RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/fbi-record-number-of-illegal-immigrants-tried-to-buy-guns

The FBI this year has turned away a record number of illegal immigrants trying to buy guns, according to a new report of background checks.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System said that it rejected 7,836,600 planned purchases from “illegal/unlawful alien” in 2018. And that was at the end of November. Christmas purchases of guns are typically high and were not included.

That number has been increasing in recent years. In 2017, it was 7.3 million. The year before, it was 7 million rejections. In 2015, it hit 6.6 million.

Illegal immigrants rank at the top of those on the FBI’s “prohibited category.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-when-democrats-embraced-the-southern-border-fencing-strategy

In 2006 Congress passed the Secure Fence Act, which mandated the construction of multilayer pedestrian fencing along about 600 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. It passed with big, bipartisan majorities: 283 votes in the House and 80 in the Senate. Some top Democrats who are still in the Senate today supported the fence: Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Ron Wyden, Debbie Stabenow, and Sherrod Brown.

Just the next year, Congress made clear it didn’t really mean what it said. The new law was amended to make fence building optional.

In 2013, Congress got back into the fence game. The Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform bill included something called the “Southern Border Fencing Strategy.” It called for 700 miles of at least single-layer pedestrian fencing along the border. It wasn’t a standalone measure; the fence was to be part of a broader package of border security measures alongside provisions that would create a process by which the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants would ultimately gain a path to citizenship.

With citizenship in the deal — even citizenship that would take a decade to achieve in some cases — Democrats were fully on board for a border barrier. The Gang of Eight bill passed in the Senate with 68 votes, including unanimous Democratic support. Name any Democrat who is in the Senate today who was there for that 2013 vote — Schumer, Durbin, Murray, Baldwin, Bennet, Blumenthal, Brown, Cantwell, Cardin, Casey, Coons, Feinstein, Gillibrand, Hirono, Kaine, Klobuchar, Leahy, Manchin, Menendez, Merkley, Murphy, Reed, Sanders, Shaheen, Stabenow, Tester, Warner, Warren, Whitehouse, Wyden — name any, and they voted for the bill that included the Southern Border Fencing Strategy.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272349/why-trumps-wall-must-michael-cutler

President Trump has demonstrated, once again, that he is a man of his word, opting to shut down the government rather than accede to the globalist Democrats who refuse to provide funding for the wall to be erected to help secure the dangerous and porous U.S./Mexican border.

Schumer, Pelosi and others, mostly Democrats, have opposed a wall and called for drones and other elements of a “virtual fence” along the southern border insisting that a wall would be too expensive and not needed.

As I noted in an earlier article, America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation, just as the cost of insulating houses ultimately saves money, by keeping warm air from escaping the house in the winter, insulating America against contraband (including deadly, dangerous narcotics), illegals and the criminals and terrorists among them, would protect America and Americans; and help staunch the flow of tens of billions of dollars annually sent out of the United States by illegal alien workers and criminals.

The cost of a secure border wall should be considered an investment in national security, public safety and the livelihoods of American workers. This is one investment that would not only pay for itself and, indeed pay dividends, but save many, many innocent lives.

For years, drones–also known as UAV’s (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles)–have been deployed along that border at great expense and with little or nothing to show for the costly effort.

The deployment of the U.S. military’s Predator UAV’s to support the Border Patrol’s efforts to secure our borders provided many Americans with a sense of security. After all, the military relies on those drones and we all know the U.S. military’s prowess at achieving national security goals and objectives.

In reality, for the most part, that sense of security provided by the drones has been false security. False security is worse than no security.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272368/save-children-build-wall-daniel-greenfield

Since the Democrats went to war against what they called, “family separation”, two migrant children have died. They did not die, as the media would have you believe, because border security is cruel, but because encouraging migrants to cross the desert with their children, as the media has done, is evil.

The outrage, the tears and fury over the policy of deterring illegal migrants from using children to force their way into this country was not compassionate. It did not help migrant children. It killed them.

