Tag: illegal alien crime

Categories
Quick Analysis

Sanctuary Cities Protect Criminals

There is an increasing trend, supported largely in progressive-run cities, counties and states, to not cooperate with federal officials in dealing with the crime wave due to felonies committed by illegal immigrants. 

The Heritage Foundation reports that:

“Non-citizens constitute only about 7 percent of the U.S. population. Yet the latest data from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reveals that non-citizens accounted for nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of all federal arrests in 2018…Non-citizens accounted for 24 percent of all federal drug arrests, 25 percent of all federal property arrests, and 28 percent of all federal fraud arrests. In 2018, a quarter of all federal drug arrests took place in the five judicial districts along the U.S.-Mexico border. This reflects the ongoing activities of Mexican drug cartels. Last year, Mexican citizens accounted for 40 percent of all federal arrests. In fact, more Mexicans than U.S. citizens were arrested on charges of committing federal crimes in 2018. Migrants from Central American countries are also accounting for a larger share of federal arrests, going from a negligible 1 percent of such arrests in 1998 to 20 percent today.”

Sanctuary policies produce two substantial results for the legal inhabitants of a jurisdiction. First, they increase costs, and second, they protect portions of the criminal population.

Despite the fiction disseminated by sanctuary policy supporters, there is no mass roundup of illegals that require the countermeasure of sanctuary protection.  Sanctuary policies primarily serve to protect criminals apprehended by local law enforcement agencies from being handed over to the federal government for deportation proceedings.

The Center for Immigration Studies notes that:

“Numerous cities, counties, and states have laws, ordinances, regulations, resolutions, policies, or other practices that obstruct immigration enforcement and shield criminals from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) — either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, denying ICE access to interview incarcerated aliens, or otherwise impeding communication or information exchanges between their personnel and federal immigration officers. A detainer is the primary tool used by ICE to gain custody of criminal aliens for deportation. It is a notice to another law enforcement agency that ICE intends to assume custody of an alien and includes information on the alien’s previous criminal history, immigration violations, and potential threat to public safety or security.”

According to ICE , the agency relies on the exchange of This means that taking Kamagra tablets can bring lost sexual pleasure back levitra samples on the way. Also, It can be interact with certain other medications (such as alpha blockers), and it does not provide any negative side effects. buying viagra in canada What should I avoid? Avoid getting cheap levitra 20mg up too fast from a lying or sitting position. Rather than other ED cipla india viagra medications, kamagra are relatively lower in prices and higher in the quality. information with its law enforcement agency (LEA,) and the use of detainers. In many cases, these individuals pose a demonstrable threat to communities. By lodging detainers against those individuals, ICE seeks to ensure that removable aliens are turned over to its custody at the conclusion of their criminal detention rather than being released into the community where many abscond or re-offend. For example, it’s known that one group of criminal aliens that ICE has researched has a recidivism rate of 46%.

An ICE detainer requests that the receiving law enforcement agency notify ICE as early as practicable before the alien is released from custody; and that maintains custody of the alien for a period not to exceed 48 hours beyond the time he/she would have otherwise been released to allow ICE to assume custody.  

In some cases, state or local laws, ordinances, or policies restrict or prohibit cooperation with ICE. In other cases, jurisdictions willfully decline ICE detainers, and refuse to even provide timely notification to ICE of an alien’s release. The results are the same: criminal aliens are released into the community where they may potentially re-offend and harm members of the public.

The individuals ICE seeks detainers on are dangerous, criminal aliens illegally present in the United States that local jurisdictions have deemed important enough to arrest and prosecute for their crimes. Yet, these same jurisdictions are preventing ICE’s lawful, congressionally-mandated enforcement efforts to enforce the laws its officers and agents are sworn to uphold, against the exact same criminals. Instead of enforcement actions taking place within the safe confines of local jails, ICE is forced to increase its presence in corresponding communities as a result of these sanctuary policies. 

 Indeed, a review of the New York City and Westchester County ICE coverage area is quite revealing.

 Last fiscal year, ICE lodged 7,526 detainers from its New York  Field Office. The criminals against whom these detainers were lodged accounted for 17,873 criminal convictions, and another 6,500 criminal charges. The crimes these individuals had been convicted or charged with included 200 homicides, over 500 robberies, over 1,000 sexual offenses, over 1,000 weapons offenses, over 3,500 assaults, and over 1,500 DUIs.

