Search The Archives

Tuesday, June 19, 2018

The Truth About The Media-Created Immigration Crisis At The Border: Immigration Facts and Statistics

The Crisis At The Border By The Numbers
 IMMIGRATION

  Issued on: June 19, 2018

It is time to reform these outdated immigration rules, and finally bring our immigration system into the 21st century.

President Donald J. Trump



FIXING OUR BROKEN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM: Congress needs to close the loopholes that are preventing common sense immigration enforcement.

Due to legal loopholes, many aliens who reach our borders are released into our country after being apprehended, encouraging more illegal immigration.

Smugglers and human traffickers understand and have exploited these loopholes.

The Flores Settlement Agreement and court decisions interpreting it have hampered the Government’s ability to detain and promptly remove many Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) and family units.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 limits the Government’s ability to promptly return many UACs who have been apprehended at the border.




UAC LOOPHOLES BY THE NUMBERS: Legal loopholes have hamstrung immigration enforcement and contributed to the crisis at our border as UAC arrivals have surged.

More than 110,000 UACs have been released into the interior of the United States since the beginning of FY 2016, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

The number of UACs at ports of entry increased by 636 percent from April 2017 to April 2018.

Border Patrol apprehensions of UACs were 331 percent higher for April 2018 than April 2017.

Only 3.4 percent of UACs encountered at the border in FY 2014 from countries other than Mexico had been removed or returned as of FY 2017.

UAC cases pending in immigration courts now total 78,000, up from less than 3,500 in FY 2009.
Approximately 90 percent of removal orders obtained against UACs each year result from one’s failure to appear at a hearing.

Removal orders issued against UACs based on a failure to appear at an immigration hearing have risen over 1000 percent since FY 2009.

Gangs, such as MS-13, have used the influx of UACs for recruiting opportunities.

More than one-third of the 274 MS-13 members and affiliates arrested in the Federal, State, and local led “Operation Matador” entered the country as UACs.




ASYLUM LOOPHOLES BY THE NUMBERS: Loopholes in our asylum laws are subject to exploitation, contributing to significant spikes in asylum claims in recent years.

Current law sets an easily-met credible fear standard, which allows aliens who make meritless asylum claims to remain in the United States for years while they litigate their cases.

The number of arriving aliens claiming credible fear has jumped to one out of every 10, up from one out of every 100 before 2011.

Since FY 2009, the amount of immigration cases originating from a credible fear finding has dramatically increased, while the percentage of cases ultimately granted asylum has dropped significantly.

The Executive Office for Immigration Review has over 312,000 cases with pending asylum applications.

Backlog in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services affirmative asylum process has swelled by over 1900 percent since the end of FY 2012.

The number of asylum claims received in FY 2017 was the highest annual number of claims in over 20 years.

DHS Secretary Debunks The Myth That Children Are Being Ripped From Their Parents At Our Southern Borders

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sarah Sanders and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen
Issued on: June 18, 2018

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

5:11 P.M. EDT



MS. SANDERS:  Good afternoon.  As you know, President Trump has laid out an immigration reform proposal that closes loopholes and provides the necessary resources to secure the border.

Congress needs to fix our broken immigration system.  To answer some of your questions on this topic, I’ve invited Secretary of Homeland Security, Kirstjen Nielsen, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan to the podium.

And, as always, I’ll be back up afterwards to take questions on other news of the day.  Thanks.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Well, good afternoon.  It is my pleasure to be here because I would love to see if I can help explain some of what’s going on and give you some of the facts.  I know there have been a lot put out there, but hopefully we can clarify some things today.

I just wanted to start by thanking the sheriffs of the United States.  I had the privilege of speaking to them this morning at the National Sheriffs’ Association Conference.  We are so thankful for their partnership at DHS and all they do to protect our community.  So I thank them.

So I want to provide you an update on the illegal immigration crisis on our southern border and the effects — the efforts the administration is taking to solve this crisis and to stop the flood of illegal immigrants, drugs, contraband, and crime coming across the border.

So let’s just start with a few numbers and facts.  So in the last three months, we have seen illegal immigration on our southern border exceed 50,000 people each month.  Multiples over each month last year.

Since this time last year, there has been a 325 percent increase in unaccompanied alien children and a 435 percent increase in family units entering the country illegally.

Over the last 10 years, there has been a 1,700 percent increase in asylum claims, resulting in asylum backlog to date, on our country, of 600,000 cases.

Since 2013, the United States has admitted more than half a million illegal immigrant minors and family units from Central America, most of whom today are at large in the United States.  At the same time, large criminal organizations such as MS-13 have violated our borders and gained a deadly foothold within the United States.

This entire crisis, just to be clear, is not new.  It’s been occurring and expanded over many decades.  But currently, it is the exclusive product of loopholes in our federal immigration laws that prevent illegal immigrant minors and family members from being detained and removed to their home countries.

In other words, these loopholes create a functionally open border.  Apprehension without detention and removal is not border security.  We have repeatedly called on Congress to close these loopholes.  I, myself, have met with as many members have been willing to meet with me.  I’ve testified seven times.  I will continue to make myself available to ask that they work with us to solve this crisis.

Yet the voices most loudly criticizing the enforcement of our current laws are those whose policies created this crisis and whose policies perpetrate it.

In particular, we need to reform three major loopholes.  Let me quickly walk you through them.  First, we need to amend the 2008 Trafficking Victims Prevention Reauthorization Act, or TVPR — which is much easier to say.  This law encourages families to put children in the hands of smugglers to bring them alone on this dangerous trek northward.  And make no mistake, we’ve talked about this before — this trek is dangerous and deadly.

Second, we need to reform our asylum laws to end the systemic abuse of our asylum system and stop fraud.  Right now, our asylum system fails to assist asylum seekers who legitimately need it.  We are a country of compassion.  We are a country of heart.  We must fix the system so that those who truly need asylum can, in fact, receive it.