The 8-year-old boy from Guatemala and the 7-year-old girl from Guatemala, who died earlier this month, are the casualties of their false compassion for children. The media would have its viewers, readers and listeners believe that its outrage was meant to save children. It was not. It was meant to take their lives.

The dead children are not the victims of an overworked Border Patrol that has been deliberately starved of the resources to do its job, because its job would limit the ability of Democrats to steal elections. They are the victims of abusive parents or caretakers, who are willing to use the lives of their children as tickets to get inside the United States, not to escape persecution, but to double or triple their incomes.

The migrants are not refugees fleeing totalitarian regimes that are persecuting them for their beliefs. They are economic migrants who are willing to kill their children to earn more and get more free stuff. And they are every bit as guilty as the parents who leave their children to die in hot cars while they play slot machines. Any sane society would treat their murderous abuse of their children the same way.

Unfortunately we are not a sane society.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-administration-will-appeal-asylum-ruling/

The Trump administration plans to appeal a federal court ruling blocking the administration from shutting down asylum claims by migrants who enter the country illegally.

Federal District Judge Jon Tigar handed down the ruling last week, frustrating the presidential proclamation President Trump issued last month.

The president’s order “irreconcilably conflicts” with current immigration law, Tigar wrote.

He added that immigrants would be at “increased risk of violence and other harms at the border” because of the new regulation.

A panel of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges upheld Tigar’s initial temporary restraining order on the asylum ban, saying it is “likely inconsistent with existing United States law.”

The Supreme Court later upheld the ruling in a 5 to 4 decision.

Administration officials on Wednesday informed the Ninth Circuit that they would appeal the asylum ruling. They requested an extension to file an opening brief to appeal the ruling until several sectors of the government reopen.

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2018/12/david-singer-un-hit-list-can-bypass_20.html

21 Nations that received almost $14 billion in US foreign aid in 2017 could become the key to unlocking the White House confrontation between President Trump and Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer over their refusal to commit the Democrats to authorizing Congress to commit $5 billion immediately towards the construction of Trump’s border wall to prevent illegal immigration into America.

Trump’s threatened Government shutdown by 21 December has been withdrawn as he seeks alternative sources of funding.

The following UN hit list offers a ready solution:

Country, and US Aid 2017
Bangladesh $261 million
Congo $494 million
Egypt $1475 million
Indonesia $277 million
Iraq $3712 million
Jordan $1489 million
Lebanon $505 million
Mali $230 million
Morocco $490 million
Mozambique $580 million
Niger $173 million
Nigeria $852 million
Pakistan $837 million
Russia $168 million
Senegal $197 million
South Africa $511 million
Turkey $153 million
Vietnam $150 million
Yemen $595 million
Zambia $419 million
Zimbabwe $194 million
TOTAL $13762 Million

These 21 states were major players in humiliating Trump — when an American-sponsored resolution in the United Nations General Assembly seeking to condemn Hamas and other militant groups for indiscriminately targeting Israel’s predominantly Jewish civilian population since 2007 failed to secure the required two-third’s majority earlier determined as necessary for its passage.

Trump has warned on many occasions that those who receive money from America — yet do not support America diplomatically — stand to lose financially as a result.

Trump has already well and truly practised what he preached:

– Defunding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency of $360 million annually

– Withdrawing from UNESCO leaving it to fund the 22% of its budget lost as a result

– Calling on NATO countries to meet their agreed share of the NATO budget

– Cutting more than $200 million in funding the Palestine Liberation Organisation

Trump has already ominously warned those countries that humiliated him on the Hamas Resolution that they could be in the firing line for reductions in their annual foreign aid as a result of not voting with America.

This threat becomes increasingly more likely as the Democrats dig in their heels and refuse to give the President the $5 billion he needs to build the border wall — one of the president’s cardinal promises made in the 2016 election campaign that has been frustrated by the Democrats from the day Trump became president.

Trump should be readily able to determine how $5 billion of this $14 billion funding to these recalcitrant states can be redirected to building the border wall.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272311/lawless-judge-strikes-down-trumps-asylum-policy-matthew-vadum

As President Trump made significant progress in his bid to win congressional funding for a border wall with Mexico, a swamp-dwelling federal judge in Washington struck down Trump administration policies that made it more difficult for foreigners who claim to be victims of domestic or gang violence to seek asylum.