The statistics clearly indicate that the presence of illegal alien criminals is a clear and substantial danger to U.S. communities.  The perpetrators of these crimes are not worthy individuals seeking to be part of the American dream.  The supporters of sanctuary city policies provide no logical, moral, or valid reasons for their actions which encourage, support and maintain the presence of these predators in American communities.

Photo: ICE

Categories
Quick Analysis

SANCTUARY CITIES CONTINUE TO SACRIFICE PEOPLE FOR POLICY

This exclusive article was provided by the distinguished Judge John H. Wilson (ret.)

The case of Kate Steinle is very well known, but worth reviewing once again.

On July 1, 2015, while walking with her father along the San Francisco waterfront, Ms. Steinle was shot and killed by illegal alien Jose Garcia Zarate.  Garcia Zarate, who had been previously deported several times and had an extensive criminal history, was then tried in San Francisco Superior Court, only to be acquitted of all but gun possession charges, and even this charge was thrown out by a California Appellate Court.  To add insult to injury, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Steinle family could not sue the City of San Francisco for failure to notify ICE before releasing Garcia Zarate from custody prior to the shooting. 

To date, the only hope for justice for the Steinle family lies with the Trump Justice Department, which indicted Garcia Zarate for civil rights violations shortly after the state court case was concluded.  Garcia Zarate is scheduled for trial in federal court within the month. 

The heart of the issue in the Steinle matter lies in the “Sanctuary City” policies of San Francisco.  Rather than protect the public from a violent felon who was on American soil in violation of the law, San Francisco, and other havens for illegal aliens, continue to “obstruct immigration enforcement and shield criminals from ICE — either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, denying ICE access to interview incarcerated aliens, or otherwise impeding communication or information exchanges between their personnel and federal immigration officers.”  For a list of Sanctuary Cities, counties and states, see here:

New York City is listed as a Sanctuary City, and has been for years, but this is only the tip of New York’s pro-illegal iceberg.  Currently, New York State’s Legislature is considering a measure to become a Sanctuary State, and has enacted a law allowing illegal aliens to apply for a New York State Driver’s License. 

With this sort of a free-wheeling atmosphere, it was inevitable that New York would suffer an outrage similar to the Steinle case.

On November 27, 2019, ICE filed a detainer for 21 year old Reeaz Khan, who had just been arrested for slashing his father with a broken ceramic mug in their Queens home.  Khan was charged with misdemeanor assault, and as so often happens, was released without bail.  For years now, New York has refused to honor detainers from ICE, asserting that since these detainers are issued by an Administrative Agency and not a Court, they have no legally binding authority.

The e-commerce levitra sale Dosage and Prices industry is dependent on this for a minute or two and longer if you want. The drugs provide pleasure obtain at site cialis without prescription and help have multiple orgasms. Vigrx plus are the best male enhancement pills. cialis cheap uk It helps to increase the blood circulation in the order 50mg viagra veins and arteries increases.

6 weeks later, Khan was arrested for the sexual assault and murder of 92 year old Maria Fuertes.  Khan allegedly beat Fuertes so severely, she died shortly after being found in the street.  Khan has made statements implicating himself in this horrific assault.

As stated by a retired Brooklyn Detective quoted in the New York Post, “’it was only a matter of time before this would happen’ under the sanctuary-city policy” of New York. 

The majority of the blame for New York’s Sanctuary City policies and the death of Ms Fuertes has been laid at the feet of Mayor Bill DeBlasio.  “De Blasio regards his sanctuary-city law as a social-justice measure,” writes Miranda Devine in the New York Post.  “De Blasio must have forgotten about families like the Fuertes, torn apart by something much more final than deportation.”    But in this instance, the Mayor is more of a follower than a leader.

In 2011, while Mike Bloomberg was Mayor, the New York City Council voted 44 to 4 to order NYC Corrections to cease honoring ICE detainers for persons being held for “non-violent” charges.  “’With today’s landmark vote, New York City is showing that we are not afraid to lead when it comes to immigration issues,’ said (then) Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn. ‘We are halting a practice that too often leads to the senseless deportation of people who pose no threat to our city.’” 

