Rank-and-file U.S. Border Patrol agents were furious with then-chief David Aguilar’s open support for “comprehensive immigration reform” and other controversial policies, footage obtained exclusively by Liberty News Network correspondent Andy Ramirez revealed.
Throughout the video, which shows part of a 2007 town hall-type meeting between agents and their boss marketed as an opportunity for them to speak candidly, officers accuse Aguilar of having expressed support for amnesty. He denied it, of course, but the agents clearly didn’t buy it.
One officer in the audience proceeds to read a quote from Aguilar’s congressional testimony where he called for “comprehensive immigration reform,” a term which is often considered synonymous with amnesty. Aguilar also advocated a “temporary workers program” and a measure to “bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows without providing amnesty.”
President Barack Obama’s uncle, Omar Onyango Obama, is an illegal alien who obtained an illegal driver’s license and Social Security card and evaded a deportation order for more than 20 years.
The Kenyan half-brother of the president’s alcoholic, bigamist father, two newspapers have reported, followed a similar path to Obama’s illegal-alien aunt, who also ignored deportation orders but received political asylum despite ducking the law for years.
Police put the cuffs on Onyango Obama last week when he nearly crashed his SUV into a police cruiser. Obama was charged with operating under the influence of alcohol, negligent operation of a motor vehicle and failure to yield the right of way.
The question, however, is whether the 20-year-fugitive from immigration authorities will be deported, given the Obama Administration’s interpretation and implementation of the failed DREAM Act.
As states like Arizona and Alabama are passing laws in an attempt to maintain control over the overwhelming amount of illegal immigration into their states, the Obama administration continues to launch lawsuits against them and assert that it is solely the role of the federal government to enforce immigration laws. However, there is a great deal of evidence that the federal government has reneged on that role, the most recent proof coming out of the U.S. Department of Labor, which has confirmed that it will enforce federal wage laws on behalf of anyone working in the United States, “regardless of immigration status.”
According to Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano, there are approximately 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, though some argue that the number is significantly higher. Of the number touted by Napolitano, however, that figure includes nearly seven million who are of working age.
Meanwhile, the nation’s unemployment rate has remained at around 9 percent for months, and at least 14 million Americans are unemployed, and the percentage of working Americans has decreased to 64 percent, per the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A federal district judge has blocked Alabama’s tough new immigration law from going into effect and says she will decide whether it is constitutional.
Sharon Lovelace Blackburn, chief judge for the Northern District of Alabama (a post for which she was nominated by the elder President Bush), acted on behalf of a coalition of Hispanic activists and leftist lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Obama administration, and various leftist churches.
The Montgomery Advertiser reported that Blackburn's ruling will last in until September 29 "or until she issues an order on the specific injunction requests, whichever comes first. That order would come no later than Sept. 28."
The law was scheduled to go into effect on September 1.
The Obama administration has taken the next logical step in implementing its amnesty plan for illegal aliens. Having officially declared the DREAM Act law even though it failed in Congress, the administration is now reviewing 300,000 deportation cases with an eye toward stopping almost all of them.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the New York Times reported on Monday, is now using the prosecutorial discretion it received from ICE chief John Morton, who permitted the discretion in a memo last month and offered a DREAM list of criteria with which to exercise that discretion. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano cemented Morton's policy last week with a letter to Congress.
Some cynics have noted that the cases the Times picked to represent the "victims" of this nation's immigration policy could have come straight from central casting.
At a meeting in Toronto earlier this month, the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association (ABA) voted to urge Congress to reject all legislative attempts to alter the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and its grant of “citizenship birthrights.”
Given that over half of the 535 members of the Congress (House of Representatives and Senate) are attorneys, the opinion of the ABA is persuasive. Add to that statistic the fact that the organization, founded in 1878, has for decades set the standards for the practice of law to which all attorneys must “voluntarily” conform and its ability to influence legislation and legislators in compounded.
The particular resolution (one of many passed at the confab) is number 303 and reads as follows:
Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security Secretary, confessed last week that the Obama administration will not deport illegal-alien students who would have fallen under the protection of the failed DREAM Act, the amnesty for illegal aliens that traveled under the name of immigration reform.
She made the remarks at a webinar and roundtable on border issues sponsored by NDN, a leftist think tank. The Washington Times reported what she said:
“I will say, and can say, that you know what? They are not, that group, if they truly meet all those criteria, and we see very few of them actually in the immigration system, if they truly meet those [criteria], they’re not the priority,” the secretary said at an event sponsored by NDN, a progressive think tank and advocacy group, on the future of the nation’s border policies.
“The reason we set priorities is so that the focus could be on those in the country who are also committing other illegal acts,” she said.
I don’t know Peter Gadiel, and he apparently knows absolutely nothing about me. But that hasn’t stopped him from attacking me in a recent article (Influential Conservative is Dangerously Wrong on E-Verify). His article makes some outrageous statements about me, even to presume he can tell you what motives are in my head when I take a position.
Recently, I released an article entitled “E-Verify and the Emerging Surveillance State.” My opposition to E-Verify is that it is a major tool in the creation of a surveillance society; will give the government the power to decide who works and who doesn’t in America; will be a great burden on both worker and business; and will do absolutely nothing to protect us from illegal immigration or terrorism. In short, E-Verify represents another false promise of security and a greater threat to our freedom.