Too Many Coincidences, Too Many Lies

A friend posted this over on FB.  With all the crazy goings on involving Republicans vs Democrats and Trump vs everyone it's sorta hard to keep track of who's who in the zoo.  I do know that it gets pretty disheartening to watch all this unfolding.  I keep telling myself that we've had many raucous times in our history with a lot of incivility, but what's going on now is pretty sad.  I know I've never seen such hatred as is exhibited against our President.  And I don't think I've ever seen such ignorance in otherwise  reasonable people who believe all the nonsense reported by his enemies and are filled with blind hate.  I also am amazed at how many in the Democrat party are embracing Socialism, guaranteed wage, abolishment of ICE, Medicare for all, etc.  It reminds me of that famous Margaret Thatcher quote, "The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money".

Anyway, check out this litany of disgusting behavior.  Maybe some of it is a stretch.  Maybe some of it isn't exactly right.  Maybe some of it is a coincidence.  But enough of it is factual that it should make the average American scratch their heads.  But this never gets reported.  Or if it is reported, it's done with a smugness that makes you wonder if you're an idiot for even thinking that this stuff could be true.  And that is one of the biggest problems.  We're not being told the truth and we're being lied to routinely by the media who have their own axes to grind.  All in all a shameful situation.

VERY INTERESTING READ..........BUT I AM SURE NO ONE IS SURPRISED ...

From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

A Grand Jury had been empaneled.

Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”.

Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared.

Guess who took over this investigation in 2002?

No other than James Comey.

Guess who was transferred in to the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS?

Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner.

Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005?

No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.

Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this timeframe???

I know, it’s a miracle, just a coincidence, just an anomaly in statistics and chances, Robert Mueller.

What do all four casting characters have in common?

They all were briefed and/or were front line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation.

Now that’s just a coincidence, right?

Let’s fast forward to 2009.

James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin.

Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, on her own personal email server by the way.

The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of the Hillary.

Like all good public servants do, you know looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.

Now you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t, the People got absolutely nothing out of it.

However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for a one hour speech then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours.

Ok, no big deal right?

Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.

Guess who was the FBI Director during this timeframe?

Yep, Robert Mueller.

He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009.

Guess who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland.

No other than, Rod Rosenstein.

Guess what happened to the informant?

The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.

How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?

Guess what happened soon after the sale was approved?

$145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal.

Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division?

None other than, Lois Lerner.

Let’s fast forward to 2015.

Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that the Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlawed personal email server.

He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law.

He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email.

Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013?

Guess who secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer.

None other than James Comey.

Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh?

Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and exonerates her.

In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy.

They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury.

Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 8th of 2016, and exonerates the Hillary from any wrongdoing.

It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues

FISA Abuse, political espionage..... pick a crime, any crime, chances are...... this group and a few others did it.

All the same players

All compromised and conflicted.

All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves.

All connected in one way or another to the Clinton's.

As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

Let us not forget that Comey's brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation's taxes.

That's the end of the FB post.  But it doesn't even take into account the whole McCabe, Strozk, Page affair and all the shenanigans that occurred in an attempt to bring down the President.  It's been relentless and based on virtually nothing.  And yet the country is suffering through this on a daily basis.  The Democrat haters will point to indictments, plea deals, and convictions.  But none of that stuff has anything to do with Trump or his purported dealings with Russia.  It's mindboggling that this whole investigation got off the ground, let alone that it continues.  And given the linkages, it's mindboggling that Mueller is leading it with a cast of characters straight out of Democrat party casting.  Enough already.

The Immigration Mess

The hyperbole and outright lies regarding our immigration mess has been interesting to watch.  It seems that we've come to a place where everyone is pissed and no one is willing to anything about it. Except, that is, blame President Trump.  There's no doubt that his administration pulled some boneheaded action early on in the latest enforcement attempt.  But they are fixing that as best they can and hopefully will get to a static state.  I say hopefully because I don't really believe it.  It will continue to a dog's breakfast.

A friend who is a Priest and lawyer is retired from the Priesthood but is currently doing a lot of pro bono work in immigration law.  I admire this man quite a bit and he has written a paper to try and explain some of the quagmire.  I'm copying the whole thing here.  Read it and learn.

Asylum and the Migrant Crisis on Our Southern Border:

What’s Happening and How Do We Respond?

“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respected stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges.” – George Washington, 1783

Few issues in the United States are as emotionally charged and divisive as how to handle the migrant crisis on our southern border. Protecting our borders and controlling the number of noncitizens who enter is always of concern. But so is upholding our nation’s values, the rule of law, due process, and providing opportunities for people escaping oppression. Since the end of World War II, the United States has provided a legal process for people coming to our borders seeking asylum. The horrors of the Holocaust led our leaders in the 1950s to recognize the pivotal role our country could play in saving countless lives. 