Trump has vowed to use the military to build the wall and in recent days sent out mixed messages about whether he would veto a stopgap spending bill needed to avert a partial government shutdown at Friday midnight. After a fierce backlash from conservatives like Ann Coulter apparently prompted Trump to return to his hardline stance insisting on getting border wall funding now before Democrats take over the House of Representatives in two weeks, Republican congressional leaders met with the president at the White House midday Thursday. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) emerged from the meeting to announce Trump would veto any spending measure that lacked funding for the wall, the president’s signature issue on the 2016 campaign trail.

Later Thursday the House voted 217 to 185 to approve a temporary spending bill after adding $5.7 billion in appropriations for the wall. Democrats have said they will oppose the measure when it reaches the Senate where under current rules it requires a supermajority of 60 votes for passage. Presently there are 51 Republicans and 49 Democrats in the Senate. As of January 3, there will be 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats. During a White House meeting with incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last week Trump said he would be happy to shut down the government to gain funding for the wall.

“I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck,” Trump said.

That shutdown now seems certain.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272278/trumps-battle-border-wall-michael-cutler

The immigration debate has been raging for years. Advocates for open borders can be found on both sides of the political aisle and in a wide variety of special interest groups who have come to see the immigration system that delivers an unlimited supply of cheap and exploitable labor, an unlimited supply of foreign tourists, and unlimited supply of foreign students and, for the lawyers, an unlimited supply of clients.

That was the premise for my article, “Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design.”

Now the debate about the construction of a border wall is coming to a head.

A line has been drawn, and not in the sand, but along the highly porous and dangerous U.S./Mexican border that permits huge numbers of illegal aliens to enter the United States without inspection and permits huge quantities of narcotics and other contraband to be smuggled into the United States as well.

President Trump is arguably the first U.S. President in many decades who truly understands that border security equals national security. He also understands that flooding America with exploitable foreign workers from Third World countries is not compassionate for those foreign workers and certainly not for the American workers that they displace.

President Trump is determined to build that wall but incredibly, the Democrats are adamantly opposed to the construction of a border wall.

As I noted in my recent article “Nancy Pelosi, Speaker Of The House – The Sequel (Worse Than The Original),” Pelosi and her Democratic Party colleagues have incredibly declared that a border wall would be as Fox News reported Pelosi’s assertions, “immoral, ineffective and expensive.”

Pelosi and company have created the false illusion that the border wall would seal off the United States from Mexico when, in point of fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The border wall would not block access to U.S. ports of entry along that border but simply funnel all traffic to those ports of entry so that the aliens can be inspected and vetted and records of their entry into the United States can be created. Similarly all cargo would be subject to inspection to keep drugs and other contraband out of the United States.

How could any rational person not want to act to combat the flow of those drugs into the United States?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/20/it_was_always_about_the_wall_138971.html

The reason a secure borer wall has not been — and may not be — built is not apprehension that it would not work, but rather real fear that it would work only too well.

There was likely never going to be “comprehensive immigration reform” or any deal amnestying the DACA recipients in exchange for building the wall. Democrats in the present political landscape will not consent to a wall. For them, a successful border wall is now considered bad politics in almost every manner imaginable.

Yet 12 years ago, Congress, with broad bipartisan support, passed the Security Fence of Act of 2006. The bill was signed into law by then-President George W. Bush to overwhelming public applause. The stopgap legislation led to some 650 miles of a mostly inexpensive steel fence while still leaving about two-thirds of the 1,950-mile border unfenced.

In those days there were not, as now, nearly 50 million foreign-born immigrants living in the United States, perhaps nearly 15 million of them illegally.

Sheer numbers have radically changed electoral politics. Take California. One out of every four residents in California is foreign-born. Not since 2006 has any California Republican been elected to statewide office.

The solidly blue states of the American Southwest, including Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico, voted red as recently as 2004 for George W. Bush. Progressives understandably conclude that de facto open borders are good long-term politics.