Third, we need to amend the Flores Settlement Agreement and recent expansions which currently allow for — which would allow for family detention during the removal process.  And we need Congress to fully fund our ability to hold families together through the immigration process.

Until these loopholes are closed by Congress, it is not possible, as a matter of law, to detain and remove whole family units who arrive illegally in the United States.

Congress and the courts created this problem, and Congress alone can fix it.  Until then, we will enforce every law we have on the books to defend the sovereignty and security of the United States.  Those who criticize the enforcement of our laws have offered only one countermeasure: open borders; the quick release of all illegal alien families and the decision not to enforce our laws.  This policy would be disastrous.  Its prime beneficiaries would be the smuggling organizations themselves, and the prime victims would be the children who would be plunged into the smuggling machines and get gang recruitment on the trip north.

There’s a lot of misinformation about what DHS is and is not doing as it relates to families at the border and I want to correct the record.  Here are the facts:

First, this administration did not create a policy of separating families at the border.  We have a statutory responsibility that we take seriously to protect alien children from human smuggling, trafficking, and other criminal actions while enforcing our immigration laws.

We have a long-existing policy.  Multiple administrations have followed that outline when we may take action to protect children.  We will separate those who claim to be a parent and child if we cannot determine a familial or custodial relationship exists.

For example, if there’s no documentation to confirm the claimed relationship between an adult and a child, we do so if the parent is a national security, public or safety risk, including when there are criminal charges at issue and it may not be appropriate to maintain the family in detention together.

We also separate a parent and child if the adult is suspected of human trafficking.  There have been cases where minors have been used and trafficked by unrelated adults in an effort to avoid detention.  And I’d stop here to say, in the last five months, we have a 314 percent increase in adults and children arriving at the border, fraudulently claiming to be a family unit.  This is, obviously, of concern.

And separation can occur when the parent is charged with human smuggling.  Under those circumstances, we would detain the parent in an appropriate secure detention facility separate from the child.

What has changed is that we no longer exempt entire classes of people who break the law.  Everyone is subject to prosecution.  When DHS refers a case against a parent or legal guardian for criminal prosecution, the parent or legal guardian will be placed into the U.S. Marshals Service custody for pretrial determination, pursuant to an order by a federal judge.  And any accompanied child will be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services and will be reclassified as an unaccompanied alien child.  That is in accordance with the TVPRA — a law that was passed by Congress — and a following court order, neither which are actions the Trump administration has taken.

And let’s be clear: If an American were to commit a crime anywhere in the United States, they would go to jail and they would be separated from their family.  This is not a controversial idea.

Second, children in DHS and HHS custody are being well taken care of.  The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement provides meals, medical care, and educational services to these children.  They are provided temporary shelter.  And HHS works hard to find a parent, relative, or foster home to care for these children.  Parents can still communicate with their children through phone calls and video conferencing.

And a parent who is released from custody can be a sponsor and ask HHS to release the child back into their care.  Further, these minors can still apply for asylum and other protections under U.S. immigration law, if eligible.

We take allegations of mistreatment seriously.  And I want to stress this point: We investigate.  We hold those accountable when, and if, it should occur.  We have some of the highest detention standards in the country.  Claiming these children and their parents are treated inhumanely is not true and completely disrespects the hardworking men and women at the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Third, parents who entered illegally are, by definition, criminals.  Illegal entry is a crime as determined by Congress.  By entering our country illegally, often in dangerous circumstances, illegal immigrants have put their children at risk.

Fourth, CBP and ICE officers are properly trained to care for minors in their custody.  DHS and HHS treats all individuals in its custody with dignity and respect, and complies with all laws and policy.  This reinforces and reiterates the needs to consider the best interest of the children, and mandates adherence to establish protocols to protect at-risk populations, to include standards for the transport and treatment of minors in DHS and HHS custody.

Additionally, all U.S. Border Patrol personnel in the southwest border are bilingual — every last one of them.  They are directed to clearly explain the relevant process to apprehended individuals, and provide detainees with written documentation in both Spanish and English that lays out the process and appropriate phone numbers to contact.

And finally, DHS is not separating families legitimately seeking asylum at ports of entry.  If an adult enters at a port of entry and claims asylum, they will not face prosecution for illegal entry.  They have not committed a crime by coming to the port of entry.

As I mentioned, DHS does have a responsibility to protect minors.  And in that case, as well, we will only separate the family if we cannot determine there is a familiar relationship, if the child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or if the parent or legal guardian is referred for prosecution.

We have a duty to protect the American people, and it’s one that I take very seriously.  Here is the bottom line: DHS is no longer ignoring the law.  We are enforcing the laws as they exist on the books.  As long as illegal entry remains a criminal offense, DHS will not look the other way.  DHS will faithfully execute the laws enacted by Congress, as we are sworn to do.

As I said earlier today, surely it is the beginning of the unraveling of democracy when the body who makes the laws, instead of changing them, tells the enforcement body not to enforce the law.  I ask Congress to act this week so that we can secure our borders and uphold our humanitarian ideas.  These two missions should not be pitted against each other.  If we close the loopholes, we can accomplish both.

Before I take questions, I just want to ask that, in your reporting, please consider the men and women of DHS who are dedicated law enforcement officers and who often put their lives at risk.  Let’s remember their sacrifice and commitment to this country.

And with that, I’ll take some questions.  Yes.

Q    Secretary Nielsen, if you could, what you talked about there — DHS is no longer ignoring the law — you’re calling on Congress to change the law.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Yes.

Q    I mean, that is the big message here.  Members of Congress on the Democratic side say that you’re using children as a lever to try to get them to take legislative action.  What do you say to that?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I say that is a very cowardly response.  It’s clearly within their power to make the laws and change the laws.  They should do so.

Yes.