Today the United States is faced with thousands of migrants coming from poverty-stricken, violence-plagued nations seeking safety and security for themselves and their children. Most of these migrants are from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, but there also are a rising number from Nicaragua and Venezuela – two politically unstable countries with repressive governments. Only about 5% of the people claiming asylum are from Mexico.   

In this paper I will address three issues of primary concern. First, what is asylum? Second, what is happening on our southern border? And third, is there a better way to respond to the crisis?  

I. What is Asylum?

Asylum is a protection granted to foreign nationals already in the United States or at the border who meet the international law definition of a “refugee.” The United Nations 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 UN Protocol define a refugee as a person who is unable or unwilling to return to his or her home country, or cannot obtain protection in that country, because of past persecution or a well-founded fear of being persecuted in the future “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Congress incorporated this definition into U.S. immigration law in the Refugee Act of 1980.

A claim for asylum under present American law requires:

1. past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution

2. because of a protected ground: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion

3. committed by the government, or by a persecutor the government is unable or unwilling to control

4. not subject to any bars in being admitted into the country

5. meets favorable exercise of discretion

Those seeking asylum must claim that they cannot return to their home country because of past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution by the government or by a non-government actor that the government is unable or unwilling to control. For example, being the victim of gang violence that the government cannot control would be a legitimate ground for asylum. 

Even in the absence of past persecution, an applicant may be eligible for asylum based on a well-founded fear of future persecution. Such a fear must be subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable. For example, if the asylum-seeker is gay, lesbian or transgender in a country where members of the LGBT community have been harmed or threatened with harm, an asylum-seeker could claim it would not be a safe option to return to the home country.

While race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, and political opinion are all grounds for seeking asylum, there are other commonly made claims that are not included. Economic hardship, for example, unless the result of government persecution is not a valid claim for asylum. Nor is ordinary spousal abuse, though there may be cases where a wife or partner could claim asylum if the abuse is reported to the authorities who are unwilling to safeguard the abused spouse. 

The Right to Due Process

Every person who claims asylum has the right to due process of law, which means notice and a full and fair opportunity to be heard. Due Process is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and extends to every person (not just a citizen or even permanent resident) in the United States, irrespective of immigration status. The Supreme Court for well over a century has expressly recognized a person cannot be deported without due process.

The Burden of Proof

In applying for asylum, the applicant has the burden of proving that he or she meets the definition of a refugee. To be successful in their claim, asylum-seekers need to provide credible evidence either of past persecution or that they have a “well-founded fear” of future persecution in their home country. The individual’s own testimony will be critical in the final determination by the immigration judge. The applicant must demonstrate before the immigration judge that it is more likely than not that he or she would be subject to persecution on one of the five specified grounds.

Asylum-seekers have a right to be represented by an attorney but not at government expense. This means that asylum-seekers must seek out and pay for an attorney or represent themselves before an asylum officer or immigration judge. Many lawyers represent asylum-seekers on a pro bono basis, but there are simply not enough lawyers to represent all the people claiming asylum. Thus, many migrants go without any legal representation and they are the most likely to be deported.

Moreover, being detained impedes asylum-seekers’ ability to find a lawyer. It also makes it more difficult for asylum-seekers to obtain corroborating evidence and expert witnesses, given that access to phones, the internet, and other vital resources is limited.

Asylum Protocols

In addition to the statutory requirements for asylum, there are strict protocols in place. All applicants are subject to thorough vetting, which includes fingerprinting and background checks. Certain factors bar individuals from asylum, including people with violent criminal histories, or who have committed aggravated felonies or crimes of moral turpitude, members of gangs, and people who are deemed terrorists or belong to a terrorist organization.  

The Asylum Process

When asylum-seekers present themselves to a U.S. official at a Port of Entry, they will be initially screened in what is known as a credible fear screening process with a Department of Homeland Security official. If the official determines that the asylum-seeker has a credible claim, the person will be allowed to remain in the country until there is a final decision on the case by an immigration judge. If the claim is rejected by the DHS official, the person will be deported, though the person does have a right of appeal to an immigration judge. This is not a loophole but due process and consistent not only with federal law but our international obligations to protect refugees and asylum-seekers.

The situation is more complicated for migrants who are caught near the border without passing through a Port of Entry. These people are eligible to be deported without having their case heard by an immigration judge, due to what is known as “expedited removal,” a part of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the use of which has dramatically expanded in recent decades. 

