Illegal Alien in Sanctuary City Charged With Sexually Assaulting 6-Year-Old

/0 Comments/in , /by

An illegal alien has been arrested and charged with sexually assaulting a six-year-old child in Johnston County, North Carolina.

Alejandro Duarte Aldama, 32 years old, was charged last week on a number of child sex crime charges involving the alleged sexual assault of a six-year-old, according to records obtained by CBS 17.

Aldama, a law enforcement official told Breitbart News, entered the U.S. without inspection, which indicates that he is in the country illegally, most likely arriving from across the southern border. Aldama had been living in Raleigh, North Carolina — a sanctuary city that shields illegal aliens from deportation.

The illegal alien has been charged with a statutory sex offense and indecent liberties with a child. Aldama, the warrant claims, attempted “to engage in a sex act” with the six-year-old on January 4, 2019. (Read more from “Illegal Alien in Sanctuary City Charged With Sexually Assaulting 6-Year-Old” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Trump Admin Is Making It a Lot Harder for Border-Crossers to Game America’s Asylum System

/0 Comments/in , /by

A new regulation posted by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security Monday morning seeks to address the ongoing crisis at the southern border by making stricter the eligibility requirements for seeking asylum in the United States.

The rule, which was posted for review on Monday morning and goes into effect Tuesday, specifically deals with the asylum eligibility of “aliens who enter or attempt to enter the United States across the southern land border after failing to apply for protection from persecution or torture while in a third country through which they transited en route to the United States.”

The concept is simple: Where an applicant seeks asylum should be based on where an applicant first finds safety from whatever they’re fleeing, rather than on personal preference of country.

“In sum, this rule provides that, with limited exceptions, an alien who enters or arrives in the United States across the southern land border is ineligible for the discretionary benefit of asylum unless he or she applied for and received a final judgment denying protection in at least one third country through which he or she transited en route to the United States,” the rule reads.

If migrants leave a country in Central America and come to the United States, the new rule says they wouldn’t be eligible for asylum here unless they first went through the asylum application process somewhere along the way and were denied.

The authority for making the rule can be found in section 208 0f the Immigration and Nationality Act, which deals with asylum and refugee status. That section of the INA also gives the attorney general and secretary of homeland security to “the authority to promulgate regulations establishing additional bars on eligibility to the extent consistent with the asylum statute, as well as the authority to establish ‘any other conditions or limitations on the consideration of an application for asylum’ that are consistent with the INA,” according to the new rule.

There are exceptions to these new regulations about eligibility. For example, aliens can apply for deferral of removal under the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.” The rule also makes exceptions for victims of human trafficking because they “do not volitionally transit through a third country to reach the United States,” and it also makes exceptions for people who transit through countries that do not recognize international treaties dealing with torture and the proper treatment of refugees.

The rule seeks to cut down on frivolous “credible fear” claims that keep aliens in the United States until their claims for asylum can be heard and ruled on.

“This rule does not change the credible-fear standard for asylum claims,” the document explains, “although the regulation would expand the scope of the inquiry in the process. An alien who is subject to the third-country-transit bar and nonetheless has entered the United States along the southern land border after the effective date of this rule creating the bar would be ineligible for asylum and would thus not be able to establish a ‘significant possibility . . . [of] eligibility for asylum’” under federal law.

Raising the regulatory bar for asylum claims would also help the administration cut down on the total processing time for the claims while sending a message to the rest of the world that America’s asylum policies are not a “get out of jail free” card for otherwise illegal immigration.

“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum. The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border,” Attorney General William Barr said in a statement. “This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”

The rule is what’s known as an interim final rule and will go into effect quicker than a normal federal regulation, which typically takes 60 days after first publication. The rule will go into effect immediately on Tuesday morning. (For more from the author of “The Trump Admin Is Making It a Lot Harder for Border-Crossers to Game America’s Asylum System” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The First Person to Stand for Our Sovereignty and Laws Against Sanctuary Policies Is… a Democrat?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

We have laws in this country making it illegal for illegal aliens to remain in this country. It’s that simple. They cannot remain here, they cannot work here, and nobody is allowed to induce, encourage, harbor, transport, or shield from detection any illegal immigrant in the act of coming to or remaining in the country. How is it, then, that states, which are often stripped of their rightful powers over marriage and abortion, suddenly become so powerful that they can not only shield aliens from the feds but invite them to work and get benefits? What ever happened to that mighty Supremacy Clause of the Constitution?

