Seven House Republicans voted with the new Democratic majority today to reopen the government without a paltry $5 billion in funding to start construction on a ‘big, beautiful’ border wall, in the midst of the ongoing battle between the White House and Democratic leaders.
Most Republican members of Congress stood firm on refusing to reopen the government without progress on Donald Trump’s signature campaign progress. The outgoing GOP House Majority had earlier designated around $5.7 billion dollars for the wall, placing the ball in the court of the Senate to get together and make a deal that would re-open the government. Nearly all Republicans have stood with the President in order to present a unified face in the struggle to finally safeguard the borders of the United States with a wall, but the seven dissenters in the House Republican Caucus today could pose a threat to the prospects of the President delivering on his promises.
The seven Republicans caving to the left on immigration were:
Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania Will Hurd of Texas John Katko of New York Peter King of New York Elise Stefanik of New York Fred Upton of Michigan Greg Walden of Oregon
The six-bill funding package reopens many elements of the United States government, such as the State and Justice Departments, in addition to the IRS and National Zoo.
‘Ocasio-Cortez sees this plan is being a vehicle through which social equality might finally realized, as it will use reparations to right historical injustices’
Incoming New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez brings with her a massive online following, influence she says she’ll deploy only in support of candidates and politicians who support her plan for a “Green New Deal.”
“The Green New Deal” is something Ocasio-Cortez invokes frequently in media appearances and rallies.
So what’s actually in it?
Her office recently released the text of a proposed House rules change outlining the plan.
The proposed rule change for the upcoming 116th Congress would require the creation of a “Select Committee for a Green Deal” that would be responsible for creating the plan by January 1, 2020, with corresponding draft legislation soon after. The text of the rule change lays out the committee’s jurisdiction and required areas of action.
Its scope and mandate for legislative authority amounts to a radical grant of power to Washington over Americans’ lives, homes, businesses, travel, banking, and more.
Early on, under “Jurisdiction,” the document makes clear its grandiose philosophical vision: “The select committee shall have authority to develop a detailed national, industrial, economic mobilization plan for the transition of the United States economy to become greenhouse gas emissions neutral and to significantly draw down greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and oceans and to promote economic and environmental justice and equality.”
In addition to achieving its goal of “meeting 100% of national power demand through renewable sources,” the document also repeatedly states the Green New Deal will advance non-environmental projects, such as, “social, economic, racial, regional and gender-based justice.”
Ocasio-Cortez’s plan further claims it will (virtually) eliminate poverty: “The Plan for a Green New Deal (and the draft legislation) shall recognize that a national, industrial, economic mobilization of this scope and scale is a historic opportunity to virtually eliminate poverty in the United States and to make prosperity, wealth and economic security available to everyone participating in the transformation.”
More specifically, Ocasio-Cortez’s plan calls for, within 10 years, a series of lofty overhauls of American life [emphasis added]:
The installation of a “national, energy-efficient, “smart grid.”
“Upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety”
“Eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from the manufacturing, agricultural and other industries” as well as from America’s transportation and infrastructure network
Between its calls for “upgrading” homes and overhauling travel, public infrastructure, and even the way Americans consume electricity, the plan leaves virtually no facet of everyday life untouched. Think of how often you don’t use electricity to imagine how much of your average day the plan wouldn’t impact.
The proposed committee would also have seemingly total oversight of American industry, with a mandate for pushing union membership. Under “Scope of the Plan,” a section on labor states the committee’s final plan shall: “Require strong enforcement of labor, workplace safety, and wage standards that recognize the rights of workers to organize and unionize free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment, and creation of meaningful, quality, career employment.”
Later in the document, Ocasio Cortez’s plan imagines creating a national jobs force to help people participate in this “transition.” The Green New Deal, it says, shall “provide all members of our society, across all regions and all communities, the opportunity, training and education to be a full and equal participant in the transition, including through a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one.”