Expedited removal is an accelerated process which authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to perform rapid deportations of individuals. To ensure that there is no violation of international law or human rights, the credible fear screening process is available to asylum seekers in expedited removal cases. If the asylum officer determines the person does not have credible fear, the individual is ordered removed. Before removal, the individual may appeal the negative credible fear decision by pursuing review before an immigration judge. If the immigration judge overturns a negative credible fear finding, the individual is placed in further removal proceedings through which the individual can seek protection from removal. If the immigration judge upholds the negative finding by the asylum officer, the individual will be removed from the United States.

How Long Does the Asylum Process Take?

The asylum process can take years to conclude. A person may file an application and receive a hearing date years into the future.  At present, there about 700,000 open deportation cases for immigration judges to decide. On average, these cases are pending for 718 days – and many remain unresolved.

The Benefits of Asylum

A person granted asylum is protected from being returned to his or her home country, is authorized to work in the United States, may apply for a Social Security card, may request permission to travel overseas, and can petition to bring family members to the United States. Asylum seekers may also be eligible for certain benefits, such as Medicaid or Refugee Medical Assistance. 

After one year, an asylum seeker may apply for lawful permanent resident status (i.e. a green card). Once the individual becomes a permanent resident, he or she must wait for four years to apply for citizenship. 

II. What’s happening at Our Southern Border?

The crisis at our southern border has divided Americans as few other issues in recent times due to the separation of children from their families. The family separation crisis is the result of the federal government’s “zero tolerance” policy promoted by President Trump and ordered by Attorney-General Sessions. This policy instructed immigration officials to criminally prosecute anyone crossing the border other than through a Port of Entry into the United States, including those who came seeking asylum.

Migrants who come to the United States other than through a Port of Entry are criminally prosecuted and held in detention until their case is adjudicated. That process can take months, and even years, if it includes an asylum claim. The problem is the legality of detaining children with their parents for longer than 20 days.

A 1997 settlement in a California case, Flores v. Reno, mandated that families cannot be detained longer than 20 days. The Flores agreement requires that children be released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody – preferably to a parent – without delay. When the child cannot be released due to a significant public safety or flight risk concern, the child should be placed in the least restrictive setting in a non-secure facility licensed by a child welfare agency. 

The Department of Justice has asked U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee, who approved the Flores settlement, to allow for longer detentions. According to the Department of Justice brief, “Tens of thousands of families are embarking on the dangerous journey to the United States, often through smuggling arrangements and then crossing the border illegally in violation of our federal criminal law. And as the government has previously stated, once those families are released into the interior, a vast segment fail to appear at their immigration hearings.” 

According to the Department of Justice, the Flores settlement has eliminated all practical availability of family detention after the 20-day period, “Thus creating powerful incentives for aliens to enter this country with children in violation of our criminal and immigration laws without a valid claim to be admitted to the United States.”

The Department of Justice has asked Judge Gee to “exempt the Department of Homeland Security from the Flores settlement agreement’s release provisions so that ICE may detain aliens who have arrived with their parent or legal guardian together in ICE family residential facilities.” Those residential facilities would be exempt from any state licensure requirements. 

Where will the asylum seekers and their children be detained? It appears that old military bases are being readied to accommodate large inflows of detained migrants and their children. Given the slow pace of immigration adjudication and the lack of a sufficient number of immigration judges, these people could be detained a year or two, or even longer. 

If President Trump’s Executive Order can stand, the result will be family detention in place of family separation. The Order instructs immigration officials to hold the entire family in detention centers together. Children would be indefinitely held in detention with their parents while their case is processed, a procedure that will likely take years.  

This treatment of asylum seekers only applies to people who cross the border illegally rather than to go through a Port of Entry. The question asked is, “Why do people with valid asylum claims not go through a Port of Entry, and thus avoid capture, arrest and prolonged detention?” There is no one answer to this question. Some migrants may believe their backgrounds will bar them from admission into the United States. Others come for economic reasons which are not grounds for asylum. However, we do know that Central American families who have attempted to apply for asylum through official channels since April have been forced to wait in line outside the border entrance for days, sometimes weeks, before being seen by immigration officers. This motivates some families to cross the border without documentation. Almost inevitably they are caught and detained. These are the ones in detention who have suffered separation from their children. 

III. A Better Way

How can we improve family detention? We can’t. ICE’s own 2016 advisory committee on this issue stated unequivocally that the system cannot be fixed. The only viable option is that the Department of Homeland Security “should generally exercise its authority to release family members, together as a family, as soon as possible.”

President Trump is not the first president to jail children. Time and again administrations have responded to surges in migrants by detaining families. In 2014, for example, President Obama responded to the surge of Central American immigrant children by ramping up family detention. The number of available beds jumped from 100 to 3,000. The government implemented a “no bond, no release” policy, holding families even after they passed asylum officers’ credible fear interviews. More than half of the 1,050 children who entered family detention in 2014 were six or younger. 

