Tuesday, January 3, 2017

PORT THIS AD NATION New Homeland Security Data Shows Major Surge in Illegal Immigration in the United States


 
NATION

New Homeland Security Data Shows Major Surge in Illegal Immigration in the United States

BY JENNI FINK
20 HOURS AGO
DISCUSS
According to numbers released by the Department of Homeland Security, the United States saw a 15% increase in illegal immigration in 2016.
Fox News reporter Adam Housley related the surge to a similar circumstance in 2014 and said that most immigrants are coming from Central and South America.
SPONSORED VIDEO:Opinion Journal: The Legal Tiff Behind Sanctuary Cities
Mute
Current Time0:00
/
Duration Time3:33
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
Specifically, immigrants are fleeing countries with high crime rates, such as:

  • El Salvador


  • Honduras


  • Guatemala

Due to the violent conditions in those countries, human rights activists are urging the Obama administration to treat the surge as a “refugee crisis.”
On Friday, Homeland Security officials said many of the immigrants from Central America applied for asylum in America with claims of "credible or reasonable fear of persecution.”
Numbers released on Friday show an increase of 67,922 Department of Homeland Security apprehensions.
Image Credit: YouTube
The 23% increase in Border Patrol arrests are attributed to the problems in Central America, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
Administration officials claimed that the 450,954 removals and returns in 2016 reflected a policy shift to target convicted criminals. In a statement, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said:
“We continued to better focus our interior resources on removing individuals who may pose threats to public safety — specifically, convicted criminals and threats to national security."
Statistics released by DHS reported that 91% of apprehensions were part of the enforcement category “Priority 1.” The top priority category includes:

  • National security threats


  • Individuals apprehended at the border while attempting to enter unlawfully


  • The most serious categories of convicted criminals as well as gang members

The Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) was made effective in 2015 by the Obama Administration as an attempt to focus deportation attention on people who posed a threat to Americans.
However, some immigration human rights advocates believe the policy change came too late. J. Kevin ­Appleby, senior director of international migration policy at the Center for Migration Studies, told the Washington Post:
“In the end, the president will be remembered as a deporter, not a reformer. In the first four years, he set record numbers in removals, much to the dismay of the immigrant community."
During Obama's first term in office, over 400,000 immigrants were deported.
Sanctuary cities with limited or no cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have played a significant factor in impacting removal operations.
The DHS report stated that PEP promoted collaboration, and in 2016, 82% of the top jurisdictions have agreed to participate in the program.
The new program hopes to prevent illegal immigrants who have repeatedly committed crimes from being protected from deportation by sanctuary cities.
at

Nonprofits would rather spite Trump than help those in need

Nonprofits would rather spite Trump than help those in need

January 3, 2017 | 12:54am

MORE FROM:

NAOMI SCHAEFER RILEY
Naomi Schaefer Riley
'Digital heroin' is killing your relationship with your kids
How to save more at-risk children
Why have international adoptions become so agonizing?
How to make deadbeat dads do more to help out
How an Omaha Indian became a symbol of the American dream
‘Nonprofits Brace for Big Changes Under Trump Administration.” “Progressive Foundations Brace for Trump Administration.” “California Endowment Commits $25 million to Fight Trump Changes.” “Advocacy Is a Battle Cry as Nonprofit Leaders Convene After Trump Victory.”
These are just a few of the hysterical headlines that have appeared in the Chronicle of Philanthropy over the past few weeks. While college students have fled to safe spaces, Hillary Clinton supporters have dyed their hair and dumped their boyfriends and celebrities are plotting their moves to Canada, the leaders of nonprofits and foundations are readying themselves for battle.
Literally. Emmett Carson, president of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, compared the transition period to the Trump administration to the Revolutionary War.
“We’re trying to figure out if it is ‘one, if by land, or two, if by sea.’”
According to the Chronicle, “Some foundation leaders have taken immediate measures, such as freezing discretionary grant-making budgets so they can hold money in reserve in case grantees need to shift their tactics.” In case you haven’t noticed, this is an emergency, folks.
Some of these foundation bureaucrats have remained calm. Though that may only be because they’re deluding themselves. Julia Stasch, president of the MacArthur Foundation, says she feels confident that her organization is prepared for the upcoming changes. But she also thinks some of the proposed changes — in the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, etc. — may not actually go through.
ADVERTISING
If a Trump administration does in fact usher in cuts in federal funds for social services — though it’s not clear that it will — one might think that the nation’s philanthropic leaders would take that as a cue to spend more to make up for the gaps they think will occur.
But that doesn’t appear to be the plan. At the annual meeting of Independent Sector, one of the largest gatherings of nonprofit leaders in the country, the panelists just wanted to turn charities into lobbying firms. “Foundations could and should be more aggressive on the advocacy front on the issues they really care about,” Ellen Alberding, president of the Joyce Foundation, told an applauding audience.
Brian Gallagher, chief executive of United Way Worldwide, widened this message beyond foundations to nonprofits generally: “If you don’t have a policy strategy, then you don’t have a mission and purpose.”
America’s nonprofits have plenty to occupy themselves without developing policy strategies. From providing better education to low-income kids to helping people fight drug addiction to finding cures for debilitating diseases to saving endangered species, America has the largest and most diverse civic life of any country on earth.
There are ways these endeavors will be affected by public policy, but that doesn’t mean each organization needs to become a political player. Those who support such charities probably believe it’s their job to pursue their mission regardless of the political environment.
But the folks who run philanthropy are so angry about the results of the election they don’t know what to do with themselves. Caleb Gayle, a former program officer at the George Kaiser Family Foundation, wrote an op-ed last week for the Chronicle arguing that the philanthropic sector shouldn’t spend more to make up for gaps in government funding.
“It should instead exercise strategic restraint,” he wrote.
Gayle is unabashed about his plan to put partisanship above helping people. “To many foundations, it might seem cruel to resist calls to spend more . . . But if grant makers start to far exceed the 5 percent annual minimum, they will validate the conservative desire to strip money from government antipoverty measures.”
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. So you won’t help people in need because it might prove conservatives right? In the long list of people who have lost their minds over Donald Trump’s election, nonprofit leaders might be closest to the edge.
Naomi Schaefer Riley is a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum.
FILED UNDER  ,   ,   ,   ,  