The plan also imagines creating governmental support for “transitioning” minority communities. The deal shall: “ensure a ‘just transition’ for all workers, low-income communities, communities of color, indigenous communities, rural and urban communities and the front-line communities most affected by climate change, pollution and other environmental harm including by ensuring that local implementation of the transition is led from the community level.”
More, Ocasio-Cortez sees this plan is being a vehicle through which social equality might finally realized through the use of reparations to right historical injustices. The final Green New Deal will “mitigate deeply entrenched racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth (including, without limitation, ensuring that federal and other investment will be equitably distributed to historically impoverished, low income, deindustrialized or other marginalized communities in such a way that builds wealth and ownership at the community level).”
And if that weren’t enough to ensure that Democratic Socialism could be fully realized in America, the plan includes failsafe in the form of universal income and Medicare for All: The plan, it says, shall “include additional measures such as basic income programs, universal health care programs and any others as the select committee may deem appropriate to promote economic security, labor market flexibility and entrepreneurism.”
Ocasio-Cortez clarifies that this plan would not only need to be financed by taxpayers, but also the Federal Reserve and other institutions the government can create. The end of the document contains a Q&A, one of which deals with the plan’s funding: “The Federal Reserve can extend credit to power these projects and investments, new public banks can be created (as in WWII) to extend credit and a combination of various taxation tools (including taxes on carbon and other emissions and progressive wealth taxes) can be employed.”
Ocasio-Cortez may not be in Congress yet, but she already has a plan to remake the way Americans drive, commute, live, work, and even use the financial system. Let there be little doubt how she aspires to wield power in Washington. Editor’s Note: This post has been updated with grammatical fixes.
House Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) invited numerous celebrities to the House gallery on Thursday to witness her become speaker of the House.
Along with nine of her grandchildren, Pelosi invited legendary crooner Tony Bennet, Grateful Dead drummer Mickey Hart, and television personality and fashion guru Tim Gunn to sit in the House gallery during the House’s for Speaker.
Washington, D.C. mayor Muriel Bowser, Stephanie Shirock and Ellen Malcolm of Emily’s List, as well as the presidents of Georgetown and Trinity Washington University, came to the Capitol building on Thursday.
Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, also came to witness Pelosi assume the Speaker’s gavel.
Bennett also attended Pelosi’s first swearing-in in 2007 as Speaker, along with actor Richard Grere. Bennet reportedly performed at a dinner on Wednesday night, according to Politico, which also featured former President Bill Clinton and failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Italian Ambassador Armando Varicchio hosted the dinner at the Italian embassy in Washington, D.C. Former Secretary of State John Kerry, California Lt. Gov.-elect Eleni Kounalakis, and other luminaries attended the exclusive Wednesday dinner for Pelosi.
Democrats retook control of the House of Representatives after the 2018 midterm elections. Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats pledged to protect Obamacare and its protections for pre-existing conditions. Progressive Democrats have pushed for climate change legislation and a single-payer “Medicare for All” government-run healthcare program.
Pelosi, along with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), continue to fight with President Trump and congressional Republicans over the president’s requested $5 billion in border wall funding.
In an interview, Pelosi told a reporter that she will not provide any money for Trump’s border wall.
“No, no. Nothing for the wall,” Pelosi said.
Pelosi has continued to state that she can strike a deal with Trump to end the partial government shutdown; although, she will not give Trump any increased border wall funding.
Once Democrats take over the House on January 3, they are planning to pass a government funding bill without any money for the border wall. President Donald Trump shows no sign of caving as shutdown continues, however.
As the impasse between Trump and the Democrats shut down parts of the federal government and forced some 800,000 workers to stay home or work without pay, the incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California) vowed the president would never get his wall.
Once Pelosi returns from her vacation in Hawaii and gets sworn in, she intends to have the House approve a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security until February and not include a penny for the border wall, the New York Times reported citing congressional staff.