So, the issue of detaining migrants and their families is not a Republican or Democratic issue, nor is it a Trump or Obama issue – both administrations have done it, one quietly, the other proudly. Regardless, there is a better way that is humane, civilized and far less costly.

The family case management program was started in January 2016. It allowed families seeking asylum to be released together and monitored by caseworkers while their immigration court cases proceeded. Case managers provided asylum seekers with referrals for education, legal services and housing. They also helped sort out confusing orders about when to show up for immigration court and ICE check-ins. And they emphasized the importance of showing up to all court hearings, which can stretch over two or three years.

The case management program was implemented in five metro areas, including New York and Los Angeles, and it was a huge success. About 99 percent of immigrants showed up for their hearings. 

It also was financially cost-effective. The program cost $36.00 per day per family, compared with the more than $900 a day it costs to lock up an immigrant parent with two children.

Sadly, the case management program was cancelled by the Trump Administration in 2017. It should be reinstituted and monitored for five years. The cost and success rate make it an appealing alternative to detention. 

In addition to the case management program, ICE has two programs that use electronic ankle monitors, biometric voice-recognition software, unannounced home visits, telephone reporting, and global positioning technologies to track people who have been released from detention while their cases are being adjudicated. In 2013, 96 percent of those enrolled appeared for their final court hearings, and 80 percent of those who did not qualify for asylum complied with their removal orders. 

Both the ICE program and the case management program work. Along with adequate vetting of migrants and enhanced border security, the immigration crisis on our southern border could be alleviated. In addition, there is a need to expand access to pro bono and government-funded lawyers so that the immigration court process can be fair and just.

If a family loses its case and isn’t deemed eligible to stay in the United States legally, the federal government should issue a notice for them to present themselves to ICE for deportation. If they don’t show, give ICE the resources it needs to go out and arrest and deport the migrants. 

Law and order can go hand in hand with humane treatment. It’s the American way.

Motivation Monday

Friday Funnies

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!!!!

Motivation Monday

TURD

Do You Know Someone Suffering From Trump Unacceptance & Resistance Disorder (TURD)?
Know the signs, spot the symptoms, and save a life!
TURD is a pattern of pathologically disassociative and psychotic behavior, first observed in the late hours of November 8th 2016, and increasing in severity with passing time.
Sufferers of TURD often exhibit pronounced cognitive dissonance, sudden bouts of rage, rioting, and uncontrollable crying.
People with TURD are characterized by a persistent unwillingness to accept that Donald Trump is going to Make America Great Again.
TURD Is caused by the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America. For many, both in America and worldwide, this was a shocking and unexpected outcome; their preferred news sources having failed to inform them that the alternative candidate was a criminal parasite in such ill health she got chucked into the back of a van like a kidnap victim.
Research is ongoing, but TURD appears to correlate closely with the following environmental and behavioral factors:
Membership in the Democratic Party
Identifying as a Feminist
Currently enrolled in college, and/or Possession of a Liberal Arts college degree
Living in a densely populated metropolitan area
Massive student debt
Spotty or non-existent work history
Patients with TURD are very resistant to treatment, and dangerous in large groups. Any possibility of treatment requires that they be separated from their hive-mind support apparatus; they cannot begin the process of accepting reality in the presence of encouragement towards delusion and irrationality. Separation may require the assistance of law enforcement.
If you have a friend or loved one suffering from TURD, urge them to seek treatment. Together we can beat this scourge, and Make America Great Again.

Friday Funnies

Friday Funnies

The Stages of Trump

Unless you are totally disgusted with the state of affairs in our country and have turned off the TV and gone fishin, you've probably seen some stories the week about the plight of immigrant kids at the border.  It's a complex situation that has been rather shamefully exploited by the media and liberal establishment.

You can go on social media and find any opinion you want.  In this instance, probably a lot of what both sides say is true.  It's true that our immigration system is a disgusting dogs breakfast.  It's true that the blame lies squarely at the feet of Congress.  It's true that they are mostly sycophantic lap-dogs who care about nothing as much as getting reelected.  They will say and do anything to make that happen.  And they don't give a shit about you!  It's true that a lot of the same things that are happening today have been going on for years.  It's true that separating families is a tough call and should be avoided.  It's true that anyone who is arrested for anything and kids are present would have the kids taken away and not sent to jail with the arestee.  It's true that we don't want kids in a detention center with adults.  It's true that most of the places we have to put kids are just fine as far as they go...but it's still not cool.  It's true that the responsibility for getting their kids into this mess lies with the people ILLEGALLY crossing our border.  It's true that the Dems will not work with the Republicans to fix this because they think they have President Trump in a bad place.  And it's true that the tide is turning with many people to say that this must be fixed and if it's not the blame will be on President Trump and the Republicans.   And if they don't, the mid-term elections in November will once again be in doubt.  They were doing pretty well but they can and will blow it if they don't fix it.

