Suspect in custody after California police respond to high school shooting reports

Capture

A 14-year-old hispanic male has been taken into custody after police responded to a reported active shooter at a high school in Palmdale, California.

Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department deputies rushed to the scene just after 7am Friday, accompanied by agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

One person, described as a 14-year-old hispanic male, has been arrested, and the Sheriff’s Department has declared the school clear. One victim, another 14-year-old man, suffered a gunshot wound in the arm, but was able to drive himself to hospital, CBS Los Angeles reported. His condition is described as stable.

Both suspect and victim are students at Highland High School. Police described the events as as

Capture

Highland High School is located about one hour north of Los Angeles. Students there took to Twitter to warn others about the reported shooter.

 Capture

Due to his age, it is unclear how the suspect managed to get a weapon. In addition, gun laws in California are among the strictest in the US.

Minutes after reports came in from Highland, Deputies were also called to nearby Manzanita Elementary School, just seven miles away, after a parent reported multiple shots fired. After investigating the call, the LA County Sheriff’s Department found no evidence of a shooting and gave the all clear at Manzanita Elementary.

Manzanita Elementary school had a scheduled day of active shooter training several days ago, according to local press, and another training day had been scheduled “in the near future.” It is unclear whether the training and the reported incident were connected.

AGITATOR ILLEGALS OPPOSED TO BORDER WALL BUILD HUMAN WALL TO BLOCK AMERICANS

By Rick Wells

The City of Los Alamitos, California, held a second vote as required by law on their ordinance nullifying the illegal sanctuary state policies of California. Some of the innumerable illegal alien squatters and their activists in southern California came out to disrupt the proceedings, chant, play Mexican music, and engage in the general chaos creation that Democrats have told them is how things are done in the US.

VIDEO BELOW

Noting the illegal’s hypocrisy, patriot Gary Galino points to a large percentage of the squatter agitators who have linked arms and formed a human wall blocking the Americans from easily accessing the meeting. He asks the illegals, who are chanting the lie that “this is our home,” why they’re building a wall when they’re supposed to be against walls and for open borders.

None of them answered his questions. Maybe they just don’t speak or comprende that gringo lingo. It’s interesting that the cheerleader for the illegals is saying “We must obey the law,” when it come to the state sanctioned violation of federal immigration laws. So they must obey laws that favor them and defy those that don’t – got you, amigo.

There are a couple guys with SEIU union t-shirts on in the crowd as well, recruiting and representing foreigners over Americans, in service to the open border Democrats, their fellow communists. The announcer, who has no business being in our country in the first place, preaches to those gathered that there is no place for racism in this city.

He’s the racist, equating defending one’s nation against invasion with a practice of discrimination based upon skin color is a favorite racist Democrat attack in their war on white people, particularly straight white men.

It’s our country, Mexican and Central American boys and girls. You don’t belong here and the American people want you out. You can demand anything you want but you’re not going to get it – unless you want a bus ticket home. That could be arranged.

San Diego County Board of Supervisors votes to support sanctuary state lawsuit against California

By Zac Self, Chris Lindahl and City News Service

SAN DIEGO — The San Diego County Board of Supervisors has voted to support the Trump administration’s lawsuit against California’s sanctuary laws.

The board voted 3-1 Tuesday afternoon to support the lawsuit.

The board directed that the County’s attorney to file an amicus brief supporting the federal lawsuit.

The deadline to file a brief passed, so Chairwoman Kristin Gaspar said the earliest the county can file a brief is if the ruling is appealed to a higher court.

RELATED: Escondido City Council votes to support sanctuary policy lawsuit

Supervisor Greg Cox was the only one opposed to supporting the lawsuit. Supervisor Ron Roberts wasn’t present for the vote.

Among the laws targeted by the legal action is SB 54, which limits cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.

Supervisor Dianne Jacob led public opposition to the laws and said she agrees with U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that they are unconstitutional and undermine public safety.

RELATED: Justice Department to sue California over ‘sanctuary’ laws

“This is a politically super-charged issue as you might imagine,” Gaspar told Fox News. “We’re talking about hundreds of emails pouring in from all sides. But let us not forget, let’s take the emotion out of this. We’re talking about following the constitutional laws of our land.”

Two supervisors indicated they’re opposed to joining the suit: Greg Cox, who said sheriff’s deputies “should not be forced to carry out immigration duties,” and Ron Roberts. But Roberts will not be at Tuesday’s meeting due to a “long-planned trip.”

