Child Trafficking Used by Criminals to Enter U. S.

Earlier this week in discussing the rampant child trafficking at the border, child smuggling used to game entry, I noted that rather suddenly men trying to enter are showing up with children.  I was skeptical about the motives, and I was right, of course: 

The Department of Homeland Security treats the expanded “Flores” decree like God’s word, releasing any illegal alien who crosses the border with a child, even if border personnel can’t confirm identities, criminal records, or whether they are threats to Americans or to the children they’re using as golden tickets.

Senator James Lankford, R-Okla., announced at yesterday’s Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that border agents told him, on his recent trip to the border, that they found in two separate incidents that an alleged murderer and a convicted pedophile had each been released with a kid as part of the expanded Flores catch-and-release deadline of 20 days.

In one case, “they released an adult with a child and then found out two weeks later that that adult had a murder warrant in their home country, and they just released him into the country, and they could do nothing about it.” In another case, “they had released an adult traveling with a child and then found out after they were released when they got their criminal records in from home country that, that was a convicted pedophile from that country now traveling with a child somewhere in our country, and because we couldn’t detain them for longer than 20 days and we couldn’t get those criminal records, they’re released in the country, and they’re traveling with a child.”

When Lankford asked acting Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Mark Morgan whether border personnel were able to verify criminal status within the arbitrary 20-day deadline by the courts, he answered, “Not efficiently.”

So criminals are using child smuggling, combined with the 20 day deadline mandated by a California judge in the Flores decision, to be released into our country to prey on the rest of us.  And in case one thinks I am being alarmist about exceptional situations…

“In every single group, almost without fail, there is someone with a criminal record, typically males with single kids,” [an anonymous] agent said. “There is a wide misconception about the majority of these people being females. They are overwhelmingly male. While we try to prioritize referrals for prosecution based on criminal history, we only have so many computers we can utilize and so many staff members.”

When I asked him if that means there are those with confirmed criminal records, even with convictions in the U.S., who have been released, he said, “Absolutely. … They are given a notice to appear in court like anyone else.”

And we know that most do not show up for their court hearings.

Again, sentimental thinking about children and families at the border is enabling child trafficking and other criminality.  Yes, families (not the fake ones) showing up at the border should be kept together . . . by sending them back across the border immediately if they don’t have proper documentation.  If they want and merit a hearing, they can wait for it across the border.  We must stop policies which make children a golden ticket to get in and thereby make them targets of child trafficking.

Rampant Child Trafficking: Children Used to Game Border Entry

As is hard to miss, there is a lot of sentimental talk about keeping families at the border together.  (Strange that deporting them together is rarely suggested as a solution.)  This and other weaponized compassion about “refugees” and “immigrants” is enabling rampant child trafficking.  A lot of those families are fake: 

Homeland Security Investigations, a division of ICE, sent 400 agents to El Paso and Rio Grande Valley, Texas, in mid-April to interview families that Border Patrol suspected were fake. In the last eight weeks, HSI special agents have identified 5,500 fraudulent families—about 15 percent of all cases referred.

McAleenan said agents have uncovered 921 fake documents and 615 individuals have been prosecuted for trafficking or smuggling a child.

“That tells me that we might be scratching the surface of this problem and the number of children being put at risk might be even higher,” he said.

“Everybody knows that if they bring a child, they’ll be allowed to stay in the United States—they call it a ‘passport for migration.’ I heard that directly from a gentleman from Huehuetenango, the western-most province of Guatemala.”

Yes.  Smuggling children in order to gain entry into the U. S.

Do we want people who would do this in our country at all?

But you get more of what you reward.  And we are rewarding child trafficking at the border. If you have a child with you and get across the border, you are probably in.  For that we can thank . . .

The legal loophole that is fueling the sharp increase in family units was opened in 2015 by a California judge, [of course]who amended the Flores Settlement Agreement to prohibit the detention of families for more than 20 days. Previously, the 20-day rule was applied to unaccompanied minors only.

An immigration case cannot be adjudicated within 20 days, so families who cross the border illegally are now released by Border Patrol within days, with a future court date that most fail to honor.  [87% failed to show up by one study. – ed.]

One of the most telling statistics is that of men crossing the border with a child. In 2014, fewer than 1 percent of all men apprehended by Border Patrol in the Rio Grande Valley Sector had a child with them. That number now sits at 50 percent, according to Rodolfo Karisch, chief Border Patrol agent for that sector.

Wow! It’s so nice to see male illegals suddenly become so family-oriented!

Now at least some of those men are smuggling their own children, taking them through a dangerous journey, which is bad enough. Who knows how many of those men are smuggling other people’s children.