Q    Have you seen the photos of children in cages?  Have you heard the audio clip of these children wailing, that just came out today?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I have not seen — as something that came out today.  But I have been to detention centers.  And again, I would reference you to our standards.  I would reference you to the care provided not just by the Department of Homeland Security but by the Department of Health and Human Services when they get to HHS.

Q    But is that the image of this country that you want out there — children in cages?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  The image that I want of this country is an immigration system that secures our borders and upholds our humanitarian ideals.  Congress needs to fix it.

Yes.

Q    Madam Secretary, I’d like to give you a chance to respond to Laura Bush.  In an op-ed, she says this is cruel.  She supports an application of the law.  Even the current First Lady, Melania Trump, has said we should be a nation of laws; we should do so “with heart.”  Do you have anything you want to tell them?  Do you believe they’re misunderstanding the situation?  Or do you believe there’s any component of this policy which, as you’ve outlined, other administrations have done, but you’re using in a way that is more intense and creates this separation issue?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  What my response would be is, is calling attention to this matter is important.  This is a very serious issue that has resulted after years and years of Congress not taking action.  So I would thank them both for their comments.  I would thank them both for their concerns.  I share their concerns.  But Congress is the one that needs to fix this.

Q    And this policy is not, by your definition, in any way, cruel?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  It’s not a policy.  Our policy at DHS is to do what we’re sworn to do, which is to enforce the law.

Yes.

Q    Following up on Major’s question there, Former First Lady Laura Bush compared this to Japanese internment during World War II — one of the darkest days in the nation’s history.  Do you believe that the effect of this policy — so not the law — but the effect of it on separating children from families in those specific instances is moral, is ethical, is American?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  What I believe is that we should exercise our democratic rights as Americans and fix the problem.  It’s a problem; let’s fix it.

Yes.

Q    How is this not child abuse?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Which?  Be more specific, please.  Enforcing the law?

Q    The images that Cecilia was talking about, and the sounds that we’ve seen from these big box stores — the Walmarts, the other stores — when you see this, how is this not specifically child abuse for these innocent children who are indeed being separated from their parents?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  So I want to be clear on a couple other things.  The vast majority — vast, vast majority — of children who are in the care of HHS right now — 10,000 of the 12,000 — were sent here alone by their parents.  That’s when they were separated.  So somehow, we’ve conflated everything.

But there’s two separate issues.  Ten thousand of those currently in custody were sent by their parents, with strangers, to undertake a completely dangerous and deadly travel alone.  We now care for them.  We have high standards.  We give them meals.  We give them education.  We give them medical care.  There’s videos; there’s TVs.  I’ve visited the detention centers myself.  That would be my answer to that question.

Yes.

Q    If I could follow up, though.  For the hundreds that are not included in there — you said 10,000 — but for the hundreds that we have seen — perhaps up to 2,000 — are there any examples of child abuse, do you believe?  And how could this not be child abuse for the people who are taken from their parents?  Not the ones who are sent here, with their parents’ blessing, with a smuggler, but the people who are taken from their parents?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Unfortunately, I am not in any position to deal with hearsay stories.  If someone has a specific allegation, as I always do when I testify, I ask that they provide that information to the Department of Homeland Security.  We will look into it.  Of course, we do not want any situation where a child is not completely adequately taken care of.

Yes.

Q    A couple of questions.  One, why is the government only releasing images of the boys who are being held?  Where are the girls?  Where are the young toddlers?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I don’t know.  I am not familiar with those particular images.

Q    You don’t know where they are?  Do you know where the girls are?  Do you know where the young toddlers are?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  We have children in DHS care — both.  But as you know, most of the children, after 72 hours, are transferred to HHS.  So I don’t know what pictures you’re referencing, but I’d have to refer you to HHS.

Q    We’ve seen images of boys, but we just haven’t seen any of the girls or any of the young toddlers.  And you’re saying that they are being well cared for.  So how can you make that claim if you don’t know where they are?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  It’s not that I don’t know where they are.  I’m saying that the vast majority are held by Health and Human Services.  We transfer them after 72 hours.  I don’t know what pictures you’re speaking about, but perhaps there are —

Q    The pictures have been released to public; they’ve been aired all over national television.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Okay.  By DHS?  Or by HHS?

Q    By DHS.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Okay.  So let’s find out from HHS.  I don’t think there’s anything other than (inaudible) pictures.

Q    They were released by your department.  I mean, they’ve been aired all over national television throughout the day — the kids who are being held in the cages.  We’ve only seen the boys.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I will look into that.  I’m not aware that there is another picture.

Yes.

Q    Secretary, let me just follow up very quickly, because you continue to insist that this is something that Congress can change —

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  Yes.

Q    — and yet this is something that was enacted after the Attorney General announced the zero-tolerance policy.  This never happened before he announced the zero-tolerance policy.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  That’s actually not true.  So the last administration —

Q    Well, we’ve never seen this under previous administrations.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  — the Obama administration, the Bush administration all separated families at the —

Q    We didn’t see kids separated from their parents.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  They absolutely did.  They did — their rate was less than ours, but they absolutely did do this.  This is not new.

Q    There were unaccompanied minors, there’s no doubt about that.  But this —

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  They separated families.

Q    — separating kids at this rate from their parents is something new and specific to this administration once the Attorney General announced the zero-tolerance policy.  So why doesn’t the President pick up the phone and change the policy?  He said he hates it.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I think what the President is trying to do is find a long-term fix.  So why don’t we have Congress changes the laws to change —

Q    (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  No.  Congress could fix this tomorrow.

Yes.  I think you were next, right?

Q    Yeah.  Madam Secretary, President Trump has had a lot to say the last few days about immigration, but he’s offered no compassion to the families that are being separated at the border.  Do you know why that is?  And why won’t he simply pause your department’s enforcement of this administration policy until Congress reaches that long-term fix so that these families can be reunited?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  He has been attempting to work with Congress since he’s been in office.  He’s made it very clear that we will enforce the laws of the United States as long as this administration is here.  As part of that, he has continually reached out to Congress to fix this.  And I think what you’ve seen him do in the last few days is that: is continue to tell Congress, “Please work with us.”  The system is broken.  The only people that benefit from the system right now are the smugglers, the traffickers, those who are pedaling drugs, and terrorists.  So let’s fix the system.

