#CBP

Scandal-less or Scandalous?

The mainstream media have been incessant on pointing out that Barack Obama’s presidency was completely scandal-free, apart from comically making light of his biggest misdemeanour – wearing a tan suit.

Where to start?

The Obama Department of Justice (DoJ) hardly acted in the spirit of its namesake. Nor have many other agencies or departments under his presidency. Some would also criticise the Trump DoJ of same.

Perhaps most noteworthy for us was the ruling by U.S. District Court Justice Andrew S. Hanen which forced Obama DoJ officials to mandatory ethics training over a period of 5 years for willfully ignoring a court order to stop undocumented immigrants from receiving work permits. Hanen claimed he had been misled by DoJ lawyers as to when the Obama administration would implement the directive. Hanen wrote,

The misconduct, in this case, was intentional, serious and material…In fact, it is hard to imagine a more serious, more calculated plan of unethical conduct.

Who could forget Attorney-General Loretta Lynch’s chance meeting with former President Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac in Phoenix just days before she was due to testify about his wife’s handling of classified material over personal emails? Bill Clinton justified it as,

I just wanted to say ‘hello’ to her and I thought it would look really crazy if we were living in a world where I couldn’t shake hands with the Attorney General, you know, when she was right there…Look, it’s 100 degrees out there. Come up and we’ll talk about our grandkids.”

Lynch suggested that they discussed Clinton’s golf game that day, the Orlando nightclub shooting, Brexit and the health of former Attorney General Janet Reno. Sure, the American public can buy that. No one could possibly imagine Hillary Clinton parsed their lips that day.

Or the time the Obama DoJ secretly obtained phone call and email records from the Associated Press (AP). The records, covering all of April and May 2012, covered more than 20 separate phone lines. These records included all outgoing calls of made from work and personal phone numbers of individual AP reporters, as well as the general phone lines of AP bureaus. So much for the constitutional rights of freedom of the press.

Or the debacle of Operation Fast & Furious. This was a plan conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to find the leaders of Mexican drug cartels by selling arms illegally to nefarious dealers in the hopes it would lead back to them. 2,000 weapons went across the border but the ATF admitted they never bothered to track them. One of the guns ended up killing the brother of the former attorney general of the state of Chihuahua. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata were killed by weapons released by the ATF. 300 Mexicans died or were wounded by Fast & Furious guns as well.

In 2012, the House Oversight Committee requested 1,300 pages of key documents it claimed the DOJ had withheld in relation to Fast & Furious and held then AG Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. Obama declared that the documents were protected under executive privilege despite the White House’s stringent denial of involvement. 

Who could forget the National Security Agency’s (NSA) spying scandal? Section 702 empowers the NSA to spy on foreign powers. By doing so it is permitted to retain and use intercepted data that was collected on Americans under strict privacy protections. If any information was wrongly collected it is supposed to be destroyed immediately. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) claimed that Americans were having their information spied upon without a warrant. The NSA admitted that it had been slow to warn other intelligence agencies when such information was wrongly disseminated. It was supposed to warn any agency in possession of such data inside of 5 days. It averaged 19 days with the worst turn around recorded at 130 days.

Obama officials were also caught red-handed monitoring the conversations of members of Congress who opposed the Iranian nuclear deal in 2015. It is consistent with throwing Netanyahu under the bus in his final days of office. 

How soon we forgot the IRS scandal targeting conservative organisations. The IRS was forced to publicly issue a sincere apology to these conservative groups for “heightened scrutiny and inordinate delays.

The outcome of the Linchpins case, which exposed the IRS, revealed that it was wrong to apply federal tax laws based only on an entity’s name, political viewpoints or positions on societal issues. The judge ruled that the IRS must act fairly, and using any form of politically based discrimination in administering the tax code is a violation of First Amendment rights.

The former FBI Director Jim Comey admitted in the Russia probe that he “was overconfident in the procedures that the FBI and Justice had built over 20 years. I thought they were robust enough. It’s incredibly hard to get a FISA. I was overconfident in those…There was real sloppiness, 17 things that either should’ve been in the (FISA) applications or at least discussed and characterized differently. It was not acceptable…I was wrong.

Hardly a scandal-free presidency. The fish rots at the head.