That is essentially the question one county clerk in New York is asking following the state’s decision to issue driver’s licenses to those here illegally.

For years, state and federal officials have been openly violating immigration laws to help promote the cause of illegal immigration. It has taken a Democrat official willing to stand up for the rule of law to finally bring this issue to a head. Erie County Clerk Michael Kearns immediately called foul on the decision of the state government by noting that because he is an official charged with issuing driver’s licenses, the new state law would place him at odds with federal law.

Kearns argues that issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens would force him to violate federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1324), which makes a felon of anyone who “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place.” That statute also makes a criminal anyone who “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law” or anyone who “engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts.”

This law has been on the books in some form since 1891. Section 3 of the 1891 Immigration Act made it a felony to “assist or encourage the importation or migration of any alien by promise of employment” through advertisements. Any alien who came in due to such advertisements was deemed inadmissible, and that law was designed to prevent people from encouraging them.

Clearly, these laws are never followed, as members of Congress transport illegal aliens to the capital and states offer them all sorts of benefits and safe harbor. In this specific case of New York driver’s licenses, Kearns is arguing in a lawsuit before the Western District of New York that “by providing driver’s licenses to individuals illegally in the United States and by prohibiting the disclosure of their records, the Green Light Law shields these individuals from detection and substantially facilities their effort to remain in the United States.”

The Fifth Circuit has ruled that Congress intended for §1324 to “broadly proscribe any knowing or willful conduct fairly within any of these terms that tends to substantially facilitate an alien’s remaining in the U.S. illegally.

What can be more squarely within the statute than offering driver’s licenses and barring disclosure of immigration status? This is what New York’s Green Light Law, which was signed into state law last month, does.

Kearns also noted in the formal complaint that one of the rationales given for the Green Light Law was to “get to and from work” and “ensure that our industries have the labor they need to keep our economy moving.”

There’s just one little problem with that. The entire purpose of the infamous 1986 amnesty bill, Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), was “to combat the employment of illegal aliens. The law specifically makes it “illegal for employers to knowingly hire, recruit, refer, or continue to employ unauthorized workers.”

The American people and the Reagan administration reluctantly went along with the first amnesty based on the promise that the ban on illegal aliens working would prevent the next wave. Now we’ve had wave after wave of illegal immigration because those laws are not enforced, and states are even bragging about facilitating their violation of the law.

Chris Hajec, director of litigation for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, told me that this case is a no-brainer. “A stated purpose of the Green Light law is to help illegal aliens get to and from work. That flies in the face of the purpose that Congress had in making it illegal to hire illegal aliens – to reduce illegal alien employment and shut off the jobs magnet for further illegal entry. When state and federal law are in conflict, federal law wins under the Supremacy Clause.”

What ever happened to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution – that “the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”?

These are not just any federal laws placing regulations on Americans. These are foundational sovereignty laws governing the entry of foreigners into the country. Immigration is not only explicitly given over to the federal government, but according to James Madison, it was one of the leading reasons why the Articles of Confederation needed to be swapped out for the new federal union.

An illegal alien first has to violate federal sovereignty – the sovereignty of the whole of the union – before he violates state sovereignty. A state, while definitely reserving the right to protect its own sovereignty, as Justice Scalia strongly asserted, has no power to go in the other direction and violate the federal sovereignty in order to allow illegal aliens to remain in the country, where they are then free to live in any state.

As Mr. Kearns fights a lonely battle on behalf of federal powers, one has to wonder why the Department of Justice is not leading the way. (For more from the author of “The First Person to Stand for Our Sovereignty and Laws Against Sanctuary Policies Is… a Democrat?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Will the Desecration of the American Flag at ICE Facility Turn the Tide of the Border Battle?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The overwhelming majority of Americans, including most swing voters, want Republicans to simply enforce our immigration laws and prioritize the needs of Americans over the desires of illegal aliens. Why won’t they?

Republicans will likely miss the powerful symbolism of illegal alien protesters ripping down the American flag at an ICE facility in Aurora, Colorado, and raising the Mexican flag. For those of us who are veterans of the fight for sovereignty, this act conjured up memories of the 2006 fight over amnesty that conservatives successfully turned into a law to protect sovereignty, a law yet to be enforced by our government.