All this got me thinking about the last 500 days or since President Trump has been in office.  At least for me and I suspect for many people I've gone through stages.  And I think these stages are akin to the stages we always hear about in accepting change or loss.  I did a little searching and found the Kubler-Ross change curve.  Most people have seen this model and it's pretty good at describing the stages we go through in accepting loss or experiencing change.

If you apply this cycle to the average American experiencing an election, if your candidate doesn't win I think you go through a similar cycle.  You don't like that your candidate lost and you experience denial...."how could this be?".  Then you get a bit pissed off about it.  And maybe do some sort of march or protest if you're a zealot.  When you finally realize your candidate didn't win and won't win, you get depressed.  You then look forward to 4 years from now when you can work to get your candidate in office and accept things as they are and work for a win next time.  

Except, the libs, anti-Trumpers, and never-Trumpers never got past anger and aggression.  They are unbelievably pissed.  It's really embarrassing, anti-American and absurd.  But it is what it is.  So Ive decided that those of us on the other side have gone through stages too.  To be clear, I didn't vote for Trump and I most certainly didn't vote for HRC.  But I was for him over her.  He wasn't my guy, but he won so he's my President.  

But watching the crazy antics of the other side have made me realize that I've gone through stages in the last 500 or so days.  First is Shock.  I was shocked that he won.  I was happy that HRC lost (and in fact ecstatic) but just as much shocked that he won.  Second phase was Sadness.  I just couldn't believe the reaction of the other side and was sad that my fellow Americans would act the way they did.  I couldn't believe that they would see electing Trump as such a disastrous event.  And I quickly moved to the third phase which was Anger.  The antics by the elites, the media, the Hollywood weirdos, and others was just beyond the pale.  I could detail some of the worst but you've seen them as well as me.  And since President Trump has done a pretty good job in a lot of things (and I know where you sit depends on where you stand) and yet he is still a victim of the irrational, hate filled idiots on the other side, I think I've moved to the fourth and what I hope is a permanent and final stage.  I now just try very hard to find the whole thing humorous.  I mean, he has taken a lickin and kept on tickin.  He seems like a duck in that it is just water off his back.  So I think he's going to keep going and doing the job he was elected to do.  And I think he's got a decent chance of getting reelected.  One thing is for sure, there's no predicting what is going to happen in this environment.  So just to keep my sanity and optimism, I've decided that the only thing to do is laugh.  Laugh at the crazies on the other side who have descended into a permanent 4th stage and are perpetually angry.  And laughing at them makes them angrier.  Which makes me happy.

Motivation Monday

Immigration Nightmare Continued

I've written previously that our immigration policies are seriously broken.  The laws are convoluted and do not help us maintain our sovereignty nor do they adequately address the need to accommodate the people who want to come here.  The laws are inconsistent in their application and different administrations (read that Presidential administrations) can and do apply the laws to their way of thinking.

President Trump has obviously made immigration a centerpiece of his administration.  He said from the first day of his candidacy that one of his most important issues was to stop illegal immigration.  There are a lot of facets to this goal, but stopping illegality is the centerpiece.  To do this he has focused on building a barrier (a wall, electronic surveillance, using geographic advantage, etc), targeting the most dangerous illegal aliens (i.e. MS-13 gang members), deporting those who have broken our laws, and returning those who cross the border illegally rather than apply Obama's catch and release policy.  The President also has proposed dealing with the illegal and unconstitutional issue of the "Dreamers" by providing a path to citizenship.  Unfortunately, the Congress has not been able to come up with a viable solution to the Dreamers dilemma.  But that is a recurring theme.

The latest dust-up over immigration is the issue of what to do with the children of those who cross the border illegally.  It is a complicated issue because of the status of the adults and the need to ensure the safety of the kids.  I've heard a lot of hysterical blathering about how Trump is ripping kids from the arms of their parents, putting them in cages, creating concentration camps, and blah, blah, blah.  The political cartoonists have gone wild and the open-border crowd who don't care about our borders or our laws are wailing.  The usual suspects in the media are apoplectic on how these poor innocent kids are being treated and how despondent the parents are.

Of course, like everything, there are two sides to every story.  And in this case probably many sides.  I saw an article that a friend posted over on FB from Rich Lowry in National Review that attempts to make sense of it all.  Now I know NR has a certain bent.  I know Lowry isn't going to be hired by MSNBC anytime soon.  But as I read this I thought that it was a balanced explanation of the situation as we see it today.  I'm sure there are some inaccuracies or some things might be viewed through the lens of Lowry's leanings, but all in all it's a pretty good, non-hysterical description of what's going on.