Which brings us to #Obamagate.

What did Obama know and when with respect to the Russia-collusion probe? Why were FISA warrants signed based on the FBI knowing full well it was based on fabricated evidence, including the Steele Dossier, which John Podesta testified was ultimately paid for by the DNC and the Clinton campaign? Why did then FBI Chief of Counterespionage Peter Strzok talk of insurance policies should Hillary Clinton lose and have a stream of disparaging texts showing his utter contempt of Trump? How could he possibly be independent in his work with such personal bias? Why did Strzok’s lover, Lisa Page state in September 2016 that “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing.” Just an innocent pillow text?

Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell responded to a congressional request yesterday to declassify a list of Obama administration officials who had requested the unmasking of National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn from Nov. 8, 2016 to Jan. 31, 2017. They included,

  1. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power
  2. White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough
  3. Vice President Joe Biden
  4. FBI Director  James Comey
  5. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
  6. CIA director John Brennan
  7. Secretary of the Treasury Jack Lew
  8. Deputy Chief of Mission to Italy and Republic of San Marino Kelly Degnan
  9. U.S. Ambassador to Italy and the Republic of San Marino John R. Phillips
  10. U.S. Treasury Office of Intelligence and Analysis Patrick Conlon
  11. Acting Assistant Treasury Secretary Arthur McGlynn
  12. Acting Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mike Neufeld
  13. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Sarah Raskin
  14. Under Secretary Treasury Nathan Sheets
  15. Acting Under Secretary Treasury Adam Szubin
  16. U.S. NATO Advisor Robert Bell
  17. U.S. Representative to the NATO Military Committee Vice Admiral John Christenson
  18. U.S. NATO Office of the Defense Advisor Policy Advisor for Russia Lt. Col. Paul Geehreng
  19. U.S. NATO Defense Advisor James Hursh
  20. U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission to NATO Lee Litzenberger (now Ambassador to Azerbaijan)
  21. U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO Ambassador Douglas Lute
  22. U.S. NATO Political Office Scott Parrish
  23. Deputy Secretary of Energy Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall
  24. U.S. NATO Political Advisor Tamir Waser
  25. U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Tefft
  26. U.S. Ambassador to Turkey John Bass
  27. Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Intelligence Integration Michael Dempsey
  28. Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence Stephanie O’Sullivan

Obama’s name is absent. Why so many people from the Treasury? How could so many people from Obama’s inner circle have known about the now exonerated Flynn but not the President? Note these were 28 individual requests rather than a single memo passed between people. Looks from the outside to be an abuse of power by eavesdropping on a political opponent. One of those individuals is now running for President.

On the surface, this surveillance looks like a far more impeachable offence than any Ukrainian quid pro quo nonsense that recently transpired.

Obama’s reaction after Flynn’s acquittal made him sound uncharacteristically offbeat and garbled in his message.

Say what one will about Trump’s character and behaviour but one has to question the ethics of the former administration. Seems more scandalous than scandal-less.

Whose state of mind should be shredded? Fact checking Trump’s SOTU claims

Really? Nancy Pelosi defended her actions at the SOTU by saying she “shredded his state of mind!

We fact check Trump’s claims below beyond the unemployment figures we put forward yesterday.

—–

CLAIM: “In 8 years under the last administration, over 300,000 working-age people DROPPED OUT of the workforce. In just three years of my administration, 3.5 MILLION working-age people have JOINED the workforce.”

TRUE

During Obama’s two terms in office, the participation rate dropped from a high of 65.7% to 62.7% by the end. Since President Trump took office, the rate has grown from 62.8% to 63.2% which sums to c.3.7 million more people joining the workforce.

Source: BLS

——

CLAIM: “The median household income is now at the highest rate ever.”

TRUE

The U.S. Census has been tracking median household income since 1984. In 2018, the last year recorded by the U.S. Census Bureau, household median income was at $63,179, the highest number recorded.

Source: Census Bureau

——

CLAIM: In the Democratic response, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer said that more than 275 bipartisan bills sit on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s desk.

TRUE

Source: Congress roll calls

——

CLAIM: “Under my administration, seven million Americans have come off food stamps and 10 million people have been lifted off of welfare.”