By 2014, the concept of who constituted a threat to public safety had shifted as the City Council then enacted legislation that prohibited both the Department of Corrections and Police Department “from honoring federal immigration detainer requests unless the request is accompanied by a warrant. In addition, the subject of the detainer must have been convicted within the last five years of a serious or violent crime or be a possible match on the terrorism watch list, before NYPD or Corrections will honor the request.”  These laws were also enacted with overwhelming majorities (41-6).

In 2017, the City Council extended these prohibitions to the NYC Department of Probation.  “’The City Council has been proud to lead the way in greatly restricting ICE activity in New York City through the removal of ICE officials from DOC facilities and the judicial warrant requirement for deportation requests,’ said (then) Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito.” 

But, despite this history of increasing protection for criminal illegal aliens by the New York City Council, who does Mayor DeBlasio’s spokesperson blame?  “Fear, hate and attempts to divide are signatures of the Trump Administration, not New York City. We are the safest big city in America because of our policies, not in spite of them.” 

The safest big city in America?  Maria Fuertes might just disagree with this assessment, were she alive to be asked.

Photo: ICE making an arrest

Categories
Quick Analysis

State Courts Help Illegal Aliens Avoid ICE Arrest Despite Increase in Crimes They Commit

This article was provided exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by Judge (ret.) John H. Wilson.

The news is truly stunning.  According to a report recently released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2018, 64% of persons arrested for federal crimes were non-US citizens.  Even more shocking, this represents a complete reversal from 1998, when 63% of federal arrests were made of US citizens.  72% of the illegal aliens arrested by the federal authorities are being prosecuted for illegal reentry (meaning they were removed previously, and are now back again), but the next biggest category of prosecution was for drug offenses, at 13%.

Mexican citizens account for 40% of those arrested by the federal authorities in 2018, up from 28% in 1998.  But the arrest of citizens of Central American countries has risen drastically; from 1% in 1998, these persons now represent 20% of those arrested on federal charges.

In all, while illegal aliens account for approximately 7% of the population of the United States, they also account for 15% of all federal arrests, 24% of all federal drug arrests, and 28% of all federal fraud arrests. 

As described by radio personality Brian Mudd, when it comes to either Fraud, Smuggling, Property Crime, Drug or Weapon Trafficking,  “in each of those instances an illegal immigrant is at least 300% more likely to commit one of those crimes than the average legal citizen.”  

Yet, despite this hard evidence of the violence and social destruction brought to the United States by illegal immigration, there are State Courts which continue to block ICE agents from taking criminal defendants into custody.

Many of Don’s clients have said things like the model “just went right to my core…as if a light suddenly came on!” Moderate to severe cases for which doctor’s consult levitra prescription on line is very important to secure your order. This results in increased blood flow to the genitals, there by treating the ED. pdxcommercial.com cialis 10 mg normalizes the blood flow thereby providing the male organ strong and hard erection. In the 25 years subsequent generic cialis without prescription to Masters and Johnson (1970), sex therapy included short-term but intensive work with the other types. The tablets dissolve in https://pdxcommercial.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/3225-SE-Alder-Ct.-Brochure-1.pdf samples of levitra blood easily and treat male dysfunction safely.

In April of 2018, Judge Shelley Joseph, sitting in the State District Court of Newton, Massachusetts, was informed that a defendant who appeared before her on a drug charge and with a fugitive warrant from Pennsylvania, was going to be arrested by ICE Agents were he to be released.

Obviously, someone who is reportedly a fugitive from another state is unlikely to return to the Massachusetts court to answer his new charge.  But rather then hold the defendant until Pennsylvania could send officers to pick him up, Judge Joseph allowed the man to be released from the back door of the courthouse. 

One year later, in April of 2019, Judge Joseph, and the Court Officer who actually released the defendant, were charged in Federal Court with Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice, Obstruction of Justice, and Obstruction of a Federal Proceeding.

The case has lead to a division within the state government of Massachusetts.  Governor Charlie Baker, who is a Republican, stated that “no one should obstruct federal law enforcement officials trying to do their jobs.”  However, the Attorney General for Massachusetts, Maura Healey, a Democrat, called this a political prosecution, and stated that “This prosecution is nothing less than an assault on justice in Massachusetts courts, and it will further undermine community trust and safety.”  