Yes.

Q    That didn’t answer the question.  And does he feel any compassion for the families that are being separated?  He has talked about the parents being possible criminals.  He has blamed it on Democrats.  He has offered no words of compassion.

THE PRESIDENT:  I think he has said in tweets that he would like Congress to act to end the underlying laws that require the separation.

Q    Madam Secretary, it seemed like a couple days ago, both the President and in your tweets, that the main posture or point was to say that this is not the administration’s policy.  But it seems like, in the last couple — well, today — that the message is a little different; is to say, well, this is our policy, but it’s our policy because either we believe it’s a deterrent or we don’t believe we have the resources to move families entirely.

And I’m just wondering — I want to make sure we get the reporting right — which of those is the most precise way to describe how the administration feels?  And given the blowback by a number of Republicans as well as Democrats, are you considering rethinking this based on feedback?  Or is this the administration’s position going forward — period, paragraph?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  The laws prohibit us from detaining families while they go through prosecution for illegally entering the border, and while they go through prosecutions for immigration proceedings.  If we close the loopholes, we can keep the families together, which is what they did in the last administration until a court ruled that we can no longer do that.  After 20 days, we have to release both unaccompanied children and accompanied children — which means that we cannot detain families together.  The only option is to not enforce the law at all.

Yes.

Q    Okay, so going back to these two questions from Kristen and Margaret, you said that you want Congress to close some loopholes.  With that, you also said that you want to make this work.  Now, are these kids being used as pawns for a wall?  Many people are asking that.  And Democrats are saying this is your discretion and there is no law that says that this White House can separate parents from their children.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  The kids are being used by pawns by the smugglers and the traffickers.  Again, let’s just pause to think about this statistic: 314 percent increase in adults showing up with kids that are not a family unit.  Those are traffickers, those are smugglers.  That is MS-13.  Those are criminals and those are abusers.

Q    When did —

Q    Just let her finish.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  So — thank you.  All I’m trying to say is, closing that loophole will enable us to detain families together throughout the proceeding as they’ve done in previous administrations.

Q    Madam Secretary.  Madam Secretary, can you definitively say, are the children being used as pawns against — for a wall.  Yes or no?  Can you say yes or no to that?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  The children are not being used as a pawn.  We are trying to protect the children, which is why I’m asking Congress to act.

Yes.

Q    (Inaudible) as the legal framework for the decisions that your administration has made.  What we’re seeing — the pictures, the audio, the stories — are they an intended consequence of the administration’s decision-making or an unintended consequence?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I think that they reflect the focus of those who post such pictures and narratives.  The narratives we don’t see are the narratives of the crime, of the opioids, of the smugglers, of people who are killed by gang members, of American children who are recruited, and then, when they lose the drugs, they’re tased and beaten.

So we don’t have a balanced view of what’s happening.  But what’s happening at the border is the border is being overrun by those who have no right to cross it.  As I said before, if you’re seeking asylum, go to a port of entry.  You do not need to break the law of the United States to seek asylum.

Q    People are being turned away from ports of entry, Madam Secretary.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  That actually is incorrect.  We have limited resources.  We have multiple missions at CBP.  And what we do is, based on the very high standards we have, if we do not have enough bed space, if we do not have enough medical personnel on staff, if we do have enough caretakers on staff, then we will tell people that come to the border they need to come back.  We are not turning them away.  We are saying: We want to take care of you in the right way; right now, we do not have the resources at this particular moment in time.  Come back.

Q    Thank you very much.  Are you intending for this to play out as it is playing out?  Are you intending for parents to be separated from their children?  Are you intending to send a message?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  I find that offensive.  No.  Because why would I ever create a policy that purposely does that?

Q    Perhaps as a deterrent.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  No.

Q    AG Sessions says it was a deterrent.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  The way that it works —

Q    The Attorney General said it was a deterrent.

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  That’s not the question that you asked me.

But the answer is, it’s a law passed by the United States Congress.  Rather than fixing the law, Congress is asking those of us who enforce the law to turn our backs on the law and not enforce the law.  It’s not an answer.  The answer is to fix the laws.

Q    Will the administration refrain from its current policy if Congress were to pass something that’s close to what you want?  Or will it continue to require the separation of parents from their children until the President gets exactly what he wants?

SECRETARY NIELSEN:  If Congress closes the loopholes, some of which — many of which are closed in the two bills that we hope are taken up this week by the House, then they close the loopholes and the families will stay together throughout the proceedings.

Thank you.

MS. SANDERS:  Thank you, Secretary Nielsen.

I’ll jump right in and go to other questions, news of the day.

Steve.

Q    The President said he would talk with the North Korean leader, Kim, yesterday.  Do you know if that happened?

MS. SANDERS:  I know the President has spoken with a number of administration officials that are working on the details following the North Korean summit, and we’ll keep you posted on those details.  But I’m not aware of a specific call between the two leaders at this time.

Q    To follow up — there’s a report that the United States and South Korea have agreed to suspend joint military drills in August.  Is that real?

MS. SANDERS:  I’m sorry, I didn’t hear the last part of the question.

Q    That they’ve agreed to suspend joint military drills in August.  Are you aware of this?  Is this true?

MS. SANDERS:  Those conversations are ongoing at this point.  As long as the North Koreans continue to act in good faith, as we saw in Singapore, then we expect those things to be on pause at this point.

Bill.

Q    Yes, Sarah.  Has the President discussed the family separation policy with the First Lady, in light of her statement yesterday?  And does he have any plans to come out and address the American people?  Maybe take some questions about how his administration is enforcing the policy.