TRUE

“Food stamps” aka U.S Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) data shows seven million less people than there were before President Trump took office. Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance saw a roughly 4.7 million person decrease.

Source: SNAP

——

CLAIM: President Trump claimed that America has gained 12,000 new factories under his administration after losing 60,000 factories under the previous two administrations.

TRUE

The Bureau of Labor tracks manufacturing establishments every quarter. US had 398,837 factories at the start of Bush’s presidency in 2001 and 343,972 manufacturing establishments at the end of Obama’s presidency in 2017. That’s a drop of 54,865. The preliminary data for 2Q 2019, reveals 356,046 factories. +12,074 since 2017.

Source: BLS

——

CLAIM: “Thanks to our bold regulatory reduction campaign, the United States has become the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world, by far.”

SLIGHTLY MISLEADING

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the U.S. has been the #1 producer of oil and natural gas in the world since 2013 before Trump took office.

Source: USEIA

——

CLAIM: “Since my election, the net worth of the bottom half of wage earners has increased by 47 percent, three times faster than the increase for the top one percent.” 

TRUE

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (FRED), the reports the net worth of the bottom half of the population was $1,070,183mn at the start of 2017. As of the third quarter of 2019, it was 1,668,034mn. That’s an increase of 55.86%, more than Trump quoted. The Top 1%, had $29,955,829mn. In 3Q 2019, it was $34,533,370mn, or 15.3%

Source: FRED Top 1% and Bottom 50%

——

CLAIM: “I have raised contributions from the other NATO members by more than $400 billion, and the number of allies meeting their minimum obligations has more than doubled.” 

TRUE

NATO Europe and Canada are expected to raise defense spending by a cumulative $400 billion US dollars by 2024 to meet the 2 percent of GDP obligations – though those obligations were agreed to in 2014.

Source: NATO

——

CLAIM: “Last year, our brave ICE officers arrested more than 120,000 criminal aliens charged with nearly 10,000 burglaries, 5,000 sexual assaults, 45,000 violent assaults and 2,000 murders.” 

TRUE

Source: ICE

——-

CLAIM: “As a result of our unprecedented efforts, illegal crossings are down 75 percent since May — dropping eight straight months in a row.”

TRUE

May, 2019 saw 144,116 apprehensions. Arrests have dropped every single month since that rime, reaching 40,620 in December, 2019. January data not released but apprehensions down 72%.

Source: CBP

——

CLAIM: “In the last three years, ICE has arrested over 5,000 wicked human traffickers.” 

TRUE

ICE has made 5,387 human trafficking arrests.

Source: ICE

——

CLAIM: “We have now completed over 100 miles and will have over 500 miles fully completed by early next year.”

MOSTLY TRUE

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf announced the completion of the border wall’s 100th mile. 400-450 miles of wall would either be completed OR under construction by the end of 2020 — not 500.

Source: DHS

——

CLAIM: “Since 2016, the violent crime rate in America has fallen nearly 5 percent after rising each of the two years before President Trump took office.”

TRUE

Violent crime fell 4.5% between 2016 to 2018. Preliminary 2019 numbers show a further decrease.

Source: FBI

——

CLAIM: Trump claimed drug overdose deaths declined for the first time in nearly 30 years.

TRUE

2018 was the first time in nearly 20 years that the number of drug overdose deaths declined and only the second time in nearly the last 30 years.

Source: CDC

—–

CLAIM: “Three years ago, the barbarians of ISIS held over 20,000 square miles of territory in Iraq and Syria. Today, the ISIS territorial caliphate has been 100 percent destroyed.”

TRUE

In March 2019, U.S.-backed forces in Syria captured the Islamic State’s last physical territory. In 2016, the ISIS held about 37,530 sq miles in Iraq and Syria.

Source: The Wilson Center

—–

Judging by her actions, should we believe “there is no such thing as eternal animosity.”

She sure has a strange way of showing it.

The only truth Pelosi spoke was that she “didn’t need lessons in dignity from the president.” She has that base well and truly covered.

The only truth in Pelosi was her denial.