In 2006, the Left, along with Sen. John McCain and President George W. Bush, tried to repeat the 1986 amnesty for illegal aliens already here. As always, the American people were dead set against it, but they just weren’t activated, because all of the political money and activism is on the other side. That all changed when illegal aliens started publicly attacking our flag, according to Michelle Malkin, who was the leading conservative voice fighting amnesty at the time.

“In the spring of 2006, the illegal alien amnesty mob finally pushed Americans over the edge,” said Malkin in an interview with CR.

“Ethnic grievance-mongers raised the Mexican flag over the American flag flying upside down at Montebello High School in southern California. The flag wars quickly spread to Florida, Texas, Arizona, and my now-adopted home state of Colorado. At the time, I wrote: ‘I predict this stunt will be the nail in the coffin of any guest-worker/amnesty plan on the table in Washington.’ I was right. Thanks to these unbridled displays of anti-American hatred, citizens rose fiercely to the defense of our borders and our laws — and the Bush amnesty plan crashed in flames.”

Malkin noted that “P.R. strategists for the sovereignty saboteurs have tried to clean up their act and dress up their endless amnesty campaigns in red, white, and blue” ever since they made that blunder. “They temporarily put down their foreign flags, stopped wearing their commie Che Guevara T-shirts, and cloaked their radical Reconquista aspirations in the less divisive rhetoric of ‘reform,’ ‘opportunity,’ and DREAMers. But they just can’t help themselves. They can never hide their true colors — and the Mexican flag-raising in Aurora this past weekend proved it. Once again, I predict doom for the border-erasers. They’ve crossed a line that Americans have not, cannot, and will not tolerate.”

What did conservatives get for their efforts in 2006? A mandate for at least 850 miles of double-layer fencing and a requirement that DHS achieve full operational control to prevent all illegal immigration and cartel activity at any land or maritime border within 18 months of passage. It’s just that the law was never implemented.

Moreover, President Bush actually started enforcing interior immigration laws and deporting illegal aliens with 287(g) and the Secure Communities program, where deportations were ramped up, an effort that bore fruit even well into the first term of Obama’s precedency, when we were averaging over 400,000 deportations a year. MS-13 was almost eradicated from the country as a result of this successful push by we the people.

The lesson of the flag is that America can survive a conventional invasion that is eventually repelled. At the “dawn’s early light” of September 14, 1814, despite a 25-hour bombardment of Fort McHenry, Baltimore, by the British navy, “our flag was still there.” There was no Union Jack flying over the fort, despite the superior British firepower. But when our government subverts our sovereignty laws and brings in millions of illegal aliens who then become the most powerful constituency in the country – with the ability to single-handedly command the legislative agenda of the House of Representatives for the month of July – our flag was easily removed from an ICE detention facility and the Mexican flag was raised for several hours.

An invading army is not counted in the census. An invading army does not steal birthright citizenship for their children. An invading army doesn’t sue us in court and change our language, at least not right away.

In that sense, those who recoil when we refer to the border situation as “an invasion” are correct. This is worse than an invasion. It is subtler, yet more enduring and transformational in the long run.

This very point, missed by the political elites, including many so-called conservative political elites, is understood even by many run-of-the-mill Democrat voters. According to a Harvard-Harris poll, by a margin of 2-1, independent and moderate voters want illegal aliens, even those with questionable asylum claims, “immediately turned back” at the border. That view is held even by 44 percent of self-described Hillary Clinton voters.

While Democrats are holding one hearing after another on how they can shield and encourage more illegal immigration at the border, Republicans are missing in action, not holding hearings in the Senate on all the harms illegal aliens are causing Americans. Most Republicans are clamoring to show that they care more about the treatment of the invaders than the constituents they represent because they think the Twitter bubble is representative of American voters’ sentiments on the issue. They are simply wrong.

According to Axios, a recent focus group of 12 swing voters in the swing state of Michigan demonstrated this point. “Immigration came up many times when these swing voters were asked to discuss their top issue heading into the presidential election,” reports Axios. “Their responses sounded a lot like the ‘America First’ message President Trump has been championing.”

This focus group was composed of the quintessential swing voters – people who voted for both Romney (2012) and Hillary (2016) or both Obama (2012) and Trump (2016). What did they find? “Eight of these participants, including one Romney-Clinton voter, agreed with this statement: “When we give migrants food, clothing, toiletries, and shelter, all we’re doing is encouraging more of them to come to the U.S., and we don’t want that.”

In other words, most moderate voters are to the right of even the messaging of the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress.