MS. SANDERS:  The President did take a number of questions, as I’m sure you’re all aware, on Friday, in which — what he actually said very closely mirrored what the First Lady said.  He said he hates seeing this.  He’s called on Congress — not just Friday, but for months — he’s called on Democrats in Congress to work with him; let’s fix this problem.  The President isn’t trying to kick the can down the road.  He’s actually trying to work with Congress to get real solutions and to fix the problem, and that’s what we’re doing.

Jeff.  And I’ll take your question since you and your network falsely accused me of not wanting to be here.  So I’ll be glad to pass that question on to you now.

Q    Why did you decide to have Secretary Nielsen answer questions instead of you?

MS. SANDERS:  I’m here answering questions as well, but I thought it was important for the Secretary, one of the primary experts on this process and the things that are going on, to come out here and have the chance to speak to you and for you guys to be able to ask questions directly of her and the leaders in this administration.

But I’m standing here in front of you.

Q    I have a real question, though.  Would the President sign a bill that did not —

MS. SANDERS:  I wondered if you were going to throw it away.

Q    Would the President sign a bill that did not include border funding if it did indeed close this loophole that Secretary Nielsen talked about?  Would he sign that specific bill?  Or does he require an entire bill with that $25 billion in border funding?

MS. SANDERS:  We’ve laid out what we would like to see on a number of different occasions.  There are currently two bills that are in process in the House.  The President supports both of those pieces of legislation that we have voiced support for the details in those.

The President doesn’t just want to see a Band-Aid put on this.  He wants us to actually fix our immigration system.  He’s tired of administrations claiming that they want to help the system and then just kicking the can down the road.  He wants to actually fix the problems.  He wants to secure our border.  This isn’t just something we can tinker with.  We have to actually fix the entire system, and he’s committed to doing that.

Q    He would require border funding then?

MS. SANDERS:  Again, we’ve laid out what we would want to see in legislation.  The President wants to fix the system and we’re committed to doing that.  And we hope Congress will actually do their part.  Democrats have got to stop playing political games and actually come to the table and get real about solving the problem.

John.

Q    Thanks.  On the IG report and the hearings in Congress with Mr. Horowitz and Director Wray: The President tweeted several times, today and yesterday, that the Mueller investigation continues to be “a witch hunt.”  He said on Friday that, after reviewing the IG report, it shows that there’s no evidence of collusion.  His own FBI Director today said that Mueller is not on a witch hunt and that the report doesn’t speak to the special counsel investigation.  How is there that disconnect there between what the President believes another branch of his administration is doing?

MS. SANDERS:  The President has been clear.  He was obviously very involved in his campaign, and he’s laid out a number of times that there was no collusion, and he strongly feels this is a witch hunt.  The President has also said that the IG report clearly calls into question the credibility of James Comey and many other senior FBI investigators who have been involved in the Russia investigation, and that report validates the claims that he’s made repeatedly.

Dave.

Q    Thanks, Sarah.  The governor of Massachusetts, who’s a Republican, today reversed course and ordered the National Guard not to send assets or personnel to southwest border because he said, in his words, actions of the federal government “are resulting in the inhumane treatment of children.”  Would you comment on that?  And have you seen any other impact on border operations from this whole situation?

MS. SANDERS:  I haven’t seen his comments specifically, but I would tell him that he should call every member of Congress, particularly those in his own state, and ask them to fix the laws.

There’s only one body here that gets to create legislation and it’s Congress.  Our job is to enforce it, and we would like to see Congress fix it.  That’s why the President has repeatedly called on them to work with him to do just that.

Deborah.

Q    Sarah, what was the President’s reaction to Laura Bush’s piece in the Washington Post?

MS. SANDERS:  I’m sorry, what was the last part of your question?

Q    What was the President’s reaction to Laura Bush’s piece in the Washington Post?

MS. SANDERS:  I didn’t speak directly with him about that, but I’m happy to address the concerns and echo what Secretary Nielsen said.  Look, we share the concern.  The President himself said that he doesn’t like this process.

But once again, it’s Congress’ job to change the law.  We’re calling on them to do exactly that.  And frankly, this law was actually signed into effect in 2008 under her husband’s leadership, not under this administration.  We’re not the ones responsible for creating this problem.  We’ve inherited it.  But we’re actually the first administration stepping up and trying to fix it.

John.

Q    Thank you, Sarah.  I have here in my hands figures from the German Ministry of the Interior, under Minister Seehofer, who says that crime has gone down 5.1 percent in Germany.  In fact, it’s the lowest rate in a quarter century in Germany — violent crime down 2.4 percent, burglary down 23 percent, and theft down 11.8 percent.  Where did the President get the statement that crime was way up in Germany under the Merkel plan for admitting refugees?

MS. SANDERS:  I’m not aware of the report that you’re referencing, but I’d be happy to check into it, and circle back to you.

Q    It’s from the German Ministry of the Interior.

MS. SANDERS:  I heard that part, but I haven’t seen it.  But I’ll be happy to check into it and circle back.

Jon.

Q    Thanks a lot, Sarah.  I read the First Lady’s statement that was put out and she seems very troubled by this zero-tolerance policy.  Is there any daylight between the President and the First Lady on this issue?

MS. SANDERS:  I think we’ve made it abundantly clear that the daylight exists between Democrats in Congress and their ability to change this law.  The President himself said that he doesn’t — he hates these images; he hates this process.  And that’s why he’s asked for it to be fixed.

I feel like we keep ignoring the fact that the President isn’t the one that creates the law, but it’s Congress’ job to create the law.  And the President has already laid out and gladly stated, a number of times, publicly, that he would sign legislation that fixes these loopholes and fixes our immigration system.

I think that people should be begging and banging down the doors of Congress and asking them to join with the President instead of fighting him.  Instead of constantly criticizing it, why aren’t they offering solutions?