I've said previously both above and in other pieces that our immigration laws are shamefully broken.  The blame for this lays squarely at the feet of Congress.  They have refused to fix it.  Until they do, then whichever current administration is in power will try and deal with the problem in whatever way they believe is correct.  Some will hate it, some will like it.  But the ones caught in the middle are the people trying to do the right thing and immigrate legally and the poor souls who are so desparate that they will risk life and limb and their children to cross the border.

Here's the article:

The Truth about Separating Kids

By RICH LOWRY

May 28, 2018 

Some economic migrants are using children as chits, but the problem is fixable — if Congress acts.

The latest furor over Trump immigration policy involves the separation of children from parents at the border.

As usual, the outrage obscures more than it illuminates, so it’s worth walking through what’s happening here.

For the longest time, illegal immigration was driven by single males from Mexico. Over the last decade, the flow has shifted to women, children, and family units from Central America. This poses challenges we haven’t confronted before and has made what once were relatively minor wrinkles in the law loom very large.

The Trump administration isn’t changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.

It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)

When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.

If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation.

Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.

That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.

The clock ticking on the time the government can hold a child will almost always run out before an asylum claim is settled. The migrant is allowed ten days to seek an attorney, and there may be continuances or other complications.

This creates the choice of either releasing the adults and children together into the country pending the ajudication of the asylum claim, or holding the adults and releasing the children. If the adult is held, HHS places the child with a responsible party in the U.S., ideally a relative (migrants are likely to have family and friends here).

Even if Flores didn’t exist, the government would be very constrained in how many family units it can accommodate. ICE has only about 3,000 family spaces in shelters. It is also limited in its overall space at the border, which is overwhelmed by the ongoing influx. This means that — whatever the Trump administration would prefer to do — many adults are still swiftly released.

Why try to hold adults at all? First of all, if an asylum-seeker is detained, it means that the claim goes through the process much more quickly, a couple of months or less rather than years. Second, if an adult is released while the claim is pending, the chances of ever finding that person again once he or she is in the country are dicey, to say the least. It is tantamount to allowing the migrant to live here, no matter what the merits of the case.

A few points about all this:

1) Family units can go home quickly. The option that both honors our laws and keeps family units together is a swift return home after prosecution. But immigrant advocates hate it because they want the migrants to stay in the United States. How you view this question will depend a lot on how you view the motivation of the migrants (and how seriously you take our laws and our border).

2) There’s a better way to claim asylum. Every indication is that the migrant flow to the United States is discretionary. It nearly dried up at the beginning of the Trump administration when migrants believed that they had no chance of getting into the United States. Now, it is going in earnest again because the message got out that, despite the rhetoric, the policy at the border hasn’t changed. This strongly suggests that the flow overwhelmingly consists of economic migrants who would prefer to live in the United States, rather than victims of persecution in their home country who have no option but to get out.

Children should not be making this journey that is fraught with peril. But there is now a premium on bringing children because of how we have handled these cases.

Even if a migrant does have a credible fear of persecution, there is a legitimate way to pursue that claim, and it does not involve entering the United States illegally. First, such people should make their asylum claim in the first country where they feel safe, i.e., Mexico or some other country they are traversing to get here. Second, if for some reason they are threatened everywhere but the United States, they should show up at a port of entry and make their claim there rather than crossing the border illegally.

3) There is a significant moral cost to not enforcing the border. There is obviously a moral cost to separating a parent from a child and almost everyone would prefer not to do it. But, under current policy and with the current resources, the only practical alternative is letting family units who show up at the border live in the country for the duration. Not only does this make a mockery of our laws, it creates an incentive for people to keep bringing children with them. 

Needless to say, children should not be making this journey that is fraught with peril. But there is now a premium on bringing children because of how we have handled these cases. They are considered chits.

In April, the New York Times reported:  Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

According to azcentral.com, it is “common to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.”

If someone is determined to come here illegally, the decent and safest thing would be to leave the child at home with a relative and send money back home. Because we favor family units over single adults, we are creating an incentive to do the opposite and use children to cut deals with smugglers.

4) Congress can fix this. Congress can change the rules so the Flores consent decree will no longer apply, and it can appropriate more money for family shelters at the border. This is an obvious thing to do that would eliminate the tension between enforcing our laws and keeping family units together. The Trump administration is throwing as many resources as it can at the border to expedite the process, and it desperately wants the Flores consent decree reversed. Despite some mixed messages, if the administration had its druthers, family units would be kept together and their cases settled quickly.