Among conservative elites in D.C., going after unqualified birthright citizenship for people who break into the country is considered a no-fly zone. For the average American, on the other hand, it is a no-brainer. “We shouldn’t give away our birthright like candy,” said Shawn M. “Meaning that all they have to do is cross the border illegally, pop out a kid, and they’re a U.S. citizen. Two illegals do not a citizen make,” she added.

Indeed, the American people stood defiant against a naval attack by a superpower 200 years ago. They stood for the flag. They certainly won’t be cowed by an invasion of illegal immigration and social transformation without representation. The only question is whether the elites of the bipartisan oligarch in Washington will catch up to the mainstream of American thought. (For more from the author of “Will the Desecration of the American Flag at Ice Facility Turn the Tide of the Border Battle?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The RNC Just Torched Ocasio-Cortez And Her ‘Squad’s’ Presser By Rehashing All The Things That Back Up What Trump Said About Them

/0 Comments/in , /by

This crew was throwing punches at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but President Trump decided to insert himself into the intra-Democratic Party conflict, telling the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wing of the party that they can leave if they’re unhappy with America. That set off a meltdown across the liberal media establishment. The accusations of racism and xenophobia were hurled once again. After hours of simmering, Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) said they weren’t going to take Trump’s bait, but then decided to chomp down hook, line, and sinker, with Omar wholeheartedly endorsing the impeachment of Donald trump solely on the basis that he beat Hillary Clinton and didn’t like what he said about them on Twitter. Yes, they peddled the same trash liberal talking points, but impeachment seems to be their main unveiling, which isn’t a shocker, while reaffirming the progressive left that they’re still feisty.

(Read more from “The RNC Just Torched Ocasio-Cortez and Her ‘Squad’s’ Presser by Rehashing All the Things That Back up What Trump Said About Them” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Kamala’s Peak Hypocrisy Centers Around Jeffrey Epstein

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Townhall. California Sen. Kamala Harris (D) chided Kirkland and Ellis, a Chicago-based law firm, that represented Jeffrey Epstein when he was accused of sexual abuse.

Here’s the kicker: the same day Harris went after the law firm, her husband, Douglas Emhoff, headlined a fundraiser in Chicago for his wife’s campaign. And guess who the main hosts were? That’s right. The six partners of Kirkland and Ellis.

“In our democracy, no one—no matter how powerful or well-connected—is above the law,” Harris said in a statement. “Yet Epstein’s deal, secured by his lawyers at Kirkland and Ellis, calls into question the integrity of our legal system and undermines the public’s confidence that justice will be served.” (Read more from “Kamala’s Peak Hypocrisy Centers Around Jeffrey Epstein” HERE)

______________________________________________________

Harris Blasts, and Takes Money From, Epstein’s Law Firm

By AP. . .Harris, a California senator and Democratic presidential candidate, was one of several White House hopefuls to blast the handling of Epstein’s case in Florida a decade ago, when his lawyers negotiated a deal with federal prosecutors that allowed him to avoid the possibility of years in prison. But her decision to move ahead with the fundraiser hosted by Kirkland and Ellis partners while criticizing the firm underscores the tension that can arise when a politician’s rhetoric collides with his or her need to raise money to sustain a presidential campaign.

“If any connection with Kirkland and Ellis is a stain on (senior Justice Department officials), why isn’t a connection with the law firm for the receipt of campaign contributions a stain on her own campaign?” said Paul S. Ryan, an attorney for the good-government group Common Cause. (Read more from “Harris Blasts, and Takes Money From, Epstein’s Law Firm” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Homicide Detectives Investigating Clinton Mega-Donor

/0 Comments/in , /by

Homicide detectives have presented a case against high-profile Democratic donor Ed Buck to prosecutors for review and possible criminal charges, according to a Los Angeles television station.

CBS2 News reports that the office of L.A. County District Attorney Jackie Lacey is “now deciding” whether it has enough evidence to prosecute Buck in connection with the death of Timothy Dean, 55, who was found dead in the political benefactor’s West Hollywood apartment on January 7. Sources told an investigative reporter with the outlet that prosecutors received the case weeks ago and have requested additional information, “including forensic analysis and medical records,” according to the report.

Dean, who worked at Saks Fifth Avenue in Beverly Hills, was also a former adult film performer. He was the second gay black man to fatally overdose on crystal methamphetamine inside Buck’s home within a span of 18 months. An advocacy group with strong ties to Black Lives Matter has accused Buck, 64, who is gay and white, of administering the lethal doses that killed both men.