Even if the Republican-majority Senate agrees to this – which the leadership has shown no sign of wanting to do – the question will come up again in just a few weeks. Democrats mean to use this to push for broader immigration reform and demonstrate they are the responsible party, according to the Times.
“We’ve got to really learn how to play jujitsu with the president and figure out how to take the wall issue and show the American people that we are the modern party who will actually secure the border and also be for a compassionate immigration system that recognizes the benefits of immigration and diversity,” Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), said in an interview Monday.
Unwilling or unable to pick one objection to Trump’s border wall proposal, they have panned it as “immoral, ineffective and expensive” as well as “fifth-century technology.”
Trump, who campaigned on building a “big, beautiful wall” on the border with Mexico, showed no sign of backing down, however. While Democrats went on vacation, he stayed at the White House and tweeted up a storm, only taking a break for a surprise trip to Iraq and Germany to visit US troops overseas.
In one of the tweets on Monday, Trump reminded Democrats they have voted in favor of a border barrier twice before.
“You voted yes in 2006 and 2013. One more yes, but with me in office,” he wrote. “I’ll get it built, and Fast!”
He also mocked the Democrats’ claim that walls are old technology, quipping “but so is the wheel.”
Trump and the Democrats have clashed over border funding before, resulting in a brief government shutdown in January 2018. At the time, Trump proposed a sweeping amnesty for children brought into the US illegally and their relatives in return for wall funding and immigration reforms. Democrats rejected it, however, and eventually prevailed in getting an omnibus spending bill that ignored immigration altogether, setting the stage for the December 2018 showdown.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
No issue encapsulates the weakness of republicans and their simultaneous adherence to the UniParty position on illegal immigration more than the aftermath of illegal aliens killing U.S. citizens. No-one ever forces democrats to own the consequences to their position; it is very frustrating.
No other issue is as easy to frame, and supported by the majority of American voters, as the issue of illegal alien impacts on local communities. Yet, we never see republican politicians making democrats own and defend these toxic negative outcomes. The reason is likely because both wings of the UniParty benefit from massive lobbying to keep the problem in place.
CTH has tracked this issue so closely through the years it often feels futile for another reminder. However, with the insufferable political games surfacing, yet again, over the issue of illegal aliens – perhaps it is worth another visit.
Understanding The Big Racket.
Massive illegal immigration is supported by both sides of the professional political machine. There are few issues more unifying for the K-Street purchased voices of DC politicians than keeping the borders open and the influx of illegal aliens as high as possible. The U.S. Chamber of Commercepays politicians to keep this system in place.
All Democrats and most Republicans support mass immigration. Almost no DC politicians want to take action on any policy or legislation that stops the influx. There are billions at stake. None of the GOP leadership want to actually stop illegal immigration; it’s a lucrative business. Almost all of the CONservative groups and politicians lie about it.
The religious right is also part of the problem. In the past 15 years illegal immigration and refugee settlement has been financially beneficial for them. The prior actions of Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck et al show they are as committed to facilitating illegal immigration as Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Flake, Ben Sasse, Kevin McCarthy, Lisa Murkowski and the rest of the Decepticons.
Washington DC and the activist media, are infested with illegal immigration supporters; the issue is at the heart of the UniParty. Follow the money. It’s the Acorn model:
There is no greater disconnect from ordinary Americans on any singular issue than the policy positions of Democrats and Republicans in Washington DC surrounding immigration. President Donald Trump is confronting their unified interests.
All political opposition to the Trump administration on this issue is structured, planned and coordinated. The issue is a valuable tool for the professional political class to sow chaos amid politicians.
The resulting crisis is useful for them; therefore they fuel the crisis.
Through June 2018, Southwest Key was given $310,000,000, in taxpayer funds. That’s just one company, in one part of a year. Prior CTH research showed this specific “Private Company”nets 98.76% of earnings from government grants (link).
