RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270929/daca-sword-damocles-michael-cutler
On Sunday morning, July 22, 2018, Congressman Steve Scalice, the Republican Whip in the House of Representatives was interviewed on Fox News about the Republican agenda, particularly in light of the upcoming midterm elections. He understandably touted the booming economy, plans to create more jobs and then, in response to the question of “protecting the DACA recipients” he expressed determination to secure the border and “protect DACA recipients.” He bemoaned the refusal of the House Democrats to join with the Republicans to protect those supposedly “young” illegal aliens.

My immediate thought, “Not again!”

The original effort of the “Gang of Eight” to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform, employed the scam that since we cannot deport the millions of illegal aliens who are present in the United States America should first secure the border (with Mexico) and then get the millions of illegal aliens “out of the shadows.”

On May 5, 2005 I testified at a hearing conducted by the House Immigration Subcommittee on the topic, New “Dual Missions” Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.

Republican Congressman Lamar Smith, a former Chairman of that subcommittee, participated in that hearing. His prepared testimony laid to waste the argument that there were too many illegal aliens to deport them all. Here is the relevant segment:

In other words, we make it very, very easy in many, many ways for individuals to stay here who are here illegally. That is not the right signal to send if we are, in fact, serious about reducing illegal immigration in America.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270901/trump-vows-border-wall-showdown-matthew-vadum

President Trump raised the specter of a federal government shutdown Sept. 30 if Congress refuses to hand over money to build the southern border wall that the American people have been demanding for decades.

Trump seems aware that, contrary to perceived wisdom, furloughing feds for a few days is smart politics that almost invariably benefits the Republican Party. Recent history shows that when Republicans shutter the government in Washington, they win elections.

“If we don’t get border security after many, many years of talk within the United States, I would have no problem doing a shutdown,” Trump said at the White House Monday during a joint presser with Giuseppe Conte, Italy’s new prime minister who has already gained a reputation as an immigration hardliner.

Trump praised Conte’s stance on immigration and called U.S. immigration laws a “laughingstock” and the “worst” in the world.

“And I agree very much what you’re doing with respect to migration and illegal immigration, and even legal immigration,” Trump told the Italian premier. “Italy has taken a very firm stance on the border, a stance a few countries have taken. And, frankly, you’re doing the right thing, in my opinion. And a lot of other countries in Europe should be doing it also.”

Trump urged Congress to get to work on revamping the nation’s immigration system and said he would “certainly be willing to close it down to get it done.” In addition to wall construction funding, the Trump administration wants to end chain migration and abolish the diversity green card lottery.

Ever the dealmaker, Trump refused to be pinned down by pushy reporters. Although the government will run out of money at the end of September, the president did not promise to veto a spending bill that would avert a shutdown unless it contained “full” funding for a wall with Mexico, but added, “I’ll always leave room for negotiation.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270894/nyc-enlists-shop-keepers-not-ice-combat-michael-cutler
Today we will examine a confluence of events and connect the dots to expose hypocrisy and dispel the myths and lies spewed by immigration anarchists.

Let’s begin with a July 18, 2018 report from the NY Post newspaper stating that the state of New York is suing the Justice Department over immigration laws. According to this report both the City of New York and the State of New York are suing the U.S. Justice Department to stop the DOJ from blocking four million dollars in federal funds for not complying with regulations that require that the city and other recipients of federal grants provide notice to the Department of Homeland Security at least 48 hours in advance of the date and time of any inmate for whom the DHS had requested such an advance notice, and to provide DHS with access to inmates in city-maintained detention facilitates when DHS deems them to be “persons of interest.”

U.S. News & World Report also published an Associated Press news report about the same story but also noting that in addition to New York City and New York State, five other states, New Jersey, Connecticut, Washington, Massachusetts and Virginia had also filed lawsuits on July 18, 2018 in the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan.

The total amount of money being withheld by the DOJ is twenty-five million dollars of which four million would go to New York City.

The news report included this excerpt which quoted New York City’s mayor:

“Our message is clear: the Trump Administration’s actions are illegal and morally bankrupt,” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said in a release.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/free_flights_for_illegals_on_united_while_the_rest_of_us_pay_full_fare.html

United Airlines, the airline that famously dragged a paying passenger off a flight, stuffed a dog into an overhead compartment and killed it, and junked a priceless guitar in their baggage handlers’ tender care, has come up with a new one for us: Free flights for unscreened illegals, sitting right there next to the paying passengers in those newly shrunken seats. In the name virtue-signalling, of course.