SHARE THIS ARTICLE:

READ NEXT
Ruben Diaz cost th
at

WikiLeaks founder: Obama trying to 'delegitimize' Trump presidency

President Obama is trying to "delegitimize" Donald Trump's presidency, says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

President Obama is trying to "delegitimize" Donald Trump's presidency, says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

WikiLeaks founder: Obama trying to 'delegitimize' Trump presidency 

President Obama is trying to "delegitimize" Donald Trump's presidency, says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Speaking with Fox News host Sean Hannity at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Assange accused Obama of having a dramatic response to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails. Obama is "trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate president," Assange said, according to a partial transcript of an interview set to air Tuesday night.
Assange claimed Obama has not been straightforward with Americans about Russia's interference in the election and WikiLeaks' involvement in the leaks.
"He doesn't say that WikiLeaks obtained its information from Russia, worked with Russia," Assange said. "He doesn't say — from the statements that I have read — that Russia was trying to influence the election for Donald Trump."
In mid-December, Obama vowed retaliation against Russia over its interference in the U.S. presidential election, but stopped short of endorsing the CIA's conclusion that the country's meddling was aimed at electing Trump.
The Obama administration announced last week sanctions and expelled dozens of Russian diplomats from the U.S. in response to the cyberattacks.
But Assange adamantly denied that Podesta's hacked emails, which WikiLeaks trickled out in the final weeks of the election, came from Russia.
"Our source is not a state party," he said. "But if we look at our most recent statement from the U.S. government, which is on the 29 of December, OK, we had five different branches of government, Treasury, DHS, FBI, White House presenting their accusations to underpin Obama's throwing out 29 Russian diplomats. What was missing from all of those statements? The word WikiLeaks. It's very strange."
Dick Cheney at Capitol for swearing-in of daughter Liz
Also from the Washington Examiner

Dick Cheney at Capitol for swearing-in of daughter Liz

By Alex Pappas
 • 
01/03/17 12:38 PM
GOP retreats from ethics changes
Top Story

GOP retreats from ethics changes

By Susan Ferrechio
 • 
01/03/17 11:54 AM
at

Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Clinton Email Lawsuits

Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Clinton Email Lawsuits

Hillary Rodham Clinton answers questions at a news conference at the United Nations, Tuesday, March 10, 2015. Clinton conceded that she should have used a government email to conduct business as secretary of state, saying her decision was simply a matter of "convenience." (AP Photo/Richard Drew)
by KEN KLUKOWSKI2 Jan 2017Washington, DC1646
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

WASHINGTON—A federal appeals court has ordered lawsuits by Judicial Watch and Cause of Action seeking to force the federal government to recover Hillary Clinton’s missing emails to move forward, reversing a lower court’s dismissal.

When Secretary of State John Kerry refused to take all lawful measures mandated by federal law to recover Clinton’s emails, Judicial Watch and Cause of Action brought separate lawsuits seeking to force Attorney General Loretta Lynch to launch a Justice Department investigation, a request that federal law says should have originated from Kerry or from the national archivist. A federal trial judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed these lawsuits, holding they were moot and no longer appropriate for judicial action.
On Dec. 27, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, ordering the lower court to restart proceedings on the lawsuit. The panel included both liberal and conservative judges.
“The Federal Records Act governs the creation, management and disposal of federal records,” Senior Judge Stephen Williams wrote for the court, quoting a previous case. “Due to the importance of maintaining federal records (which are generally accessible to the public through the Freedom of Information Act), the act strictly limits the circumstances under which records can be removed from federal custody or destroyed.”
When a Cabinet officer becomes aware that the removal or destruction of federal records has happened or is imminent, he must notify the head of the National Archives, and then “initiate action through the Attorney General” to recover those records. Despite the Federal Records Act’s clear and unambiguous language, Kerry never did so.
D.C. Circuit precedent holds that the Federal Records Act commands Cabinet secretaries and the Archivist to pursue claims of missing or destroyed records, and does not allow any discretion on whether to do so. Another law—the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)—allows a person to sue over nonperformance of a federal agency action that federal law requires the agency to take. Judicial Watch and Cause of Action brought their suits under the authority of the APA.
Although the State Department’s requesting that Clinton please turn over emails produced some results, the D.C.-based appeals court noted that “the Department has not explained why shaking the tree harder—e.g., by following the statutory mandate to seek action by the Attorney General—might not bear more still.”
“In terms of assuring government recovery of emails, appellants have not been given everything they asked for,” the court concluded. “Absent a showing that the requested enforcement action could not shake loose a few more emails, the case is not moot.”
The D.C. Circuit therefore sent the case back down to the district court for additional proceedings. The watchdog groups’ lawyers can now seek a ruling on the merits of their case and a court order to Kerry (or his successor) asking the Justice Department to begin law enforcement actions to recover Clinton’s emails.
The appeals are consolidated under the name Judicial Watch v. Kerry, D.C. Circuit docket nos. 16-5015, 16-5060, 16-5061, and 16-5077.
Ken Klukowski is senior legal editor for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter@kenklukowski.

Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.
at

BREAKING: "US Customs System Shuts Down In Major Airports / Who Was Smug...