The southern border continues to set records for illegal immigration. Where’s President Biden? Where’s the leadership?

Dec 7, 2023 · 11:06 PM UTC

1,234
4,492
72
3,704
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
He's busy sending out more invitations.
4
7
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Why not do something instead of complaining. You're all on the same team. Liars & cheats. #Uniparty
6
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Thank goodness we have republicans to keep telling us about it. Maybe someday the people will have a way of getting people in office who actually do something.
3
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Wow. For 2 Decades there has been no border policies. Now that Biden is President, they say it's all his fault.
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
*** Scoop: Top border officials say releases attract more migrants *** ------------------------------ ARTICAL RATED - Highly Factual Since Republicans Keep lying to Americans about everything, I decided to pay Elon's $16/month to tell Americans what the true facts are. So everyone will see a lot more of my posts. Republicans ... Your lies will now be reversed into truths - ENJOY ------------------------------ Border Patrol chiefs have acknowledged to Congress that the release of migrants into nearby communities is an incentive for others to attempt illegal border crossings, according to transcripts obtained by Axios. Why it matters: Republican demands for changes to border policies — including the legal mechanism known as "parole" that allows some migrants to be released into the U.S. — have stalled the Senate's $111 billion emergency package for Ukraine, Israel, the Indo-Pacific and border security. Urging Republicans to put aside "petty, partisan, angry politics" to help Ukraine defeat Russia, President Biden said Wednesday that he's "willing to make significant compromises on the border." "We need to fix the broken border system. It is broken," Biden acknowledged. What they're saying: Axios was provided exclusive excerpts of transcribed interviews with seven current or now-former Border Patrol chiefs or deputy chiefs, which were conducted this year by House Homeland Security Committee staffers from both parties. "[T]he belief that they are going to be released with no consequence is certainly something that many migrants tell our agents" as a reason for crossing, Deputy Chief Patrol Agent Dustin Caudle, who oversees a section of the border near Yuma, Arizona, said in a September interview. Tucson Chief Patrol Agent John Modlin echoed that sentiment in an interview in July, adding: "If not, they would be … dressed head to toe in camouflage, running as fast as they could, staying up in the mountains or in the valleys to avoid detection by our system." Worth noting: Caudle also blamed smugglers. "The human life has very little value to a majority of smugglers," he said, according to another excerpt provided by a Democratic committee aide. "They care about getting paid.… A lot of them do sell a false narrative that they're going to be guaranteed release." The big picture: The Biden administration has turned to various forms of "parole," which is different from parole in the criminal justice sense, to address an array of immigration challenges. The practice of releasing migrants into the U.S. to await immigration court proceedings is not new — and was used for surges during the Trump administration as well. But officials told congressional staffers that the large numbers being released was not something that they had regularly experienced. By the numbers: In March, Axios reported more than 700,000 migrants and asylum seekers had been permitted entry into the U.S at the discretion of Homeland Security officials through parole. That figure has only ballooned since then. On Tuesday, more than 7,300 recently arrived migrants were released into border communities with directions to check in with ICE or — at most — given a notice to appear in immigration court in the distant future, according to internal data obtained by Axios. That same day, a staggering 12,000 people were encountered by border officials either crossing illegally or at ports of entry. The other side: The Biden administration has already significantly increased fast-tracked deportations, especially for migrant families who cross the border illegally. A recent analysis by the CATO Institute found that more than half of those who were caught illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border under Biden have been deported. Even so, limited detention space and removal flights — along with large volumes of people arriving daily — have created backlogs that force border officials to release detainees. If Border Patrol does not release migrants, ICE will eventually release them anyway. Between the lines: Border dynamics are complicated. Migration flows are driven by a combination of changing factors that both push people to leave their home country and draw them to a particular destination. Growing political unrest, gang violence and economic insecurity are driving many people to flee Central and South American countries. Knowing family members or friends in the U.S., a relatively strong economy, established smuggling routes and a backlogged immigration system function as additional incentives. What to watch: The release of the transcripts is part of a broader effort by House Homeland Security Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) to highlight the role U.S. border policies play in the historic migration patterns we've seen in recent years, according to a committee spokesperson. Republicans are quick to blame DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Biden for allowing a large number of migrants to live and work in the U.S. after illegally crossing the border and while waiting in immigration backlogs. "Chairman Green has been very clear that DHS should not get another dime of taxpayer funding until it correctly uses the tens of billions Congress has already allocated this year," the spokesperson said. Forcing Border Patrol "to make use of expanded mass-parole and to release illegal aliens into communities across the country with court dates years in the future instead of allowing them to fulfill their mission to secure the border is taking an emotional toll," Green told Axios in a statement. "This, of course, also encourages more people to break our laws and enter the country illegally," the chairman added. axios.com/2023/12/07/border-…
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
