TIJUANA, MEXICO - APRIL 29: Members of a caravan of Central Americans who spent weeks traveling across Mexico walk from Mexico to the U.S. side of the border to ask authorities for asylum on April 29, 2018 in Tijuana, Baja California Norte, Mexico. More than 300 immigrants, the remnants of a caravan of Central Americans that journeyed across Mexico to ask for asylum in the United States, have reached the border to apply for legal entry. (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)

The caravan of migrants from Central America seeking entry into the United States has illustrated many problems in our immigration system.

First, the migrants were aided and abetted by the Mexican government, which issued them transit or humanitarian visas as they traveled north to make it to the United States. Second, they were encouraged by open-borders activists, who agitated against U.S. immigration law and met the caravan when it arrived.

But the third and biggest problem is their exploitation of the asylum/refugee system. The caravan members are applying for asylum in large numbers. At least 158 have been allowed into the country for initial asylum interviews with U.S. immigration officers. Another 70 or so remain on the Mexican side of the border.

When an otherwise-illegal alien comes to the United States, he can claim political asylum when he gets here. Asylum applications from nationals of countries with rampant government persecution of particular ethnic groups or religions are expected. But the fact that these caravan members are claiming asylum is remarkable. They come predominantly from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala.

To obtain asylum, an alien must demonstrate a “well-founded fear of persecution” in his country of origin, based on race, nationality, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Furthermore, the persecution must be by agents of the government or must occur with the complicity of the government.

It appears that the vast majority of aliens in the caravan are claiming asylum simply based on the fact that they lived in poverty or in crime-ridden areas. They offered reasons such as “unemployment,” “gang threats,” or “fear of crime” for their asylum claims. But those are not valid bases for seeking asylum. If being poor or living in a crime-ridden country were enough to gain asylum, then the majority of people in the developing world would be entitled to it.

But that’s exactly what the open-borders activists assisting the caravan appear to want. One group, Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice, or “CLUE,” declared that, “They are coming here because they are desperate due to conditions created by the United States….”

They even sent immigration attorneys to coach the aliens on how to best make an asylum application. Of course, a person who is truly seeking refuge from persecution by the government of his home country doesn’t need coaching. All he needs to do is truthfully tell his story to a U.S. immigration official.

Many aliens make up bogus stories of persecution in order to bolster their claims of asylum. Sometimes U.S. immigration officials are able to determine that such stories are fabricated, but often the aliens will succeed in fraudulently obtaining asylum.

A final problem is that the majority of asylum claimants are allowed to roam the United States for multiple years while their asylum claims are being adjudicated. They are also able to obtain employment authorization while their claims are pending.

Others disappear into the fabric of the country and fail to show up for their asylum hearings. But for them, simply getting across the border is mission accomplished. They figure that they can live illegally in the United States without much difficulty.

The Trump Administration has responded to the caravan appropriately – by sending additional Justice Department attorneys and immigration judges to the area to adjudicate the asylum claims quickly. This will reduce the risk that the asylum applicants disappear while their asylum claims languish for years.

Chances are, most of the applications will be rejected. Between 2011 and 2016, more than 75 percent of the asylum applications from Hondurans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans were rejected.

But all it takes is one erroneous decision by an activist court (such as the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals) to redefine the legal requirements for asylum to include some types of economic or crime-based distress. That seems to be what some in caravan are hoping for. That, or the possibility that they can disappear into the United States while their claims are being adjudicated. And if Congress passes an amnesty for illegal aliens someday, they will be waiting to get it.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/05/10/caravans-unlikel...

Views: 70

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They are all most Here 2 pages of information for you: http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum

 Thanks Tif

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service