Prosecutors announced last summer that they lacked sufficient evidence to charge Buck in the death of Gemmel Moore, the 26-year old sex worker who died at his residence on July 27, 2017. However, the glare of publicity that followed the second death sparked a renewed investigation into the circumstances of Moore’s fatal overdose. . .

Jasmyne Cannick, an L.A.-based political strategist who launched the ‘Justice 4 Gemmel + All Of Ed Buck’s Victims’ drive, has demanded Lacey prosecute Buck for murder. She explained to NBC News that black, gay “lives are seen as expendable,” adding, “it’s very easy to write off someone who dies of a drug overdose who was working as a sex worker.” (Read more from “Homicide Detectives Investigating Clinton Mega-Donor” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Transgender Weightlifter Wins Gold at 2019 Games

/0 Comments/in , /by

. . .Laurel Hubbard, 41, formerly Gavin Hubbard, “won two gold medals and a silver in the three heavyweight categories, for women weighing more than 87 kilograms, or 192 pounds, finishing first in the snatch-lift and combined categories and second in the clean-and-jerk,” as The Washington Times reported.

CaldronPool.com reported, “In second place was Samoa’s 18-year-old weightlifter Feagaiga Stowers, who won her nation’s second gold medal last year after Hubbard was forced to withdraw due to an elbow injury.” Stuff.co added, “Lifting for gold comes after revelations that Hubbard was charged with careless driving causing injury after her vehicle fishtailed on a sharp bend near Queenstown on October 24, 2018. Her car hit a vehicle carrying an Australian couple in their 60s. The male driver spent nearly two weeks in Dunedin Hospital and needed major spinal surgery on returning to Australia.”

Stuff also reported that Hubbard sought the permanent suppression of his name after the accident, and a judge ruling in February supported suppressing the name until the end of September 2019, but Stuff appealed, and last week the High Court overruled the judge from February. Stuff noted, “Justice Gerald Nation said Judge Farnan had made a number of errors and Hubbard’s potential distress did not meet the legal test for suppression.” (Read more from “Transgender Weightlifter Wins Gold at 2019 Games” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

There Is Now A Viral Movement To ‘Storm Area 51’

/0 Comments/in , /by

It’s a source of mystery, controversy, legend, and myth. An enigma that has captivated the minds of conspiracy theorists for decades. And now over one million people have pledged to storm it en masse to uncover the secrets hidden within.

Indeed, the top-secret facility “Area 51” near Groom Lake, Nevada, is now the subject of a viral Facebook event where people from all over the world are vowing to join forces in a mass effort to overrun the base, hoping that the high volume of people will overwhelm the military into letting them past the outer fences so that they can finally “see them aliens.”

According to Fox News, the “Storm Area 51” event has generated over one million “Going” pledges to participate in the planned raid scheduled on September 20 at 3:00 A.M. Another 912,000 have listed themselves as “Interested.” Exactly how many of the people “Going” are actually serious and not just joking remains to be seen.

“We will all meet up at the Area 51 Alien Center tourist attraction and coordinate our entry. If we naruto run, we can move faster than their bullets. Let’s see them aliens,” the page says. . .

Exactly how many of the people “Going” are actually serious and not just joking remains to be seen. As of this writing, the page has generated over 40,000 posts, with many people offering up ideas on how to carry out this not-so-clandestine plan. (Read more from “There Is Now A Viral Movement To ‘Storm Area 51’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Video Shows Bear Charging Man Who Came Within Feet of Cubs

/0 Comments/in , /by

A black bear in Tennessee charged at a man who was seen on video Saturday approaching the animal and her cubs.

The man is seen coming within feet of the bear and her cubs at Cades Cove, a popular tourist spot in Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

The man was not hurt, according to Paige Marple of Knoxville, who was in the area with her boyfriend and brother when they noticed the bear and her cubs. Marple told Fox News that they stayed in their truck and watched from a distance as the man approached the bear. . .

“You can hear myself, my brother and my boyfriend all gasp, as we thought it was going to get bad,” Marple said. “Shock and relief was followed by a feeling of anger because the man did something that could have very well ended bad for himself and the family of bears.”

Dana Soehn, a park spokesperson, told Fox News that visitors need to be aware that bears are wild animals, and can be dangerous or unpredictable, adding that it is illegal to come within 50 yards of them in the park. (Read more from “Video Shows Bear Charging Man Who Came Within Feet of Cubs” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE