumented" immigrant. The truth is, Trump is exactly right that any sovereign nation is obligated to its citizens to regulate immigration, whether this be through limits or prevention. No non-citizen has the right to demand the privilege of citizenship, and to claim that such rights exist is to do violence to the rights of actual citizens.
Comment | Share
Texas Puts Refugee Program on Notice
 

The Obama administration plans to resettle 110,000 refugees into the U.S. over the coming year, but Texas is having none of it. The Lone Star State, which saw an influx of some 7,000 refugees over the last 12 months, has announced plans to sever its participation in the Obama administration's refugee program.
The Washington Free Beacon explains that the reason has to do with a lack of safeguards: "Texas officials drafted a plan that would require federal national security officials to provide assurances that none of the individuals being resettled pose a terror threat. The administration has declined to approve this plan."
Gov. Greg Abbott says, "Despite multiple requests by the state of Texas, the federal government lacks the capability or the will to distinguish the dangerous from the harmless, and Texas will not be an accomplice to such dereliction of duty to the American people. Therefore, Texas will withdraw from the refugee resettlement program. I strongly urge the federal government to completely overhaul a broken and flawed refugee program that increasingly risks American lives."
Abbott is right to be concerned. Around 30,000 migrants from terror hot spots managed to infiltrate the southern border last year. Barack Obama can insist, as he did this week, that "refugees are subject to more vigorous screening than the average tourist." But why should we believe anything he says? Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton asserted, "I think we've done a really good job securing the border."
How good? Well, a newly uncovered DHS memo says, "Refugee fraud is easy to commit, yet not easy to investigate." In fact, "bad actors ... have exploited this program." You don't say. Remember that next time Democrats say we have nothing to worry about.

[Crafty_Dog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtIi8QR5Mzs

[ccp]

Breitbart: Hillary up by 6 in NJ .  No surprise.  Between the major power of the unions and mostly government unions this is reason Dems love open borders:

http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/16/02/08/the-list-what-makes-new-jersey-a-state-of-many-nations/