Today … [Houston Mayor Sylvester] Turner said he met with officials from Austin-based Southwest Key Programs, the contractor that operates some of the child shelters, to ask them to reconsider their plans. A spokeswoman for Southwest Key didn’t immediately reply to an email seeking comment.
“And so there comes a point in time we draw a line and for me, the line is with these children,” said Turner during a news conference Tuesday. (link)
“The thought that they are going to be putting such little kids in an institutional setting? I mean it is hard for me to even wrap my mind around it,” said Kay Bellor, vice president for programs at Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which provides foster care and other child welfare services to migrant children. “Toddlers are being detained.” (link)
“Faith Based Immigration Services” is a code-speak for legalized human smuggling.
Human smuggling is big business. If you dig in to the IRS 990 forms you’ll see a lot of, well, “generous” wage/benefit perks. Golf, florists, cafe’s, mysterious leases, land purchases, third party mortgages, $$$ Spouses on the payroll, etc.
So when you’ve got each individual immigration business making multi-hundreds of millions; and politicians getting kick-backs (lobbyists); and bribes to Mexican government officials; and payments to smugglers;who do you think actually wants the business to stop?
The “faith-based” crew (Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck, etc.) don’t want it to stop, because facilitating illegal alien import is now the financial bread and butter amid groups in their base of support. The man/woman in the pew might not know; but the corporation minister, preacher or priest (inside the process) surely does.
The Wall Street, big GOPe, U.S. Chamber of Commerce crew doesn’t want it to stop because they benefit from it (cheap labor), and the taxpayers -not them- are the ones funding it.
Sad thing is, it’s you and me that are paying the South American human smugglers through U.S. taxpayer funds. Laundered through the immigration business bagmen at U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and/or, U.S. Catholic Charities, or Southwest Key Programs Inc; or Baptist Child and Family Services Emergency Management Division (BCFS-EMD), just to name a few.
These immigration groups, get *MASSIVE* HHS grants and then pay-off the DC politicians and human smugglers, including MS13. Billions of dollars are spent, and the business has exploded in the past six years.
It’s a vicious cycle. Trafficked children are more valuable than adults because the organizations involved get more funding for a child than an adult. Each illegal alien child is worth about $56,000 in grant money. The system is full of fraud.
From our prior research approximately 65% of the money they get is spent on executive pay and benefits, opaque administrative payrolls, bribes, kick-backs to DC politicians and payoffs to the South American smugglers who bring them more immigrants.
As best it can be determined, approximately 35% ($19,000) is spent on the alien/immigrant child; maybe. It gets sketchy deep in their accounting.
All of those advocates gnashing their teeth and crying on television have no idea just who is controlling this process; and immigration idiots like Ted Cruz are only adding more fuel, more money, to the bottom line:
"This has to stop," Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said when asked about the separation of migrant families at the border in his state.
He'll also be introducing legislation "that will mandate that kids must stay with their parents." pic.twitter.com/2j0Z515d88
President Trump is not only threatening to secure the border, he’s threatening a Washington DC-based business model that makes money for a lot of interests. The operation also has side benefits for the participants; child sexploitation, child labor, and yes, much worse (you can imagine).
Martin Indyk, two-time US Ambassador to Israel and current Distinguished Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, attacked President Trump on Twitter Wednesday for saying Israel will be okay despite the US pulling out of Syria because we give them “billions of dollars.”
“This cavalier attitude is deeply worrying,” Indyk said. “Ignores the role of US as force multiplier for Israeli deterrence. From here it’s a short step to Trump asking: why are we giving Israel so much money?”
Here’s Trump’s full comments as reported Thursday by the Times of Israel:
Speaking with reporters, Trump was asked about criticism that the move could put Israel in jeopardy by allowing Iran to expand its foothold in Syria.
“Well, I don’t see it. I spoke with Bibi,” he said, referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I told Bibi. And, you know, we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And they’re doing very well defending themselves, if you take a look.”
“So that’s the way it is,” Trump said, according to a White House transcript.