Here’s the news item:

United Airlines is donating flights to help reunited immigrant families that were separated at the U.S.’s southern border.

The San Francisco Business Times reported Thursday that the pro-immigration lobbying group FWD.us announced United’s donation in a Facebook post, calling it “needed, timely, and critical.”

“A growing community of support is coming together to reunite families who were separated at the border,” the group posted Wednesday. “We are so thankful and happy to announce that United Airlines is jumping in and helping. Thanks to this partnership with United, we are able to provide travel to the recently reunited immigrant families to get to their next destination with dignity.”

Now, I’m all for an airline showing compassion. Kids separated from their parents due to their parents’ prison problems, and kids separated from their parents due to divorce ought to get free flights, too. But this, from the airline that just a few days ago refused to refund the ticket of a woman who got stuck sitting next to a masturbater, and then got the treat of hearing United’s flight attendants joking about it. Here’s the ‘customer service’ she got from United, as she posted it on Instagram:

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270859/lies-soros-backed-immigration-lobby-michael-cutler
The George Soros-backed American Immigration Council is the latest group hell-bent on “resisting” commonsense immigration enforcement in the U.S. Several in this group are, themselves, practicing immigration attorneys who should know the truth about the dangers of open borders policies in communities across the U.S. However, however, many lawyers at the American Immigration Council gloss over facts and, instead, promote dangerously false information about the legal aspects of the immigration issue.

One such example of the white-washing lawyers at the American Immigration Council is Joshua Breisblatt, the group’s Senior Policy Analyst and an immigration attorney with an extensive background in immigration law and the lobbying efforts mounted in the Halls of Congress to push the open borders agenda. His bio notes that he had worked for Former Congressman Harry Mitchell of Arizona. Breisblatt penned an outrageously deceitful article on the group’s website titled: “USCIS Is Slowly Being Morphed Into an Immigration Enforcement Agency.”

The article begins with these three paragraphs:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued new guidance to initiate deportation proceedings for thousands of applicants denied for any immigration benefit. This policy change will have far-reaching implications for many of those interacting with the agency, but also signals a major shift in how USCIS operates.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/26/close-the-birthright-citizenship-

The law is full of loopholes. If you do not first secure two witnesses, your last will and testament may not be valid. If a policeman fails in reading the Miranda warning, a criminal’s confession may be thrown out and kept away from the jury. And, through the lawbreaking and evasive maneuvers by their illegal alien parents, young children, through no merit (or choice) of their own, may end up with the very beneficial acquisition of U.S. citizenship.

Birthright citizenship began as an unintended consequence of the language of the 14th Amendment. This beneficent amendment was ratified in the wake of the Civil War to address the former Confederate states’ restrictive “black codes,” which limited the rights of the newly freed slaves. Such laws included provisions limiting the right to bear arms, to travel, to make contracts, and much else, often using roundabout maneuvers, such as racially neutral language that based rights on whether one’s grandparents had a particular right.

Thus, the amendment states broadly, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The amendment goes on to protect all such citizens’ “privileges and immunities,” the right to “life, liberty, and property,” and “equal protection of the laws.”

In other words, this was not an immigration amendment, but rather a law aimed at addressing the particular obstacles that faced the recently freed slaves. While tortured readings of the 14th Amendment have also brought us such abominations as an abstract “right to privacy,” which in turn led to the right to abortion and gay marriage, on the question of citizenship, there is at least a debatable question arising from the text of the amendment itself.

What the Court Has (and Has Not) Said

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2018/07/23/can_the_center_hold_it_must_solve_immigration_first_110723.html

The country seems perpetually stuck in 2016. Pundits and authors continue rehashing what “really” happened in the election. Our president — as he demonstrated once again in Helsinki last week — remains preoccupied with electoral math. The Justice Department continues to grind away on the campaign, emerging every few weeks to send the media into a frenzy. And Republicans are still deciding whether, how, and how much to separate themselves from Trump.

The Democrats seem to be stuck even further back — in 2016 primary season — with their establishment wing trying to beat back a populist surge to its left. Bernie’s latest bounce back took the form of a surprising win by fellow New Yorker and self-described socialist, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, over one-time Speaker hopeful Joe Crowley. Meanwhile, long-time senator Diane Feinstein lost the support of California’s Democratic Party to Kevin de Léon, the challenger to her left, despite crushing him in the primary. Even presidential hopefuls looking ahead to the 2020 primary season have darted left, likely in fear of being outflanked.