Analysing 37 anti-Trump Psychiatrists for glaring bias

On July 7, 2019, a video did the rounds on social media referring to a book titled, The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump,which contained the updated findings of 37 psychiatrists and mental health experts, led by Dr Bandy X. Lu, a forensic psychiatrist from Yale School of Medicine.  It followed on from a previous work published in October 2017, where only 26 other psychiatrists had joined forces with Lu at the time. 

Social media lapped up Dr. Lu’s claim that she was the President of the World Mental Health Coalition (WMHC).  If one throws ‘world‘ in a title it sounds more impressive, doesn’t it? Although Americans often struggle with the word “world”. For decades Americans hosted a baseball event called the “World Series” where no other nations played.

Still, we felt compelled to check how gargantuan the WMHC is to properly measure its global status. For reference, the American Psychiatric Association has c. 38,000 members. We could be easily led to believe the WMHC had multiples of that. Sadly not. It has a total of 37. Yes, thirty-seven. Given the World Psychiatric Association represents 200,000 members worldwide, we can get a fair idea of how much ‘pull’ WMHC hasn’t.

Turns out WHMC is an “all-volunteer organization, and donations are used for direct educational activities, to strengthen the fabric of society as we better our collective mental health.” with the following donation manifesto:

“We:

1. provide consultation to government bodies upon request;
2. organize public forums for discussion and education; and
3. alert, protect, and educate the public when when we see signs of imminent or lasting danger within the body politic or in its leaders.” [although there is a typo they might wish to address which we have highlighted for them]

Perhaps the most telling part of the bias in the updated version can be found in the Amazon summary of the latest book,

The prestigious mental health experts who have contributed to the revised and updated version of ‘The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump’ argue that their moral and civic “duty to warn” supersedes professional neutrality.

You don’t say? If these psychiatrists ever testify in court (as they proudly claim they often do), any attorney defending the accused should just dredge out this summary to prove they aren’t impartial by their own admission.

Lu proved once again that Trump Derangement Syndrome lives and breathes within the walls of elite tertiary institutions of America, just like Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan who admitted she crossed the road to avoid walking in front of a Trump building during her impeachment testimony. This is the level of maturity one gets for a $70,000pa education.

The WMHC has no qualms publishing a question from a town hall which included an “…historic number of leading psychiatrists in our country felt the imperative to publish such a book because of their unprecedented fears about a President with such severe mental problems…”

Historic being 37…If 500 law professors can get their act together on co-signing a letter on articles of impeachment, surely the psychiatric community can achieve a higher watermark. May we suggest they take a leaf out of the 11,000 scientists who signed a letter on climate change which Mickey Mouse, Albus Dumbledore or Araminta Aardvark were among the co-signatories.

Back to the video. Lu’s opening statement was that Trump “failed every criterion for rational and reality-based decision-making capacity.”

Reading in a robotic style off an autocue, Dr. Lu said that Trump is unfit to be president based on the wealth of data gleaned from the 448-page Mueller Report (released to the public on April 18, 2019). So between April 18th to July 7th, the WMHC has absorbed all 448-pages with a thorough and impartial eye.

Forget that the Mueller said under oath that the report “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated” with Russia.

Dr Lu said, “first and foremost, we want to remove Mr Trump’s access to nuclear weapons and war-making powers…we could offer many more, but given the urgency, we decided to focus on the two most important.”

Since when did 37 psychologists become experts in foreign policy?  In more than 1,000 days in office, no country has come close to being nuked by Trump. Unlike his predecessor, foreign powers realise he is not messing about. Cross a red line and there are consequences. Period. Are psychiatrists confusing unorthodoxy with mental illness?

Did the WMHC predict that Iran would end its retaliation so soon? It is a bit silly to believe that they won’t continue the 4-decade proxy war.

However CNN (which is in thorough need of psychiatric assessment alongside WaPo. NYT and other mainstream media outlets) indulged us with, “Iran’s strikes seem intended to avoid US deaths. Here’s why that might be the case.” Wow. That is a pretty darned expensive way to fire shots across a bow. We guess once in possession of Obama’s gift of billions, Iranian generals can afford the luxury of expending multiple $100,000 missiles instead of $1,000 shells.

Maybe the WMHC can tell us why CNN believes those thoughtful leaders of the Iranian regime were compassionate enough to spare the lives of an enemy they swear death to. Who knew?