“We’re going to take good care of Israel. Israel is going to be good. But we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And we give them, frankly, a lot more money than that, if you look at the books — a lot more money than that. And they’ve been doing a very good job for themselves,” he added.
Here’s some of the top responses to Indyk’s tweet:
Indyk has a rather fascinating history according to his Wikipedia page (click through for source links):
In 1982, Indyk began working as a deputy research director for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington.[4][5] From 1985 Indyk served eight years as the founding Executive Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a research institute specializing in analysis of Middle East policy.[6]
[…]He served as special assistant to President Bill Clinton and as senior director of Near East and South Asian Affairs at the United States National Security Council. While at the NSC, he served as principal adviser to the President and the National Security Advisor on Arab–Israeli issues, Iraq, Iran, and South Asia. He was a senior member of Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s Middle East peace team and served as the White House representative on the U.S. Israel Science and Technology Commission.
He served two stints as United States Ambassador to Israel, from April 1995 to September 1997, and from January 2000 to July 2001. He was the first and so far, the only, foreign-born US ambassador to Israel.
He has served on the board of the New Israel Fund.[7] Indyk currently serves on the Adivsory Board for DC based non-profit America Abroad Media.[8]
On July 29, 2013, Indyk was appointed by President Barack Obama as Washington’s special Middle East envoy for the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.[9] Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas favored his appointment.[10] He resigned from this position June 27, 2014, returning to the Brookings Institution as its vice president and director for foreign policy.[11][12]
Controversy
In 2000, Indyk was placed under investigation by the FBI after allegations arose that he improperly handled sensitive material by using an unclassified laptop computer on an airplane flight to prepare his memos of meetings with foreign leaders.[13][14][15] There was no indication that any classified material had been compromised, and no indication of espionage.[16]
Indyk was “apparently … the first serving U.S. ambassador to be stripped of government security clearance.”[16] The Los Angeles Times reported that “veteran diplomats complained that Indyk was being made a scapegoat for the kinds of security lapses that are rather common among envoys who take classified work home from the office.”[16] Indyk’s clearance was suspended but was reinstated the next month, “for the duration of the current crisis,” given “the continuing turmoil in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza [Strip] and for compelling national security reasons.”[16]
Criticism Receiving donations from Qatar
In 2014, Indyk came under scrutiny when a New York Times investigation revealed that wealthy Gulf state of Qatar made a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings Institution, in order to fund two Brookings initiatives,[17] the Brookings Center in Doha and the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World.[18] The Times investigation found that Brookings was one of more than a dozen influential Washington think tanks and research organizations that “have received tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments in recent years while pushing United States government officials to adopt policies that often reflect the donors’ priorities.”[17] A number of scholars interviewed by the Times expressed alarm at the trend, saying that the “donations have led to implicit agreements that the research groups would refrain from criticizing the donor governments.”[17]
The revelation of the think tank’s choice to accept the payment from Qatar was especially controversial because at the time, Indyk was acting as a peace negotiator between Israel and the Palestinians, and because Qatar funds jihadist groups in the Middle East and is the main financial backer of Hamas, “the mortal enemy of both the State of Israel and Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party.”[19] Hamas political chief Khaled Meshaal, who directs Hamas’s operations against Israel, is also harbored by Qatar.[17] Indyk defended the arrangement with Qatar, contending that it did not influence the think tank’s work and that “to be policy-relevant, we need to engage policy makers.”[17] However, the arrangement between Qatar and Brookings caused Israeli government officials to doubt Indyk’s impartiality.[20]
Since 2015, the proponents of neoliberalism have been pushing ahead with their plans for open borders and globalist agenda without the consent of the people. The last 365 days saw that destructive agenda greatly challenged.
In light of the epic events that shaped our world in 2018, it seems the Yellow Vests – the thousands of French citizens who took to the streets of Paris to protest austerity and the rise of inequality – would have been a nice choice for the Financial Times’ ‘person of the year’ award. Instead, that title was bestowed upon the billionaire globalist, George Soros, who has arguably done more meddling in the affairs of modern democratic states than any other person on the planet.