And you have people like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who come out and complain and attack.  It’s because they have no message.  They have no solutions.  We’ve laid out a solution and we’d like to see them work with us to put it in place.

Steve.

Q    Also critical of this particular policy, besides the people that you mentioned on the Democratic side, are a number of Republicans, and also some very prominent members of some of the President’s base — evangelical Christians.  Do you know if the President has heard from those members of his base? Evangelicals, in particular — had discussions with the President about this particular policy?  And can you sort of fill us in on discussions the President may have had in that regard?

MS. SANDERS:  I think any evangelical that — or in any church for that matter — that feels strongly, they should open up their doors and help facilitate some of these individuals.  I think that’s their calling, that’s the mission of the church, and they should certainly fulfill that.  If they want to fix the immigration system, then they should call their members of Congress and ask them to join with us to do that.

Steve.

Q    Thank you.

Q    Sarah, can you just —

MS. SANDERS:  Sorry, Steve.  Go ahead.

Q    There’s some confusion about this Space Force that the President announced today.  Did he actually sign anything?  Does he believe that this can be done without the approval of Congress?  The Air Force appears opposed to it.  Where is the support for this coming from besides the President?

MS. SANDERS:  The President has asked the Department of Defense to start the process.  We’re in the beginning stages of it, and we’re going to work with the Department of Defense and the other relevant parties to put it into place.

Francesca.

Q    Thank you, Sarah.  If the administration is, as it says, not using the children as pawns in this situation, then why not just have Congress pass legislation that narrowly deals with this family separation issue, and sign it, and then deal with the other aspects of the immigration system that the President wants to overhaul at a different time?

MS. SANDERS:  Once again, we want to fix the entire system.  We don’t want to just tinker with it.  The President is tired of watching people kick it down the road and not take responsibility and not fix the problems that we have.

Q    I understand, ideally, Sarah, that you would like to see all these other things change about the immigration system.  But we’re dealing with this particular situation right now.  Why not —

MS. SANDERS:  We’re dealing with a number of situations.  That’s not the only one.  We have people flooding over the borders.  Look, the President wants people to come to this country, but we want them to come legally and through the right process.  And that’s what we’re asking.  We want to secure the border.

There have been a number of individuals that are permanently separated from their families due to the illegal aliens that have come across this border and murdered and killed American citizens.  Where is the outrage over that separation?  We want to fix the whole thing.  We don’t want to just tinker with one part of it.  This is a broken system, and we’ve got to quit ignoring it.  Just ignoring the rule doesn’t fix it, and that’s what this administration is actually trying to do.

I’m going to take one last question.  Saagar.

Q    Thank you, Sarah.  So Secretary Pompeo came out today and he said that, in exchange for denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula, that the United States had committed to updating the armistice agreement that’s currently in place.  Can you confirm that the President did make this commitment to Kim Jong Un?  And what exactly does updating the armistice mean?  Does it put the future of U.S. forces on the Korean Peninsula in question?  And just any more information you could update us on in that regard.

MS. SANDERS:  We’re finalizing the details of what the process will look like.  Certainly would confirm Secretary Pompeo’s comments.  And would refer you to the State Department and the Department of Defense, who will be putting those details out and together.

Thanks so much, guys.  Have a great day.

END

5:49 P.M. EDT

Thursday, June 7, 2018

Breaking: Veterans on Patrol (VOP) Make Gruesome Discovery - Unearthed a Human Skull

Veterans on Patrol (VOP) #OperationBackyardBrawl Update:  6/7/2018 16:00ET

According to Lewis Arthur, his Veterans on Patrol efforts found what they are calling a "child's skull under 14 years of age" along a section of I-19 in the southern Arizona desert.  According to Mr. Arthur, Border Patrol was initially contacted, however, during his live broadcast, he stated that USBP advised him that his VOP personnel would need to contact local law enforcement themselves.

LiveStream Broadcast of apparent skull discovery:



"Waiting for Sheriff Department" (Started approx at 16:40ET)


After Discovery Update: Sheriff Deputies Secured Remains

Images were posted after the broadcast which depicts what appears to be a human skull of a small size (based upon items placed nearby that gives spacial awareness for the viewer).  This is a developing story.

Approximately 18:00ET, its been reported by Veterans on Patrol that at least 5 Sheriff Deputies were at the location and have secured the scene of the skeletal remains.

(Photo Credit:  VOP Alpha Co- Team Pulaski)






Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Veterans on Patrol Meeting With Tucson Police Department / City Council Ward 5


June 6, 2018

Veterans on Patrol founder Lewis Arthur met with Tucson Police Lieutenant Parker to review some key items from the CEMEX event that went viral on social media last weekend.  In typical VOP style, the meeting with TPD Lt. Parker was livestreamed via the VOP Facebook account.

During this meeting, Arthur made three specific requests of TPD;  the video footage of the cadavar dog(s) that went through the CEMEX site, the certifications of the cadaver dogs, as well proof of evidence processing by TPD or any law enforcement agency. 

On Sunday, June 3, social media was gripped by the hashtag #operationbackyardbrawl that was started by Veterans on Patrol after they entered into a peaceful standoff with Tucson Police and Arizona State Police.  The reason for the standoff was due to what VOP viewed as a lack of proper attention by local law enforcement of possible sex slave / human trafficking camps on the CEMEX Tucson property.  The site was initially observed by VOP around May 29th, at which time they notified Tucson Police.

According to Arthur, their initial findings on May 29th included what looked like some type of child trafficking due to a possible underground "jail cell" which was made from an old septic tank as well as what appeared to many as "rape trees" which were garnished with old fire hose and strapping materials.  This prompted VOP to contact law enforcement, however, due to the delay in response over the following several days, VOP then contacted an associate, Craig Sawyer, who is both a public advocate for children as well as a former United States Marine and Navy Seal.

Together, both Sawyer and Arthur concluded publicly that there was a strong possibility that the CEMEX site could be evidence of a large child trafficking operation.