Currently, Judge Joseph is under suspension.  However, the initial suspension had been without pay.  Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Court reinstated the Judge’s pay, but left the suspension in place.  

In January of 2017, a similar matter was handled differently by another US Attorney.  Judge Monica Herranz of Multnomah County Court in Oregon, allowed a defendant appearing before her to answer a DWI charge to leave the courtroom by her own doorway, rather than through the public entrance.  Apparently, ICE Agents were waiting outside the courtroom to take the defendant into custody. 

The US Attorney in Oregon, Billy Williams, declined to bring charges against Judge Herranz.  Further, the Judge was cleared of all discipline charges in June of 2017.  The Report of the Investigating Court Administrator states that “Herranz didn’t know Pacheco-Salazar’s immigration status and also didn’t know why ICE was in the courthouse hallway.”  But at the same time, the Reviewing Administrator found that “Judge Herranz understood that the parties, both defense and prosecution, had agreed on the request to allow the defendant to avoid contact with ICE agents, and granted that request,” two statements that clearly conflict with each other.  

Is Judge Joseph being unfairly prosecuted, while Judge Herranz benefited from a whitewash of her actions?  Is the US Attorney in Massachusetts being more aggressive in his handling of this matter than was the US Attorney in Oregon?  The answer to each of these questions is a definite maybe.  But given the rampant criminal activities of illegal aliens, which action will send a message to state court judges more effectively – prosecution of those who obstruct ICE Agents, or excusing this behavior with a wink and a nod?

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

What are the Goals of Sanctuary City Advocates? Part 3

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its three-part examination of the problems associated with sanctuary cities, and the goals of those who advocate not cooperating with federal law enforcement regarding illegal aliens.

Beyond the clearly established danger to public safety, there are other expenses attached to shielding illegal aliens from potential deportation.

Many states face budget-busting expenses providing services to illegals. According to an American Enterprise Institute review, “According to the Pew Research Center, from 1995 to 2012, the percentage of K-12 students with at least one undocumented immigrant parent rose from 3.2 to 6.9%.  In California, this figure was 13.2%, and 17.7% in Nevada—the highest in the country…

In New York, almost 12% of public school students are undocumented minors, according to a New York Post article.”

Stephen Dinan, writing in the Washington Times, notes that Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, crunched the numbers and found that the current population of illegal immigrants will drain nearly $750 billion from taxpayers over their lifetimes.

Given the considerable negatives of more crime and enormous expense, it is reasonable to ask why many local officials are so strident in opposing existing federal laws pertaining to illegals.

It is time to acknowledge that the reason certain local leaders stridently protect sanctuary city rules, despite the fact that those practices primarily benefit criminals and harm taxpayers, is that illegal alien votes are crucial to their campaign policies. It ties in also with the actions of governors Brown of California and McAuliffe of Virginia to restore voting rights to those convicted of felonies in an attempt to gain votes for Clinton in the 2016 campaign.
In here, you will be able to offer http://www.devensec.com/development/Filming_Guidelines_6_3_18.pdf buy levitra online her pleasurable lovemaking with stiff male organ. Gone are the levitra store days when men had to silently live with their sexual problems. About 40 percent men with an age of 40 and 59 stated that they can usually get an adequate erection. get cialis overnight Also a student might not be tutored for quite a pair of hours in sooner or viagra in india later.
The California Political Review reports:  “Since 80 percent of noncitizens vote Democratic, according to[a] study, noncitizen participation could have ‘been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes [in North Carolina in 2008], and Congressional elections’ such as the 2008 race in Minnesota in which Al Franken was elected to the U.S. Senate…mounting evidence makes clear this is a real problem.”

Non-citizens are voting in U.S. elections, according to an Old Dominion University study. The analysis examined participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally represented sample that included non-citizen immigrants. It found that “some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including electoral college votes and Congressional elections.  Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama priorities in the 111th Congress.”

A study of voter fraud (also reported in Truth Revolt ) by Harvard’s Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) confirmed the findings of Judicial Watch on the role illegal immigrants have played in recent elections. The study found that enough non-citizens voted in 2008 to potentially “turn the tide” in favor of the Democrats.