Perhaps FT’s controversial nomination was an attempt to rally the forces of neoliberalism at a time when populism and nascent nationalism is sweeping the planet. Indeed, the shocking images coming out of France provide a grim wake-up call as to where we may be heading if the globalists continue to undermine the power of the nation-state.
It is no secret that neoliberalism relentlessly pursues a globalized, borderless world where labor, products, and services obey the hidden hand of the free market. What is less often mentioned, however, is that this system is far more concerned with promoting the well-being of corporations and cowboy capitalists than assisting the average person on the street. Indeed, many of the world’s most powerful companies today have mutated into “stateless superpowers,”while consumers are forced to endure crippling austerity measures amid plummeting standards of living. The year 2018 could be seen as the tipping point when the grass-roots movement against these dire conditions took off.
Since 2015, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel allowed hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants into Germany and the EU, a groundswell of animosity has been steadily building against the European Union, perhaps best exemplified by the Brexit movement. Quite simply, many people are growing weary of the globalist argument that Europe needs migrants and austerity measures to keep the wheels of the economy spinning. At the very least, luring migrants with cash incentives to move to Germany and elsewhere in the EU appears incredibly shortsighted.
Indeed, if the globalist George Soros wants to lend his Midas touch to ameliorating the migrant’s plight, why does he think that relocating them to European countries is the solution? As is becoming increasingly apparent in places like Swedenand France, efforts to assimilate people from vastly different cultures, religions and backgrounds is an extremely tricky venture, the success of which is far from guaranteed.
One worrying consequence of Europe’s season of open borders has been the rise of far-right political movements. In fact, some of the harshest criticism of the ‘Merkel plan’ originated in Hungary, where its gutsy president, Viktor Orban, hopes to build “an old-school Christian democracy, rooted in European traditions.” Orban is simply responding to the democratic will of his people, who are fiercely conservative, yet the EU parliament voted to punish him regardless. The move shows that Brussels, aside from being adverse to democratic principles, has very few tools for addressing the rise of far-right sentiment that its own misguided policies created.
Here it is necessary to mention once again that bugbear of the political right, Mr. Soros, who has received no political mandate from European voters, yet who campaigns relentlessly on behalf of globalist initiatives through his Open Society Foundations (OSF) (That campaign just got some serious clout after Soros injected $18bn dollars of his own money into OSF, making it one of the most influential NGOs in the world).
With no small amount of impudence, Soros has condemned EU countries – namely his native Hungary – for attempting to protect their territories by constructing border barriers and fences, which he believes violate the human rights of migrants (rarely if ever does the philanthropist speak about the “human rights” of the native population). In the words of the maestro of mayhem himself: “Beggar-thy-neighbor migration policies, such as building border fences, will not only further fragment the union; they also seriously damage European economies and subvert global human rights standards.”
Through a leaked network of compromised EU parliamentarians who do his bidding, Soros says the EU should spend $30 billion euros ($33bln) to accommodate “at least 300,000 refugees each year.” How will the EU pay for the resettling of migrants from the Middle East? Soros has an answer for that as well. He calls it “surge funding,” which entails “raising a substantial amount of debt backed by the EU’s relatively small budget.”
George Soros has spent billions in the EU to undermine the nation state. This is where the real international political collusion is. pic.twitter.com/ANXOII7SFY
Any guesses who will be forced to pay down the debt on this high-risk venture? If you guessed George Soros, guess again. The already heavily taxed people of Europe will be forced to shoulder that heavy burden. “To finance it, new European taxes will have to be levied sooner or later,” Soros admits. That comment is very interesting in light of the recent French protests, which were triggered by Emmanuel Macron’s plan to impose a new fuel tax. Was the French leader, a former investment banker, attempting to get back some of the funds being used to support the influx of new arrivals into his country? The question seems like a valid one, and goes far at explaining the ongoing unrest.