*** Report: Jared Kushner’s $2 Billion Saudi Check Appears Even More Comically Corrupt Than Previously Thought *** “The reason this smells so bad is that there is all sorts of evidence he did not receive this on the merits.” Back in April, The New York Times reported that Jared Kushner’s four years of Saudi ass-kissing and murder-excusing had paid off in the form of a $2 billion investment from the kingdom‘s sovereign wealth fund to his newly formed private equity firm. That struck a lot of people—ethics officials among them—as pretty shady given that far from having impressed would-be clients with his investing prowess, the panel that performs due diligence for the Saudi fund concluded that no one in their right mind would give the former first son-in-law a dime. Among other concerns, the panel noted that management was “inexperience[d],” that the kingdom would be responsible for “the bulk of the investment and risk,” that its fee seemed “excessive,” and that the firm’s operations were “unsatisfactory in all aspects.” Given those reservations, it warned that the country’s Public Investment Fund should stay far, far away from Kushner’s firm—a recommendation that was overturned by the fund’s board, which happens to be led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, i.e., the guy who approved a plan to kidnap, kill, and dismember a journalist via bone saw and benefited from Kushner’s unwavering support within the White House and reported insistence that the prince could “survive the outrage just as he [had] weathered past criticism.” (Again, just so it‘s abundantly clear, the “outrage” and “criticism” were over a Saudi dissident and U.S. resident being chopped up into pieces.) So, it wasn’t that difficult for people to put two and two together and infer that Kushner’s firm seemingly got $2 billion to invest—and at least $25 million to pocket regardless of performance!—as a thank-you for being so good to a human rights-abusing autocrat. And a new story from the Times suggests, somehow, even further shadiness than that. Where Wall Street, Washington, and Silicon Valley meet. The paper’s Kate Kelly and David Kirkpatrick report that “shortly before the 2020 election,” Kushner unveiled a government-sponsored program dubbed the Abraham Fund, which the Trump administration said would raise $3 billion for projects around the Middle East, capitalizing on the Abraham Accords, the diplomatic agreements normalizing relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. As part of that endeavor, Kushner and then Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin “crisscrossed the Middle East in the final months of the administration on trips that included trying to raise money for the project.” But according to the Times: It was little more than talk: With no accounts, employees, income or projects, the fund vanished when Mr. Trump left office…. [The fund] was overseen by Adam Boehler, at the time the head of a newly formed development finance agency and a college roommate of Mr. Kushner’s. Mr. Boehler joined Mr. Mnuchin on his Gulf visit in October and accompanied Mr. Kushner to Qatar and Saudi Arabia in December. Officials said the fund would invest in poorer countries that joined the accords, and its first projects were said to include upgrading checkpoints into Israel from the Palestinian territories and building a gas pipeline between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. Neither project went anywhere. Nor did the efforts to enlist Gulf money. In January last year, Mr. Boehler announced the only publicly disclosed investment in the Abraham Fund: a “commitment of up to $50 million” from Uzbekistan, a relatively low-income country. Uzbek officials said at the time that they sought to reduce poverty and foster regional cooperation. Long criticized for human rights abuses, Uzbekistan had begun a lobbying push in Washington to improve its image after a leadership change; its new president also gave Mr. Trump a $2,950 silver replica of a historic building and his wife a $4,200 bed cover. But no money for the short-lived Abraham Fund was ever delivered. Yet while the countries (and the people who live there) that were supposedly going to benefit from the Abraham Fund never saw any money materialize, Kushner and Mnuchin would soon be raking in the cash. As the Times notes, Mnuchin’s newly formed commercial enterprise “received $500 million commitments from the Emiratis, Kuwaitis and Qataris,” plus $1 billion from the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, within a few short months of his time at the Treasury Department ending. And while Kushner took slightly longer to get things off the ground, his new firm “reached an agreement for a $2 billion investment from the Saudis six months after he left government.” And while we would never suggest anything about this looks less than totally aboveboard, others seem to believe it might be! …an examination of the two men’s travels toward the end of the Trump presidency raises other questions about whether they sought to exploit official relationships with foreign leaders for private business interests. In the weeks after the election, Mr. Kushner made three trips to the Middle East, the last for a Jan. 5 summit in Saudi Arabia with leaders of the Gulf monarchies. Mr. Mnuchin that day began a tour through the region that was planned to include private meetings with the heads of the sovereign wealth funds of Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait—all future investors. The path from public service to private investing is well trod by members of both parties. The two Treasury secretaries under President Barack Obama later went to Wall Street. But Mr. Kushner and Mr. Mnuchin stand out, ethics experts said, for the speed of their pivots and for the sums they raised from foreign rulers they had recently dealt with on behalf of the United States…. Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who studies government ethics, said each fund raised different issues. For Mr. Kushner, she said, “the reason this smells so bad is that there is all sorts of evidence he did not receive this on the merits.” But for Mr. Mnuchin, who was a successful investor before entering government, the biggest question is whether he was burnishing relationships as Treasury secretary that he knew would be useful to him in the near future, Ms. Clark said. “If he was, that is an abuse of his office,” she said. “I don’t know if it is criminal, but it is certainly corrupt.” Kushner declined the Times’ request for comment. A spokesman for Mnuchin denied to the Times that he had solicited investments while working in government and claimed, without providing specifics, that some of the details of the story were inaccurate. The spokesperson added that the firm has diverse backers, “including U.S. insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds, family offices and other institutional investors.” From <vanityfair.com/news/2022/05/…>
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
*** Trump FINALLY CONFESSES he got HELP from Russia in the 2016 Election, STUNNING FILING (his 1st impeachment hearing - it was never a witch hunt)*** ---------------------------------- Can't Deny It Now That It's Writing. -------------------------------- Trump just admitted that the Russians helped get him elected in a recent court filing AND that on the last 19 days of his presidency, he made Jeff Clark, a co-conspirator in Georgia and DC, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. Michael Popok of Legal AF unpacks the latest filing by Donald Trump to try to delay the March 2024 trial, and the accidental confessions and admissions in it, that only strengthen the Department of Justice’s case against him. ------------------------- From youtube.com/watch?v=y01A3Qtp…
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Can Biden at least tell us why they are letting the flow occur. It would help to have their honest thoughts rather than just rhetoric.
2