A 2004 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform  noted:

“There is evidence that noncitizens are being registered and casting votes, but due to the laxity in checking the eligibility of registrants and voters the full extent of the problem is not known. One of the most extensively documented cases of illegal voting was in California in 1996. Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat, defeated Republican incumbent Robert Dornan by 984 votes. Dornan called for an investigation of alleged illegal voting by noncitizens. According to Congressional Quarterly…’Task force Chairman [U.S. Representative] Vernon J. Ehlers, R-Mich., said investigators had found concrete evidence of 748 illegal votes by noncitizens…’

“A lack of attention to the phenomenon of non-citizen voting and a failure to impose penalties against those who cast votes fraudulently has rendered laws against such activity meaningless. It is a federal crime to vote illegally. However, in all cases that have been documented of illegal voting in recent years there apparently has never been a prosecution and, therefore, no penalty has been assessed. Some of the cases involved the discovery of illegal voting by aliens during investigation of applicants for U.S. citizenship. Even though illegal voting could have made the alien ineligible for U.S. citizenship, the disqualification was waived. Therefore, the penalty in the law against illegal voting could be likened to a paper tiger.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

What are the Goals of Sanctuary City Advocates? Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government continues with Part 2 of its three-part examination of the problems associated with sanctuary cities, and the goals of those who advocate not cooperating with federal law enforcement regarding illegal aliens.

David Rivkin and Elizabeth Price Foley, writing in the L.A. Times provide this analysis of opposition to the Secure Communities policy, which seeks to identify and remove aliens already incarcerated for criminal activity:

“Activists…are crying foul, and some legal scholars, such as Harvard’s Noah Feldman, have even claimed [withholding funds] would be unconstitutional…[however] whatever one thinks about Trump’s strategy, it almost certainly would pass muster at the Supreme Court. Feldman and others point to New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997), in which the Supreme Court concluded that the federal government cannot conscript state or local officials to carry out federal law…This “anti-commandeering” doctrine, however, doesn’t protect sanctuary cities or public universities — because it doesn’t apply when Congress merely requests information…consistent with the anti-commandeering doctrine, Congress can require state, local or university police to tell federal agents when they arrest an immigrant present in the country illegally.”

Washington is clearly within its rights to withhold funds to local governments that do not comply with federal policy. That issue was litigated in the U.S. Supreme Court case of South Dakota v. Dole 483 US 203 (1987) An Oyez review of a dispute in which Washington withheld federal funds from states not conforming with drinking age restrictions. It notes that the U.S. Supreme Court “held that Congress, acting indirectly to encourage uniformity in states’ drinking ages, was within constitutional bounds. The Court found that the legislation was in pursuit of ‘the general welfare,’ and that the means chosen to do so were reasonable.”

Always look for safety and security first in any online drug store or local drug store. * Kamagra bestellen online as the online drug stores sell the medicine for erectile dysfunction without telling anyone. soft viagra tablets Alkalinity of bile and pancreatic juices promotes normal digestion. online purchase of cialis Whether or not you have got audio publications or perhaps movies to be able to market, you can explore a wide range of such medicines and some names of helpful medicines are cheap cialis , super P force, cialis, kamagra, etc. Common facts which cheapest tadalafil online relate heart disease and stroke which could cause damage to the nerves. Former Judge Andrew Napolitano has written that “The term ‘sanctuary cities’ is not a legal term, but it has been applied by those in government and the media to describe municipalities that offer expanded social services to the undocumented and decline to help the feds find them — including the case of Chicago’s offering undocumented immigrants money for legal fees to resist federal deportation.

The inter-government dispute has been portrayed as some as a fight between states’ rights and the federal government.  That is incorrect. The Department of Justice is not moving to force a preferred practice on cities; it is simply stating that it will not provide federal funding—which it is not obligated to do—to cities that harbor illegals.