“Had I attended, I would have urged my colleagues to stay out of this issue,” Roberts said.

Local governments in recent weeks have taken varying approaches to weighing in on the sanctuary state case, from resolutions to voting to file lawsuits themselves.

RELATED: San Diego church becomes ‘sanctuary congregation’ amid immigration debate

The city council in San Juan Capistrano, for instance, recently passed a resolution against SB 54. Resolutions are largely symbolic statements of a government’s stance.

Aliso Viejo, Escondido and Mission Viejo are among the cities whose leaders have voted to file amicus briefs in support of the Trump administration’s position. Such briefs are often submitted by those who have an interest in a court case but are not parties in the lawsuit.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors voted last month to join the lawsuit, while the Huntington Beach City Council voted recently to file its own suit.

The Los Alamitos City Council voted to “exempt” the city from the sanctuary laws.

“We want to do something more than a resolution, or at least I personally do, because that’s seemingly meaningless,” Gaspar said. “We’ll be working in closed session with our legal team to really explore any and all options that we have as a county to provide meaningful input into this lawsuit.”

The San Diego Organizing Project released the following statement after the decision:

“Today’s harmful decision during a closed session shows that our Board of Supervisors is out of touch with the citizens of San Diego County. SB 54 is a crucial bill to protect all San Diego residents, both immigrants and citizens of all cultural backgrounds, from unwarranted interrogations, detainments and deportations. Our faith community will work tirelessly to elect true representatives who understand that we are better and stronger together.”

Congressman Duncan Hunter also released a statement after the board voted:

“Today’s action was the very definition of leadership. In standing up against the irresponsible actions by the State of California, our County Supervisors who supported this action clearly demonstrated that their priorities are protecting those of us in San Diego County and not about politics. The fact of the matter is, when state and local law enforcement agencies outright refuse to share information to federal officials regarding criminal activity, our communities are unsafe and the rule of law is undermined. It’s not complicated. I have always been, and will continue to be, an advocate for state’s rights, but that’s not the issue. The U.S. Constitution clearly places border policy and our immigration laws within the purview of the federal government. State or local governments cannot just choose to ignore federal statutes because of a political agenda, especially when doing so places its citizens at risk by leaving criminals eligible for deportation in our communities. Our San Diego County Supervisors who took action today deserve our thanks and we need to hold every elected official accountable who does not demonstrate the same the type of leadership.”

Troops on Mexican border can’t enforce immigration laws – California governor

US President Donald Trump speaks after touring border wall prototypes near San Diego, California, March 2018. © Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

After initially approving 400 troops for President Donald Trump’s border deployment plan, California Governor Jerry Brown has reportedly placed conditions on their use for immigration enforcement, angering federal officials.

Trump announced the deployment of the National Guard along the border in early April as part of a crackdown on illegal border crossings from Mexico. Until Congress approves funding for the construction of the border wall, the US president said, the military will help police the frontier.

The governors of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, all Republicans, have cooperated with the plan. Brown initially approved sending some 400 troops to the border, earning praise from Trump.

Capture

Brown’s proposal for the use of troops, however, excluded any activities that could be considered helping the US Border Patrol in immigration enforcement, AP reported Monday, citing anonymous “US officials with knowledge of the talks,” who were not authorized to discuss the matter.

As examples of tasks the governor was objecting to, AP listed vehicle repairs, operations of remotely controlled surveillance cameras, and clerical work such as payroll and fuel supply.

California National Guard spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Keegan told AP on Monday that the state had not rejected the troop deployment. Brown sent the federal government a Memorandum of Agreement outlining the restrictions on the use of troops, and is waiting for a response, Keegan said.

Talks between federal and California officials “soured” on Friday and over the weekend, AP reported, after the federal officials were presented with Brown’s document outlining the restrictions on troop functions. The anonymous officials who spoke to AP described the restrictions as “onerous.”

The governor reportedly wanted to focus more on drug and firearms smuggling and fighting transnational criminal gangs, suggesting the use of about 40 troops for marijuana eradication across California.

 Capture

Dominated by Democrats, the state has been at the forefront of opposing Trump’s immigration policies since the very beginning of the president’s term. In October 2017, the state legislature adopted a bill declaring California a “sanctuary state,” barring officials from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. State Attorney General Xavier Becerra has threatened businesses who cooperate with the federal government with fines and imprisonment.