Lu makes the audacious claim that, “Our work is not about Mr Trump who may not be a danger as a private citizen, but about protecting society against the powers of the presidency in a person who has not demonstrated the ability to handle them.

If the work isn’t about Trump, why does the WMHC have a section that also targets this administration’s border protection policies? It released a statement on refugees which said the following,

We write as mental health professionals who are deeply concerned about the psychological harm our nation’s current immigration practices inflict on asylum seekers, immigrant communities, and our society…We are alarmed that recent changes in executive policy and personnel show increasing cruelty with intent to inflict as much pain as the law allows.”

It is a safe assumption to think that the WMHC members aren’t staunch Republicans. Never mind that Obama first introduced kids in cages separation laws at the border, something confessed by the mainstream media late last year. Who needs facts on the psychiatrist’s couch?

Presumably, the next iteration of the book will suggest that the 63m that voted for Trump are equally in need of having their voting rights repealed for their inability to handle their democratic rights.

Lu proudly states she has testified in court cases with respect to forensic psychiatry but in this case feels that interviewing the subject is not important. She read out from the screen,

As the evidence was overwhelming, and since outside perspectives are more important in a functional exam than a personal interview, we did not feel we needed one…the wealth and quality of the report’s content made this possible…in fact we had more and better data under sworn testimony than we have ever had in our usual practice.

Psychiatrists are banned by law from diagnosing patients without examining them although Lu thinks this step is unnecessary to make a determination that he is unfit. Hmmm.

Also, we are not interested in a diagnosis of the president because he is not our patient.

Lu said her group offered the president to undergo an examination if he believed himself fit. His office acknowledged receipt of the request. Like any sane human being, a polite “p*ss off” was the only appropriate reply to a bunch of sanctimonious intellectuals who think they know better than all of us.

Force in numbers (even as tiny as 37) signing consensus-based documents like this are the latest weapons used by liberals. Albert Einstein once said to a scientist who claimed he’d get 100 scientists to prove him wrong replied, “it only takes one!

Of course, we can already hear the defenders of the WMHC ring loud on the basis of their academic credentials.

However, we hold a different view. Just because one holds qualifications in a particular field from a reputable institution, doesn’t mean they don’t carry biases or conflicts of interest. Schools with brand names often escape rigorous scrutiny because they are so revered and citing them is seen as adding credibility to one’s own arguments.

In 2015 a claim was made against Harvard for not disclosing financial conflicts of interest. A press release entitled ‘Clean air and health benefits of clean power plan hinge on key policy decisions’ constituted a gushing praise of a commentary entitled ‘US power plant carbon standards and clean air and health co-benefits’ by Charles T. Driscoll, Jonathan J. Buonocore, Jonathan I. Levy, Kathleen F. Lambert, Dallas Burtraw, Stephen B. Reid, Habibollah Fakhraei & Joel Schwartz, published on May 4, 2015, in Nature Climate Change.

The claim (a letter to the Dean) suggested that

“two of the co-authors of the commentary, Buonocore and Schwartz, are researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Your press release quotes Buonocore thus: “If EPA sets strong carbon standards, we can expect large public health benefits from cleaner air almost immediately after the standards are implemented.” Indeed, the commentary and the press release constitute little more than thinly-disguised partisan political advocacy for costly proposed EPA regulations supported by the “Democrat” administration but opposed by the Republicans. Harvard has apparently elected to adopt a narrowly partisan, anti-scientific stance…The commentary concludes with the words “Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests”. Yet its co-authors have received these grants from the EPA: Driscoll $3,654,609; Levy $9,514,391; Burtraw $1,991,346; and Schwartz (Harvard) $31,176,575. The total is not far shy of $50 million…Would the School please explain why its press release described the commentary in Nature Climate Change by co-authors including these lavishly-funded four as “the first independent, peer-reviewed paper of its kind”? Would the School please explain why Mr Schwartz, a participant in projects grant-funded by the EPA in excess of $31 million, failed to disclose this material financial conflict of interest in the commentary? Would the School please explain the double standard by which Harvard institutions have joined a chorus of public condemnation of Dr Soon, a climate sceptic, for having failed to disclose a conflict of interest that he did not, in fact, possess, while not only indulging Mr Schwartz, a climate-extremist when he fails to declare a direct and substantial conflict of interest but also stating that the commentary he co-authored was “independent”?”