At this point, it is worth remembering what triggered the exodus of migrants into Europe in the first place. A large part of the answer comes down to unlawful NATO operations on the ground of sovereign states. Since 2003, the 29-member military bloc, under the direct command of Washington, has conducted illicit military operations in various places around the globe, including in Iraq, Libya and Syria. These actions, which could be best described as globalism on steroids, have opened a Pandora’s Box of global scourges, including famine, terrorism and grinding poverty. Is this what the Western states mean by ‘humanitarian activism’? If the major EU countries really want to flout their humanitarian credentials, they could have started by demanding the cessation of regime-change operations throughout the Middle East and North Africa, which created such inhumane conditions for millions of innocent people.
This failure on the part of Western capitals to speak out against belligerent US foreign policy helps to explain why a number of other European governments are experiencing major shakeups. Sebastian Kurz, 32, won over the hearts of Austrian voters by promising to tackle unchecked immigration. In super-tolerant Sweden, which has accepted more migrants per capita than any other EU state, the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats party garnered 17.6 percent of the vote in September elections – up from 12.9 percent in the previous election. And even Angela Merkel, who is seen by many people as the de facto leader of the European Union, is watching her political star crash and burn mostly due to her bungling of the migrant crisis. In October, after her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) suffered a stinging setback in Bavaria elections, which saw CDU voters abandon ship for the anti-immigrant AfD and the Greens, Merkel announced she would resign in 2021 after her current term expires.
Meanwhile, back in the US, the government of President Donald Trump has been shut down as the Democrats refuse to grant the American leader the funds to build a wall on the Mexican border – despite the fact that he essentially made it to the White House on precisely that promise. Personally, I find it very hard to believe that any political party that does not support a strong and viable border can continue to be taken seriously at the polls for very long. Yet that is the very strategy that the Democrats have chosen. But I digress.
The lesson that Western governments should have learned over the last year from these developments is that there exists a definite red line that the globalists cross at risk not only to the social order, but to their own political fortunes. Eventually the people will demand solutions to their problems – many of which were caused by reckless neoliberal programs and austerity measures. This collective sense of desperation may open the door to any number of right-wing politicians only too happy to meet the demand.
Better to provide fair working conditions for the people while maintaining strong borders than have to face the wrath of the street or some political charlatan later. Whether or not Western leaders will change their neoliberal ways as a populist storm front approaches remains to be seen, but I for one am not betting on it.
A Mexican national suspected in a double-homicide in Mexico was admitted to the United States via a H-2B worker visa, according to a Friday Breitbart report.
“On September 27, Jose Froylan Garcia Melendez was admitted to the U.S. on an H-2B visa,” the report said. “The following day, after Melendez was rewarded the visa, Mexican officials notified the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to make them aware that the national was wanted in Mexico for double homicide.”
More than 60,000 H-2B visas are doled out to low-skilled workers annually, snatching those jobs from American citizens and allowing major corporations to cut down on the cost of their labor. The program exists because establishment Republicans and some Democrats often bend a knee to big business donors who grease the candidates’ palms on the campaign trail with the intention of being repaid once our esteemed elected officials are sworn into office.
These visas are for jobs outside of the agriculture industry, meaning that these immigrants are not coming to America to “do jobs that Americans won’t do,” as is often the pitch, like picking vegetables on farms.
“Two days after his admission to the U.S., Melendez was arrested by ICE agents while at work in Weems, Virginia for immigration violations,” the report said. “The next day, Mexican officials issued Melendez’s arrest warrants, formally charging him with the double homicide.”
Fortunately, this time around the visa program did not result in physical harm to any American. But it begs the question: if we absolutely must replace American workers with cheap foreign labor, is it unreasonable to request of our elected officials that they do not import suspected murderers?
Tom's Blog 