As for unaccompanied minors, most of them are smuggled as well in part to, yes, game the system.

McAleenan said it’s often a parent, who is already in the United States illegally, who pays a smuggler to deliver their child up to the border.

“I don’t think most people realize that most of these unaccompanied children are being released to parents or relatives in the United States who are also here unlawfully, who may not have permission to work in the United States,” McAleenan said.

New restrictions, placed by Congress in the latest round of appropriations, include a provision that illegal aliens in a household with an unaccompanied minor are now exempt from deportation.

Again, rewarding child trafficking and the violation of our borders.

I do not pretend to know the balance between compassion on the one hand and self-defense and not enabling criminal behavior on the other.  But we as a nation need to be realistic about who is entering the U. S. and how they are gaining entry, even if being realistic is smeared as racist or whatever.

And, for the sake of children and the God who loves them, we must stop enabling and rewarding child trafficking.

DACA and Illegal Immigration – Democrats are Using Labour’s Playbook

With DACA, the so-called Dreamers, and illegal immigration again a matter of dispute between President Trump and the Democrats and Establishment Republicans in Congress, I wish to point out the big picture.

To go deeply into the history of said big picture would take a book, a big roach-killing book, not a blog.  But my humble, very condensed effort anyway….

Tony Blair’s Labour was not happy with the cultural make up of the British electorate.  So Labour imported an electorate more to their liking through massive immigration.  The U. K. is suffering the fruit of that, including frequent Islamic terror attacks.

Democrats are trying to do the same thing to America.  They’ve already done it to California and to a lesser extent Colorado among other states.  They are trying to do it to all of us. One even admitted it recently. They want to overwhelm American voters retaining traditional American Constitutional values by importing Democrats.  To a large extent, they have already succeeded, thanks in part to establishment Republican enablers.  Massive crime from illegals is only part of the fruit of that.  The overwhelming of social services in many communities is another.  Oh yes.  I didn’t mention Democrats make a point to buy illegals’ future votes with welfare and other social services us citizens pay for.

The future of America depends on stopping the Democrats and their RINO enablers before it’s too late.

About Leaving Power Hungry Judges Unchecked

Once again, federal courts are taking the odd position that they have more authority over immigration and national defense than the President of the United States.  Further, they are giving purported refugees and potential immigrants more rights than citizens the President is trying to protect.

Daniel Horowitz is at the point where he thinks the President should put his foot down and defy such rulings.  That would surely seem draconian to many and something of a constitutional crisis. And perhaps it would be a constitutional crisis.  But unless we wish to be a Dictatorship of Black Robes instead of a constitutional republic, we are running out of viable options.

I might as well start here Wannabe’s Laws of History.  Law Number One: The power hungry will take as much power as you allow them to take.

The founding fathers knew this and wrote the Constitution in such a way as to disperse power amongst the three branches of the federal government and to enable the three branches to check the excesses of each other.  The problem is that long ago the Legislative and Executive branches became afraid to check the power of the Judiciary.  We treat our judges like High Priests.  And so when political hacks put on the HOLY Black Robes, their tyrannical hackery goes unchecked.

My correct opinion is that the Roe v Wade decision and its aftermath played an enormous role in putting us where we are today.  Leaving aside the abortion issue itself, it was an absurd decision.  To say the Constitution mandated virtual abortion on demand for all nine months of pregnancy was about as absurd as saying it mandates that 1+1=9.

That ruling struck down the abortion laws of 48 states.  (And that is another issue.  Who gave the Federal government such power over state abortion laws?  What about the 10^th Amendment?) No wonder one of the dissenters, Byron White, called it “an exercise of raw judicial power.”  Yet not one state, not one, defied this tyrannical and absurd ruling. 

And that failure sent a terrible message to the judiciary – that they could literally get away with murder.  That whenever they felt like it, they could turn this country into a Dictatorship of Black Robes regardless of the Constitution and of the consent of the governed and their elected officials.  I know some opine that judges watch the election returns and try to avoid defying too much the consent of the governed.  Recent history makes me doubt that when it comes to the current Supreme Court and many lower courts.  And time and again they have defied the consent of the governed without paying a significant price.

Thus today we have such absurdities as federal judges running immigration policy and national defense even in the face of a presidential election won in part because of promises to restrict immigration in order to protect us.

Good people can differ as to what would justify defiance of federal judges.  But the results of leaving their usurped power unchecked in the past can hardly be disputed.

History has consequences.

NOTE:

This is surely your first visit to this blog.  Welcome!  Feel free to read my first post to find out what I’m up to.