During the meeting on Wednesday, Lt. Parker asserted that Tucson Police did have the evidence in custody that VOP turned over and are currently processing all of it.  Additionally, Lt. Parker asked a few times what physical evidence Arthur / VOP had that proves a crime has been committed on the CEMEX site.  Arthur was only able to cite circumstantially the appearance of the site was more than enough, but also stated VOP still has evidence it has not turned over due to what appears to be a lack of trust between himself and Tucson Police on this matter. 

Lt. Parker and Arthur met for around 45 minutes during which multiple items were discussed.  According to Lt. Parker, Tucson Police does have some concerns regarding how VOP performs its operations, and went on the record stating that there have been prior incidents where VOP did not act in an appropriate manner consistent with similar neighborhood watch programs;  according to Lt. Parker, VOP is to be operating no differently than fellow neighborhood watch programs.  Arthur stated that since TPD and other law enforcement agencies were not taking the matter of child trafficking seriously, VOP would be performing "patrols" in the desert areas along I-19 consisting of 5 unarmed / 1 armed personnel. 

Lt. Parker did state that the case at CEMEX is still technically "open" and a Detective has been assigned.  At this time, Tucson Police does not have any affidavits or statements by the experts that VOP has claimed reviewed the CEMEX site. 

This story is ongoing. - SA




Veterans on Patrol Meeting With Tucson Police Department - 6/6/2018

  1. VOP meeting with Tucson Police Team ONE (Lieutenant Parker).
  2. VOP is requesting Video of Cadaver dog going through CEMEX site.
  3. VOP is requesting cadaver dog certification.
  4. VOP is requesting proof of evidence processing since CEMEX destroyed site (bulldozed).
  5. According to TPD, the Cadaver dogs came from “DOC”; TPD is not sure if they are camera-equipped.
  6. VOP is asking for name of officer that went through CEMEX site with K9.
  7. TPD is stating that video (if it exists) must be obtained via FOIA process.
  8. VOP asked if TPD is still securing the site;  TPD stated they were there through at least Monday.  TPD released the site back over to CEMEX by Tuesday, once Code Enforcement and K9 Dogs swept the site.
  9. VOP requesting documents related to “chain of custody” for the evidence they turned over to TPD. 
  10. TPD stated that the CEMEX site investigation is still open and a Detective is assigned reviewing all evidence..
  11. TPD stated that City Code Enforcement took over responsibility for the fencing oversight operations;  CEMEX will be responsive to Code Enforcement.
  12. VOP advised TPD that the “agreement” was that TPD was going to have FBI or ICE review the scene; that was part of the agreement to have them come down from the tower.
  13. TPD stated that some of VOP tactics are not “approvable” (i.e. they should not get into any physical confrontations and there have been some questionable practices in the past).
  14. TPD states that they do not agree with VOP in its assessment;  however Lieutenant Parker is not saying definitively that VOP is wrong either.
  15. VOP engaged TPD in conversation regarding its use of Military and Law Enforcement experts and that was how VOP solidified it’s assessment at the CEMEX site.
  16. TPD asked VOP if the experts provided statements to Law Enforcement (VOP is not aware of any experts providing sworn statements).
  17. TPD (Lt. Parker) is stating they weren’t aware of situation at CEMEX until Friday (June 1, 2018).  
  18. VOP stated they knew about it Tuesday (May 29, 2018) but TPD didn’t act on the info until Friday (June 1, 2018).  Officer Mendoza, TPD had responded.
  19. TPD questioned VOP’s method of having 100’s of people trample over evidence at CEMEX.  VOP responded that no one from TPD was responding to VOP’s requests for assistance.  Having the public come out was the only way to bring attention to the matter.
  20. VOP reminded TPD that their Detectives didn’t come out until the very end of the standoff (June 3-June 4, 2018).
  21. VOP advised TPD that TPD Detectives did not talk to, or get a statement from VOP (still, as of 6/6/2018).
  22. TPD stated that DPS (AZ State Police) responded to the CEMEX site “as a result of reports of person(s) on top of a the CEMEX tower with AR-15’s.” 
  23. VOP reminded TPD that while TPD did come out the first night, they didn’t fully process the scene, and never returned on 5/30/2018 as they were told they would.
  24. VOP was told a detective would come the next morning, but none came.  That is how the CEMEX event escalated between VOP and TPD on 6/3/2018.
  25. TPD stated that the people that built the camp at CEMEX (the man seen in the white cowboy hat), have a “soft spot” in their hearts for immigrants coming up from the Mexico border.
  26. VOP was asked by TPD if they have more solid evidence of child-trafficking;  TPD stated they have hundreds more articles of evidence that they have secured (buried?).
  27. TPD asked VOP if children toys, and other items found at these camp sites, could be just randomly left by “normal” migrants traveling through;  VOP affirmed that is a possibility.
  28. VOP requested of TPD that they at least explore the possibility of a large conspiracy of child pornography and pedophiles that may be using the I-19 corridor as it’s main trafficking route.
  29. TPD acknowledged that the straps on the tree at the CEMEX site could be viewed as suspicious.
  30. TPD asked again what other evidence VOP has regarding the claim of child / human trafficking; VOP reviewed statement of local gentleman from reservation.
  31. Local male took VOP to another site further north of the CEMEX site.  TPD asked again for physical evidence.  VOP stated that a mattress they found had suspicious dry fluids on it.  
  32. TPD stated although VOP believes they are witnessing child trafficking campsites, TPD states they can not identify a specific victim at this time.
  33. VOP discusses with TPD that they didn’t look to get involved with child / human trafficking as it’s dangerous and time-consuming, and it wasn’t within their original mission.
  34. VOP again makes a valid request to ask TPD to rule out all possible avenues of child abuse.
  35. VOP advised TPD that they will be out in the desert;  TPD stated that they are concerned about public safety as VOP will be moving around public areas with weapons.
  36. VOP reminded TPD that over the course of 3 years, there were only two complaints made about their operations that required TPD involvement.
  37. VOP reminded TPD that of the few times the police were called on VOP, it actually resulted in a felon being taken off the street and handed a 20 year sentence.
  38. VOP advised TPD of the 5 unarmed man teams with 1 armed security unit during the searches.
  39. TPD is asking that VOP act in a manner consistent with any other neighborhood watch program.
  40. VOP reminded TPD that they are a City Service Provider, and VOP / CBI / Experts in Tracking all tried to have TPD secure the scene at CEMEX.
  41. TPD acknowledged there are some “jurisdictional” issues between who responds to certain areas around the CEMEX / Indian Reservation areas.
  42. TPD stated they do appreciate the work that VOP does… did remind VOP of the concerns mentioned previously.