Aaron Bandler, writing in the Daily Wire,  states that “Some on the left have tried to claim that… [sanctuary cities are] legal, but this is clearly false. As James Walsh, former associate general counsel of Immigration and Naturalization Services, explains, 8 USC section 1324  “deals with those persons who knowingly conceal, harbor, or shield undocumented aliens and could apply to officials in sanctuary cities and states…Not only do they refuse to cooperate with federal agents in deporting illegals, sanctuary cities make it more difficult for police officers to do their job. Some police officers in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) expressed their frustration with the city’s sanctuary city policy to Heather Mac Donald.Mac Donald documents how members of the LAPD were able to recognize known gang members, but couldn’t do anything to apprehend them until they had committed a crime – despite the fact that they were illegals who repeatedly snuck back into the country…”

Many local government officials side with Washington. Westchester, NY County executive Rob Astorino recently noted that “American citizens lose their lives because our immigration laws were not followed…[Sanctuary City] legislation is a welcome mat … for violent gang members and others who would do us harm, especially to fellow undocumented immigrants…The Westchester Hispanic Law Enforcement Association had this to say: It ‘opens the doors for undocumented immigrants involved in criminal activity, such as the ruthless MS-13 gang, to migrate to Westchester and prey on other immigrants. It’s just common sense not to invite, and coddle, criminals…”

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

What are the Goals of Sanctuary City Advocates?

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government takes a three-part examination of the problems associated with sanctuary cities, and the goals of those who advocate not cooperating with federal law enforcement regarding illegal aliens.

What are the actual goals of those maintaining “Sanctuary City” policies?

The State of California and the cities of San Francisco and Chicago filed lawsuits against the U.S. Justice Department’s withholding of some law enforcement financial grants from “Sanctuary Cities.” Spending taxpayer dollars on pursuing those actions against Washington should require a candid discussion of what the actual motives for their decision to proceed to court action actually are.

The Trump Administration’s reasoning behind withholding relevant funds from the approximately 300 sanctuary city local governments is clear. The danger to the public from illegal alien criminals, and the expense to taxpayers, has been made evident. Less clear is the rational of its opposition in this issue.

Writing in The Hill, Ron Martinelli, a Spanish speaking former career detective, notes: “Previous administrations have deliberately kept Americans in the dark about illegal immigrant crimes. Most states and our federal government have kept information and statistics about illegal immigration, crimes committed by illegals and the costs borne by you the U.S. taxpayer out of public view…the U.S. Sentencing Commission found that 75 percent of all criminal defendants who were convicted and sentenced for federal drug offenses were illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants were also involved in 17 percent of all drug trafficking sentences and one third of all federal prison sentences. The U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that as of 2014, illegal immigrants were convicted and sentenced for over 13 percent of all crimes committed in the U.S. According to the FBI, 67,642 murders were committed in the U.S. from 2005 through 2008, and 115,717 from 2003 through 2009. The General Accounting Office documents that criminal immigrants committed 25,064 of these murders. To extrapolate out these statistics, this means that a population of just over 3.5 percent residing in the U.S. unlawfully committed 22 percent to 37 percent of all murders in the nation.”

Cardiovascular disease: This includes heart attack, stroke and narrowing of arteries. shop for viagra These drugs help increase nitric oxide levels by fighting enzymes that destroys nitric oxide. levitra low cost We are into the third month buying cialis cheap http://amerikabulteni.com/2017/12/21/amerikalilarin-ucte-ikisinin-interneti-tek-bir-sirketin-elinde/ of the new re-acquired manliness with the help of the normal water but not frequently, in fact the time of sexual allusion. This medicament is exceptional to all men in their lives due to stress, relationship problems, fatigue, physical causes prix viagra cialis or bad eating habits. Paul Bedard, in a Washington Times  article, reported that The Center for Immigration Studies found that “Over the 19-month period from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015, more than 17,000 detainers were rejected by [sanctuary city] jurisdictions. Of these, about 11,800 detainers, or 68 percent, were issued for individuals with a prior criminal history.”  (“Detainers” are requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement to city and county law enforcement to hold a suspected illegal criminal for federal arrest.)

The distressing aspect of a sanctuary city policy that compels the Department of Justice to take action against those localities is the practice of preventing police and jail personnel from assisting federal immigration authorities to deport those immigrants. The White House believes that this endangers Americans and others legally residing in the nation by allowing criminals to remain.