The missing piece here is Congress, but little outrage will be directed at it, and probably nothing will be done. And so our perverse system will remain in place and the crisis

Trump Explained

A friend posted this over on FB.  He didn't attribute the writer but I think this is as spot on as anything I've seen to explain our President.  It has amazed me that the press can't seem to figure him out.  This should be required reading for any member of the media that gets assigned to cover him.  Don't know that it would do any good and their institutional bias would most likely overcome this bit of truth, but at least they would have the info.

“But there are 5 simple rules for understanding President Trump. They define how he’s lived his life until now. And what still drives him at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If you understand them, you will get what he’s doing. If you don’t, there’s always a job waiting at the New York Times.

1. Act, Don’t React

Trump hates reacting, he loves taking the initiative and forcing others, rivals, competitors, media syndicates or foreign dictators, to react to him. That’s the essence of strategy and he nails it the way few have.

When UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson muttered that there was a “method to his madness”, that was it.

The method is becoming the driving force in an escalating conflict. Instead of reacting to attacks, Trump forces his attackers to react to him. He takes the initiative and leaves his opponents sputtering.

That’s how he became the President of the United States. It’s what he’s doing internationally.

By acting, Trump takes control of each encounter. What happens next may not be ideal, but Trump cares more about maintaining the initiative than about forcing a specific outcome. He doesn’t see politics as a chess match, but as a boxing match. He doesn’t get locked into predetermined goals. Instead he lets the kinetic confrontation create opportunities by exploiting his opponent’s reactions.

Picking a fight with the North Korean dictator, led to a peace summit. A trade war with China has already led to some serious concessions. A trade shoving match with Europe and Canada offers potential wins.

Unlike previous administrations, Trump isn’t satisfied with the status quo. And that means that he tries a lot of things.

That takes us to Rule 2.

2. Try Everything

Critics have poked fun at Trump’s failed business ventures. But you don’t succeed without trying and failing.

Trump is comfortable with failure. He knows that if you’re willing to knock on 100 doors, you might get 1 sale. His approach to politics is trying a lot of different approaches and policies to get to a win.

When Obama expressed a willingness to meet with dictators and terrorists, it’s because he was already sympathetic to them. The seeds of the Iran deal were always in him. The negotiations just took him where he already wanted to be. Trump however isn’t meeting with Kim Jong-un because he likes him. He’s doing it because it might pay off. Or it won’t and then he’ll try something else.

Obama needed Iran. Trump doesn’t need North Korea. He can take it or leave it. He’s hungry for wins, but he also sees the potential for them everywhere so he doesn’t overcommit to any individual deal.

Political professionals scoff at that scrappy attitude. They insist on the importance of posture and position. Trump knows all about posture and position, but he refuses to be its prisoner. He can insult Kim one day and flatter him the next. Politics is just business with countries instead of companies.

Trump’s approach is the same to both politics and business. Do whatever it takes to get the deal. And then decide if the deal is worth taking.

3. Chaos is Power

Most people want to minimize chaos. Countries and companies spend fortunes, fight wars and dedicate decades to reducing chaos. Trump however thrives on chaos. Instead of trying to control chaos, he generates it, causing uncertainty and then offering a sense of security in exchange for a good deal.

That’s what Trump is doing with trade. It’s what he did to China and North Korea.

Trump tries everything (Rule 2) and escalates confrontations (Rule 1) so that his opponents have no way to counter him except by escalating the confrontation and creating more chaos. And then Trump forces them to negotiate by proving he can function in a chaotic and uncertain situation better than they can.

That’s how he got North Korea to the table. After decades of the Norks intimidating previous administrations by creating chaos with their threats, Trump topped those threats. The media warned that a nuclear war would break out. Instead China and North Korea chose a peace summit.

The summit may come to nothing, but Trump had already broken the Nork ability to intimidate us.

China, Europe and Canada don’t want a trade war. They have nothing to gain and plenty to lose. By creating economic chaos, Trump also became the only man who can end the chaos and restore security.

Chaos is power.

When the United States became a world power, its administrations emphasized stability over everything. Trump welcomes chaos because it’s a much more effective negotiating strategy. Entities that seek order can be intimidated with chaos. But politicians who seek chaos can’t be intimidated.

Trump doesn’t seek order. He wants victory.

4. Never Show Your Hand

Conventional politicians have a narrow window of agenda items. They’re very clear on what they want, what they don’t want, what they’re willing to do and what they’re willing to give up to get it.

Trump has always been ambiguous. Parse his sentences and you can read them three different ways. Each assertion eventually uncovers a contradiction. That’s confusion. Tactical confusion.

As Trump has mentioned plenty of times, he loves being unpredictable.

Trump is the only president in a century who is able to go into negotiations with a completely unpredictable outcome. And the roster of competing figures around him only creates more chaos.