Meeting at Ward 5 (Tucson City Council) / Richard Fimbers - D

VOP is requesting from the City Council (Ward 5) that the office of Richard Fimbers take an overwatch responsibility with VOP… if women and children are in bad situation, VOP will put them into a secure area, and VOP is requesting that Ward 5 have oversight to remove any potential risk of complaints of “kidnapping” etc…  goal is to avoid having ICE intervention of any women, children or disabled.  

VOP is asking if Ward 5 will assume oversight regardless of immigration status.  This is being requested to minimize trauma to victims.  Trafficked victims are in place with VOP to assist 

Advocacy groups already contacted by VOP include Phoenix Dream Center (take in females), Bikers Against Child Abuse.  

Operation Backyard Brawl: Data Dump ( #OperationBackyardBrawl )

Possible Child Trafficking Camps found in Tucson, AZ Connections: June 6, 2018
#OperationBackyardBrawl

Veterans On Patrol: VOP Alpha Co - Team Pulaski (Facebook Page)
             VOP Video Page:  Facebook

Veterans on Patrol:  Bravo Camp Conklin

Call: 520-500-4506

About

Alpha Company is the Spear Tip in Combating Veteran Suicides. As with everything #VOP related; We don't accept money and don't answer to our corrupt Gov't.

LiveStream Updates: 6/6/2018

2:30PM ET "Meet the Korean War Veterans"


12:00PM ET Update:  "Transparency"


11:30AM ET Update:  "Transparency"


No automatic alt text available.


*******************************************************************

YouTube Links:

Quite Frankly Show:  Scott Anthony Update



USMC / Navy Seal Craig Sawyer Videos:
Vets4ChildResue Organization









Craig Sawyer: Hagmann Report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKhgCgPenyA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arniEAx8Gxw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZduugIrZg0

Series of Events:

- Murders this week connected to JonBenet Ramsey case happens in AZ.
- Ex-Military (Veterans on Patrol) find possible rape camp while searching for homeless vets to help
- Land is owned by CEMEX
- CEMEX is a partner of the Clinton Global Initiative and $100million donor to Clinton
Foundation
- CEMEX linked to Haiti through Clinton foundation
- CEMEX is also owned by Bronfman-Rothschilds
- Sara Bronfman/husband becomes head of Libya-USA trade initivative
- CEMEX is under U.S. DOJ Investigation (March 14th / Reuters Article)
- Emiliano Salinas is son of former President of Mexico*
- Salinas is also an Ex member of NXIVM*
- Salinas worked for Lazard Investments*
- Lazard Investments handled the restructuring of CEMEX*
- Jonathan Rothschild is the MAYOR of TUCSON
- Tucson is a Rothschild/Greenberg stronghold. They own the Pima County Sheriff

LiveStream Links: 




COORDINATES OF 1ST CAMP:       32°07'43.9"N 110°59'16.4"W




Image Links:
https://imgur.com/a/M2VBNdB

Soros Involvement:
https://archive.li/VXsIo

Blood & Cement Patent:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP3228334A1.html

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Unconfirmed: Russia Assisting To Cease Hostilites In Syria Post-Strikes By U.S. / Allied Nations

Notice from Russia Ministry of Defense:

#SYRIA
Information Bulletin of the Center for the Reconciliation of Warring Parties in the Territory of the Syrian Arab Republic (15 April 2018)

Compliance with the cessation of hostilities

As part of the implementation of the Memorandum on the establishment of de-escalation zones in the Syrian Arab Republic, signed by the Russian Federation, the Republic of Turkey and the Islamic Republic of Iran on May 4, 2017, monitoring groups continue monitoring ceasefire compliance.

The situation in de-escalation zones is estimated as stable.

The Russian part of the representative office of the joint Russian-Turkish commission to review issues related to the
with facts of violations of the cessation of hostilities regime, 3 cases of shooting in Latakia province were recorded.
The Turkish part of the mission recorded 2 shooting cases in the province of Idlib.

Provision of humanitarian aid to the population of the CAP

During the day, the Center for the Reconciliation of Warring Parties in the RAA carried out one humanitarian action in the village of Kisua in the province of Damascus Reef for the delivery of 445 food packages (canned meat, sugar, rice) with a total weight of 1.9 tons.
A total of humanitarian actions - 1785.
The total weight of the delivered humanitarian cargo is 2519.8 tons.
During the day, medical assistance was provided to 133 residents.
In total, medical care was provided to 77,710 residents.

Reconciliation of the conflicting parties

During the day, agreements on joining the regime for the cessation of hostilities were not signed.

The number of settlements that joined the reconciliation process has not changed - 2505.


The number of armed formations that declared their adherence to the adoption and implementation of the conditions for the cessation of hostilities did not change - 234.

Saturday, March 24, 2018

Which Representatives and Which Senators Voted For The 2018 Omnibus Bill?

From the House Roll Call #127

Those In Favor (House of Reps)


THOSE AGAINST (House of Reps)


Full Senate Vote (Alphabetical)


US Senate (By Vote)