In response, Trump floated the idea of withdrawing all immigration enforcement from California, saying the state would “beg” to have them back after the resulting crime wave. Eventually, however, he decided on deploying the National Guard in areas where the US Border Patrol said it needed support due to lack of the border wall.

Several wall prototypes were built south of San Diego, California, but Congress did not approve much in the way of wall funding in the $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill. Trump signed the bill to avoid a government shutdown, but his base was displeased by all the concessions to the opposition Democrats.

Trump campaigned on the platform of securing the border with Mexico and reforming the US immigration system. Last year, the White House proposed giving amnesty to 1.8 million immigrants in the US illegally in exchange for building the wall and abolishing “chain migration” and the diversity visa lottery. Democrats have denounced the proposal as “racist.”

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

DHS SAYS CITIES HID 142 SUSPECTED GANG MEMBERS FROM DEPORTATION

Screen Shot 2018-04-16 at 12.21.33 PM

Department of Justice is pressuring cities to cooperate with deportation efforts

By Neil Munro

City and country governments ignored federal “detainer” requests and released 142 suspected members of MS-13 and other criminal gangs in the eight months up to June 2017, says a report from the Department of Homeland Security to the Senate’s judiciary committee.

The gang release data is the agency’s most up-to-date, according to the agency, which delivered the answers in response to routine oversight questions by committee members.

The data does not cover any releases after June 19, 2017, when city governments escalated their opposition to the legal deportation of illegal migrants in their cities and counties. Currently, the Department of Justice is pressuring cities to cooperate with deportation efforts and is trying to cut federal police grants to cities who release criminals back into Americans’ neighborhoods.

The answers do not describe the crimes committed by gang members that caused their arrests.

The detainer data shows how many arrested and detained illegals were released by city and local governments even after federal officials requested they be held until they could be arrested by DHS officials.

Santa Clara County in California led the pack by releasing 22 of 127 suspect gang members after the DHS asked they be held. Los Angeles released 16 suspected gangsters, Orange County released 12 and Travis County in Texas released 11.

Montgomery County in Maryland led the MS-13 score by releasing five of 15 suspected MS-13 members who were released nationwide from October 2016 to June 2017.

California jurisdictions released 90 of the 142 suspects. Next in line was Washington State, which aided 11 migrants, including 3 MS-13 members.

Several states and local cities are trying to shield criminal migrants from deportation, despite the resulting danger to Americans. The illegals are protected by progressives eager to protect migrants from deportation, but also by politicians eager to support local cheap-labor businesses, such as the food industry. That opposition to federal immigration law has sparked dramatic fights in New York, Washington D.C., Oakland, Calif., and elsewhere.

It Begins: California Senator Introduces Bill to Kill Free Speech, Requires State-Sanctioned Fact Checkers to Approve Online Content

Capture

Richard Pan is a far left California state senator.

 By Jim Hoft

Pan recently introduced legislation to crack down on free speech on the internet.

Pan’s legislation would force online publishers to utilize state-sanctioned fact checkers to approve content before it is posted online.

Jon Rappaport reported:

The bill is titled “SB1424 Internet: social media: false information: strategic plan.

It targets social media based in California. But as you read the bill, you see it appears to define social media as any Internet blog, website, or communication.

SB1424 is brief. Read it:

This bill would require any person who operates a social media, as defined, Internet Web site with a physical presence in California to develop a strategic plan to verify news stories shared on its Web site. The bill would require the plan to include, among other things, a plan to mitigate the spread of false information through news stories, the utilization of fact-checkers to verify news stories, providing outreach to social media users, and placing a warning on a news story containing false information.

(a) Any person who operates a social media Internet Web site with physical presence in California shall develop a strategic plan to verify news stories shared on its Internet Web site.

(b) The strategic plan shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following:

(1) A plan to mitigate the spread of false information through news stories.

(2) The utilization of fact-checkers to verify news stories.

(3) Providing outreach to social media users regarding news stories containing false information.

(4) Placing a warning on a news story containing false information.

(c) As used in this section, “social media” means an electronic service or account, or electronic content, including, but not limited to, videos, still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, instant and text messages, email, online services or accounts, or Internet Web site profiles or locations.

Getting the picture?

It’s a free speech killer.

This is what the Democratic Party has become — intolerant fascists.

It all goes back to what actor James Woods said months ago.
“Scratch a liberal, find a fascist.”