To truly create chaos (Rule 3), you have to be unpredictable. That creates insecurity. It forces your opponents to read things into every move you make. And then to be stymied by the futility of it.

Ambiguity leaves the other side unable to assess what the United States would actually settle for. Instead it ends up offering far more than we would settle for just to restore that sense of security.

Trump is the most famous man in the world. And yet his decision-making remains mysterious.

5. Don’t Be Afraid to be the Bad Guy

If Americans have a fatal flaw, a weakness that undermines our domestic and international politics, it’s a need to be liked. Most other countries don’t wonder whether the rest of the world likes them.

Blame Hollywood, dime novels or comic books, but as Americans we see ourselves as the heroes. And our enemies, foreign and domestic, know that they can break us by making us question our goodness.

It’s how they did it in Vietnam, in Iraq and too many foreign policy debates to count.

One of Trump’s great strengths is that he’s not afraid to be the bully, the heavy and the jerk. He can flatter Kim Jong-un, Trudeau and any other leader. Or call them names.

He can say shocking things and take unacceptable positions if it gets him what he wants.

That’s the attribute that upsets and infuriates Never Trumpers. But it also gives the United States far more negotiating leverage and freedom than it ever had before. And that’s why the people chose him.

Trump embodied all the things that had been going unsaid and all the truths that needed telling.

Past presidents valued their personal relationships with foreign leaders. But Trump is willing to throw a punch at the boy band leader of Canada if it gets a farmer in Wisconsin a better deal for his dairy.

On the global stage, President Trump has forced North Korea, China, Europe and Canada to react to him. He’s trying everything. He’s creating chaos. He’s hiding his hand and he’s winning.

The media shouts that Trump is isolated. If he were isolated, the world wouldn’t be revolving around him. The world doesn’t stop when Putin or China’s Jinping issue a statement. But a single Trump tweet can upend the priorities of international diplomacy for days, weeks and even months.

Trump isn’t reacting to the world. The world is reacting to him.

And as long as he can keep the world reacting to him, he’s the one setting the agenda for the world.”

Friday Funnies

This is a great concept.  Lot's of money to be made...

Motivation Monday

Cool Pic

This Isn't Going To Turn Out Well

Cats

Fair Winds...

If you've been reading at all you know that there are several people from whom I draw inspiration.  I look to these people for reference, for thought provoking ideas, and sometimes to either confirm or refute something I might believe.  They never let me down.  Never.  At the top of this list is Charles Krauthammer.  I know I'm not the only one.  I know that there are tens of thousands who revere his writing and commentary.  I know my blog is some little inkspot on the vast social miasma.  But the letter from Dr. Krauthammer today detailing the graveness of his disease is at once both devastating and inspiring.  I've heard all of the tributes poring in on Fox News and read several beautifully written thoughts from Twitter to Facebook to traditional print media.  And they are all true.  He is quite simply a giant in the world of political dialog.  His humanity, his intelligence, his humor, his logic, his forthrightness will not be forgotten nor matched.  His persistence in the face of severe disability will continue to inspire.  I've missed him for the past year that he has been ill.  I shall miss him even more knowing he won't be back.  As we say in the Navy...Fair Winds and Following Seas Dr Krauthammer!

A Note to Readers 

By Charles Krauthammer

Opinion writer

June 8 at 12:01 PM

I have been uncharacteristically silent these past ten months. I had thought that silence would soon be coming to an end, but I’m afraid I must tell you now that fate has decided on a different course for me.

In August of last year, I underwent surgery to remove a cancerous tumor in my abdomen. That operation was thought to have been a success, but it caused a cascade of secondary complications — which I have been fighting in hospital ever since. It was a long and hard fight with many setbacks, but I was steadily, if slowly, overcoming each obstacle along the way and gradually making my way back to health.

However, recent tests have revealed that the cancer has returned. There was no sign of it as recently as a month ago, which means it is aggressive and spreading rapidly. My doctors tell me their best estimate is that I have only a few weeks left to live. This is the final verdict. My fight is over.

I wish to thank my doctors and caregivers, whose efforts have been magnificent. My dear friends, who have given me a lifetime of memories and whose support has sustained me through these difficult months. And all of my partners at The Washington Post, Fox News, and Crown Publishing.

Lastly, I thank my colleagues, my readers, and my viewers, who have made my career possible and given consequence to my life’s work. I believe that the pursuit of truth and right ideas through honest debate and rigorous argument is a noble undertaking. I am grateful to have played a small role in the conversations that have helped guide this extraordinary nation’s destiny.

I leave this life with no regrets. It was a wonderful life — full and complete with the great loves and great endeavors that make it worth living. I am sad to leave, but I leave with the knowledge that I lived the life that I intended.

Friday Funnies