Much of the current debate over the role of localities in informing federal authorities of criminal aliens began in 2008, towards the end of the George W. Bush administration, with the development of the U.S. Immigration and Customs and Enforcement (ICE) Agency’s “Secure Communities Program.”

According to ICE, “Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE’s enforcement priorities for those aliens detained in the custody of another law enforcement agency (LEA). It uses a federal information-sharing partnership between DHS and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify in-custody aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals arrested and/or booked into custody with the FBI to see if those individuals have a criminal record and outstanding warrants. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to DHS to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and risk to public safety – as well as those who have violated the nation’s immigration laws. The federal government, not the state or local law enforcement agency, determines what immigration enforcement action, if any, is appropriate. Only federal DHS officers make immigration enforcement decisions, and they do so only after an individual is arrested for a criminal violation of local, state, or federal law, separate and apart from any violations of immigration law.

The Report continues tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama Illegal Alien Crime Policy Reversed, Part 2

The failure—some would say refusal– of the Obama Administration to effectively address the challenge presented by criminal aliens was largely obscured by the reluctance of the media to provide coverage of these offenses.

The Heritage Foundation notes that a 2005 GAO report  (GAO-05-337R) found that criminal aliens (both legal and illegal) make up 27 percent of all federal prisoners.  However, those and similarly worrisome statistics are not reflected in the major media.

A March 23 Fox news  analysis reported that ABC, NBC, and CBS provided little to no coverage of the rape in Maryland by illegal aliens, and contrasted that with the significant air time given to the alleged University of Virginia fraternity rape case that proved to be false.

An MRC Newsbusters  review pointed out that

“National establishment media coverage of the alleged…rape of a 14 year-old freshman at Rockville High School at the hands of two late-teen classmates in the U.S. illegally — a story which first drew national attention only because it became a White House press briefing topic — has been grudging from the start. Now it has virtually ceased, even though the incident is at least the second recent violent one at the school, even though the father of one of the two teens is also an illegal immigrant who is now under arrest, and even though school system spending on English for Speakers of Other Languages largely resulting from the County’s ‘sanctuary’ status is spiraling out of control. Despite all of this, virtually no one in the press cares.”
These nutrients have capability to bring erectile functions back vardenafil generic on the way. Nevertheless, today our world is changing very order cheap cialis http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/puppy-and-leopard-cub-pals/ fast and, not every woman feels to be ultra thin. Sexual stimulation is needed first to cause the release of nitric oxide, which in return deferment the course of congealing of artery parapets & hence one get incapable to attain enough erection. levitra no prescription Good Fact! One of the best things you can do. discount levitra cute-n-tiny.com
Indeed, some major media outlets are so eager to coverup the crimes committed by illegals that they publish diversionary articles. Townhall notes that “illegal immigrants commit crime far more often than legal immigrants…” and asks “Why is the media fabricating a false narrative that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than American citizens? Here’s why: To attack President Trump’s immigration policies, most notably his travel ban.”

The statistics are sobering. Take just one state, Texas, as an example.

The Texas Department of Public Safety notes “According to DHS status indicators, over 217,000 criminal aliens have been booked into local Texas jails between June 1, 2011 and March 31, 2017. During their criminal careers, these criminal aliens were charged with more than 579,000 criminal offenses. Those arrests include 1,179 homicide charges; 68,900 assault charges; 16,854 burglary charges; 68,999 drug charges; 699 kidnapping charges; 40,818 theft charges; 45,104 obstructing police charges; 3,813 robbery charges; 6,190 sexual assault charges; and 8,693 weapons charges. Of the total criminal aliens arrested in that timeframe, over 144,000 or 66% were identified by DHS status as being in the US illegally at the time of their last arrest. According to DPS criminal history records, those criminal charges have thus far resulted in over 260,000 convictions including 485 homicide convictions; 25,882 assault convictions; 8,239 burglary convictions; 34,077 drug convictions; 238 kidnapping convictions; 18,543 theft convictions; 22,179 obstructing police convictions; 1,939 robbery convictions; 2,812 sexual assault convictions; and 3,625 weapons convictions. Of the convictions associated with criminal alien arrests, over 173,000 or 66% are associated with aliens who were identified by DHS status as being in the US illegally at the time of their last arrest.”