We don’t accuse the WMHC of committing crimes but we think this example shows that we shouldn’t blindly accept the findings from academics without heavier scrutiny.

Certainly, in the case of these 37 psychiatrists, even a deplorable uneducated Trump supporter can see through the heavy coats of bias and condescending rhetoric. The ultimate irony is these people have such confidence in their own intellectual superiority that they reckoned one would look under the hood.

Maybe when 200,000 global psychiatrists ascribe to the same view as WMHC, we may be inclined to lend more credibility to the suggestions of Trump being unfit for a role. At the moment the WMHC appears to be mentally unsuited to uphold the very high standards of the wonderful work done by the rest of the mental health community.

They needn’t worry. It is likely that more than 63 million Americans will make that determination in November 2020 on whether he is still fit to serve.

Nativity scene in cages

A Claremont United Methodist church has decided to put the nativity scene inside cages to “consider the most well-known refugee family in the world.”

Bleeding liberal hearts don’t want to accept that if citizens don’t like particular laws, they should vote to change them. Simple. This follows on from a similar stunt in June 2019 where woke artists in NY protested kids in cages by using 24 mockups complete with audio being blasted through speakers of crying and wailing kids. pluck at those heartstrings.

While humanitarian crises are nothing to laugh about, for all of the accusations of heavy-handed, inhumane, jackboot wearing authoritarian ICE & CBP officials we hear so much about, how is it that in full knowledge of all of that, these illegal immigrants still choose to risk everything to come to America. They know that going through the legal process of filing for refugee status at an official border will likely be rejected, therefore choose to enter via the illegal route. 

It wasn’t so long ago that Trump suggested bussing illegal immigrants to predominantly Democrat-controlled sanctuary cities basing it on the idea that if they proclaim publicly how welcome they are there should be no issues. How these virtue-signalling politicians howled in protest.

The greater irony is that a growing number of illegal immigrants are choosing to move OUT of sanctuary cities. In 2007, 7.7mn (63.1%) lived in the 20 largest metros to 6.5mn (60.7%) in 2016 according to Pew. During that time 1.5m illegal immigrants were deported (12.2mn ->10.7mn).

Yet the media, too eager to bash Trump on any occasion with respect to his border policies were forced to issue retractions last month. Ouch.  Who could forget when Manfred Nowak, an expert from the U.N. Global Study on Children Deprived of Liberty, claimed that 100,000 migrant children were detained by the Trump administration. He also indicated that it was the “world’s highest rate” of detained children. How the mainstream media had to take a slice of humble pie the following day when Nowak acknowledged that the cited number was from 2015 — under President Obama.

No one with a heartbeat wants to see screaming kids locked in cages. Separated? Well, there is a good reason for that. When even the likes of left-leaning HuffPo admitted in December 2014 that 80% of women and girls are sexually assaulted while trying to make it across the border there is a good reason to question the proof of identity of the supposed parents. Even if 90% of parent/children pairs are legit, what of the 10% that aren’t? Do ICE risk it?

To emphasize the danger of lax screening, multiple kids were found dead after being abandoned once across the border as their usefulness as a golden ticket on compassionate grounds had expired. If that isn’t some of the worst forms of child abuse then what is? Moreover, these people are hardly the type that decent Americans would want to embrace with open arms! Come one, come all?

While there is no doubt a case to be made for illegals who could make wonderful contributions to society, perhaps some stats from ICE’s latest annual report should shed light on reality.

ICE’s 2018 annual report notes the following situation at the border:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) has continued to use resources as effectively and efficiently as possible to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

In FY2018, ERO arrested 158,581 aliens, 90% of whom had criminal convictions (66%), pending criminal charges (21%), or previously issued final orders (3%). The overall arrest figure represents an 11% increase over FY2017.