In other words, moderate Democrats face in 2018 much the same challenge Hillary Clinton faced in 2016, with populist storms surging on both sides. The difference is that today’s Democrats can learn from Clinton’s mistakes.

New Democracy, an initiative led by the Progressive Policy Institute’s Will Marshall, seeks to do just that. For New Democracy’s recent debut at the Washington Court Hotel, center-left politicians and policy experts exchanged ideas on a new Democratic platform. Speakers included Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), former New Orleans mayor Mitch Landrieu, and William Galston, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who was domestic policy adviser to Bill Clinton. Galston’s talk focused on what he argued is a sine qua non for the center-left’s agenda: sensible immigration policy.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270771/lefts-embarrassing-plea-open-borders-michael-cutler
Pro law-and-order immigration advocates in America whine about the emotional arguments and unhinged publicity stunts used by the open borders/abolish-ICE anarchists to sway public opinion.

But, when they use these emotional arguments, the abolish ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) crowd are merely playing to their own personal strengths: irrationality, magical thinking, and projection. The important issue is that law-and-order advocates, like us, have failed abysmally to use our own emotional arguments in changing minds on the immigration topic.

Indeed, the most persuasive emotional arguments strongly favor secure borders and effective immigration law enforcement.

Let’s begin by understanding that a nation’s leaders should be most concerned about the safety, well being and futures of its own citizens the same way that rational parents must prioritize the safety and well being of their own children above all others. From a nurturing perspective, pro law-and-order immigration advocates will have an edge by using this argument.

While we are on the topic of children, consider how the DREAM Act and then DACA were sold to us on the lies that this legislative detritus was supposed to help “young immigrants” who were brought here as children and had no control over their situation.

Of course, those “young immigrants” could have been in their mid-thirties and simply had to claim to have been present in the U.S. prior to their 16th birthdays. Then, when that bill failed to pass, President Obama cobbled together DACA — again claiming that this was about the children because, “Congress had failed to act.” I wrote about this deception in my article, DACA: The Immigration Trojan Horse, How the original DREAM act was designed to cover 90% of the illegal alien population in the US.

Now the press, and the Democrats along with certain judges, have gone off the deep end where an estimated 3,000 children have been separated from their parents along the U.S. Mexican border when they were caught being smuggled into the United States.

Various religious and charitable organizations like T’ruah and Church World Services have turned this into a media circus. Psychologists have been rushed in to help treat these “traumatized” children.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/house-democrats-introduce-first-bill-abolish-ice/

House Democrats introduced legislation on Thursday that would abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the first legislative manifestation of the anti-ICE rhetoric that has increasingly captivated Democrats in recent weeks.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Mark Pocan (D., Wisc.), provides Congress one year to terminate ICE in favor of a more “humane immigration enforcement system.” In practice, the legislation would empower a special commission to redesign the system for handling asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, absent any role for the White House.

The commission would comprise eight lawmakers from both parties as well as nine members selected from “major civil society and immigrants’ rights organizations and individuals directly impacted by ICE practices.”

“The ICE brand has been so damaged by the president that it can no longer accomplish its original mission,” Pocan said, reiterating a message that has become increasingly common among progressive Democrats. “Even ICE agents recognize that ICE doesn’t do what it was intended to.”

The commission would be tasked with identifying “all essential functions of ICE that uphold the Constitution,” and “the appropriate federal agencies that shall be tasked with executing activities such as combating financial crimes, cybercrimes, trade fraud, human trafficking and drug smuggling.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/poll-voters-oppose-abolishing-ice/

Most voters oppose abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to a new Politico/Morning Consult poll, after some congressional Democrats called for scrapping or reimagining it.

Over half, 54 percent, believe the government should keep the border enforcement agency, while only 1 in 4 voters think it should be abolished.

The remaining 21 percent of voters were undecided.

ICE has become more controversial lately as the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy for illegal border crossers resulted in as many as 3,000 minors being separated from their parents as the adults were prosecuted.

Protests against the agency have erupted across the nation, with demonstrators adopting slogans like “No person is illegal” and “Crush ICE.”

Several high-profile Democrats have added their voices to the chorus calling for the agency’s elimination.

Potential 2020 presidential candidates Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Kamala Harris have called for ICE to be scrapped or replaced.

Socialist upstart Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who last month beat out veteran Representative Joe Crowley in the Democratic primary for his New York City district House seat, has called the “draconian” ICE to be abolished.