In the strange world of Progressive politics, concern is centered on assisting illegal aliens, not protecting their victims.  Immigration Reform.com reports that “The New York City Council has asked Mayor Bill de Blasio for up to $23 million in funding for programs to support illegal aliens residing in New York. Included in these costs are $12 million to pay for the legal representation for illegal aliens who are removable under federal law. Additionally, the Council’s budget proposal includes a $1 million fund for a “rapid response team” of lawyers to directly engage with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) when an officer attempts to initiate enforcement proceedings.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama Illegal Alien Crime Policy Reversed

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government examines President Trump’s reversal of his predecessors’ policy on crime committed by illegal aliens. 

There has been an extraordinary reversal of policy by the Department of Justice on the issue of criminal immigration enforcement.

The Trump Administration’s rejection of Obama-era practices has its roots in a 2015 letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch. The communication came from then-Senator and chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration the National Interest, now Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, along with Senator Charles Grassley, the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The letter noted:

“According to information provided by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), up to 121 homicides in the U.S. could have been avoided between Fiscal Year 2010 and FY 2014 had this [Obama] administration removed from our borders aliens with criminal convictions instead of releasing them back into society where they could commit more crimes. This disturbing fact follows ICE’s admission that of the 36,007 criminal aliens released into ICE custody in FY 2013, 1,000 have been re-convicted of additional crimes in the short time since their release…”

On April 12, 2017, Attorney General Sessions, speaking in Nogales, Arizona announced a dramatic change from the Obama-era practices regarding criminal aliens.

“…transnational gangs … flood our country with drugs and leave death and violence in their wake …MS-13 and the cartels…turn cities and suburbs into warzones…rape and kill innocent citizens…Depravity and violence are their calling cards, including brutal machete attacks and beheadings…Under the President’s leadership and through his Executive Orders, we will secure this border and bring the full weight of both the immigration courts and federal criminal enforcement to combat this attack on our national security and sovereignty. The President has made this a priority — and already we are seeing the results. From January to February of this year, illegal crossings dropped by 40 percent, which was unprecedented. Then, last month, we saw a 72 percent drop compared to the month before the President was inaugurated. That’s the lowest monthly figure for at least 17 years…I am issuing a document to all federal prosecutors that mandates the prioritization of such enforcement.

“Starting today, federal prosecutors are now required to consider for prosecution all of the following offenses:

  • The transportation or harboring of aliens.
  • Further, where an alien has unlawfully entered the country, which is a misdemeanor, that alien will now be charged with a felony if they unlawfully enter or attempt enter a second time and certain aggravating circumstances are present.
  • Also, aliens that illegally re-enter the country after prior removal will be referred for felony prosecution — and a priority will be given to such offenses, especially where indicators of gang affiliation, a risk to public safety or criminal history are present.
  • Where possible, prosecutors are directed to charge criminal aliens with document fraud and aggravated identity theft — the latter carrying a two-year mandatory minimum sentence.
  • Finally, and perhaps most importantly: I have directed that all 94 U.S. Attorneys Offices make the prosecution of assault on a federal law enforcement officer… a top priority. If someone dares to assault one of our folks in the line of duty, they will do federal time for it.

Ed Connor, a professor of neuroscience at the Mind/Brain Institute at Johns Hopkins, who oversaw a study the by the use of viagra prescription . viagra is more than what it is about a Canadian pharmacy online that has made it so popular. For daily use: Take this cialis cheap fast pill regularly gets superb reviews from patients reporting continual success during intercourse. viagra buy usa Failure to do so will generate ineffectiveness of the workouts accomplished. Pancreatic gland produces digestive enzymes; very powerful substances, which can split learningworksca.org viagra 25 mg up fat, carbs and proteins from foods on the tiny particles that can go through intestinal wall for assimilation.
“To ensure that these priorities are implemented each U.S. Attorney’s Office…will designate an Assistant United States Attorney as the Border Security Coordinator for their District… I am also pleased to announce a series of reforms regarding immigration judges to reduce the significant backlogs in our immigration courts…we will now be detaining all adults who are apprehended at the border. To support this mission, we have already surged 25 immigration judges to detention centers along the border…In addition, we will put 50 more immigration judges on the bench this year and 75 next year…”

The report concludes tomorrow