  • 2015: 101,800
  • 2016: 110,104
  • 2017: 143,470
  • 2018: 158,581

The number of individuals detained by ERO is driven by enforcement actions taken by ICE and apprehensions made by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In FY2018, 396,448 people were initially booked into an ICE detention facility, an increase of 22.5% over FY2017.  Book-ins to detention resulting from CBP arrests increased by 32% over the previous year, illustrating a surge in illegal border crossings.

  • 2015: 307,342
  • 2016: 352,882
  • 2017: 323,591
  • 2018: 396,448

In FY2018, ERO removed 256,086 illegal aliens, reflecting an increase of 13% over FY2017. The majority of removals (57%) were convicted criminals. Additionally, 5,914 of the removed illegal aliens were classified as either known or suspected gang members or terrorists, which is a 9% increase over FY2017.

  • 2015: 235,413
  • 2016: 240,255
  • 2017: 226,119
  • 2018: 256,086

Here are some of the reasons for arrest – both criminal convictions and charges – for 2017 (2018):

  • Driving under the influence : 80,547 (80,730)  
  • Dangerous drugs: 76,503 (76,585) 
  • Immigration violation:  62,517 (63,166)  
  • Assault: 48,454 (50,753) 
  • Larceny: 20,356 (20,340)  
  • Burglary: 12,836 (12,663)
  • Fraud: 12,398 (12,862)
  • Illegal weapon possession: 11,173 (11,766)
  • Sex offences: 6,664 (6,888)
  • Stolen Vehicles: 6,174 (6,261)
  • Forgery: 5,210 (5,158)
  • Homicide: 1,886 (2,028)
  • Kidnapping: 2,027 (2,085)
  • Prostitution racketeering: 1,572 (1,739)

Since the initial surge at the Southwest border (SWB) in FY2014, there has been a significant increase in the arrival of both family units (FMUAs) and unaccompanied alien children (UACs). In FY2018, approximately 50,000 UACs and 107,000 aliens processed as FMUAs were apprehended at the SWB by the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP). These numbers represent a marked increase from FY2017 when approximately 41,000 UACs and 75,000 FMUA were apprehended by USBP.

While USBP routinely turns FMUA apprehensions over to ICE for removal proceedings, ICE is severely limited by various laws and judicial actions from detaining family units through the completion of removal proceedings. For UAC apprehensions, DHS is responsible for the transfer of custody to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) within 72 hours, absent exceptional circumstances. HHS is similarly limited in their ability to detain UACs through the pendency of their removal proceedings. When these UACs are released by HHS or FMUA are released from DHS custody, they are placed onto the non-detained docket, which currently has more than 2,641,589 cases and results in decisions not being rendered for many years. Further, even when removal orders are issued, very few aliens from the non-detained docket comply with these orders and instead join an ever-growing list of 565,892 fugitive aliens.”

CM will quote Thomas Sowell again,

A passionate commitment to social justice is no substitute for knowing what the hell you’re talking about.

The Democrats & MSM still don’t get it

Of course the Democrats have been wailing “racism” with respect to this tweet. What the Dems and the mainstream media keep forgetting is that all they do is give Trump free exposure. The intended message relating to his racism, bigotry, white supremacy etc etc is diluted. CM has said for the longest time that the best way to defeat Trump is to give him zero airplay over such nonsense. Sadly TDS prevents rational thought and encourages hysteria.

Anti-ICE protestors take down US flag and hoist Mexican flag in its place

Nikki Haley said it best,

Watching this video of anti ICE protestors bringing down the American flag and raising the Mexican flag. There are no words for why the Democrats are staying silent on this. If this is your way to winning an election, fire your strategist. This is disgusting. Love your country. And if you don’t like what is happening then tell the members of Congress to get to work and fix it.”

If these protestors hate America so much, why don’t they move to Mexico? To raise its flag surely suggests living south of the border must be superior? Yet more conditional citizens. If they hate the laws, then look to change them rather than disrespect those they disagree with.

If America is so hateful, why are so many still trying to get in illegally?

CM thinks Nikki Haley will be the 2024 candidate for president. With stunts like this, her odds look better and better.

AOC, best remember that victory loves preparation

Poor old AOC sought to hammer former ICE Director Thomas Homan but he pointed out facts and made her look rather wanting…she is really becoming a liability for the Dems.

If she doesn’t like the laws she is in a great place to change them.