La Raza in WaPo: Trump Immigration Orders Like ‘Slave Trade’

By John Binder

The president of the open borders group known as La Raza is comparing President Donald Trump’s immigration orders to a number of historic atrocities, including the slave trade, in a new Washington Postop-ed.

The piece by National Council of La Raza President Janet Murguía, claims Trump’s plan to deport criminal illegal immigrants; build a wall along the southern border; and crack down on sanctuary cities will “similarly tarnish our nation’s character” like the slave trade did:

Some of the darkest chapters in U.S. history have involved forcibly relocating minority populations: the slave trade, the Trail of Tears, Operation Wetback and the internment of citizens and noncitizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Each was considered legal and justified in its time. Now they are condemned as assaults on the values that define our nation.

President Trump’s first executive order on immigration and the draft enforcement memos signed by Secretary of Homeland Security John F. Kelly promise to similarly tarnish our nation’s character. The memos call for expanding the nation’s deportation forces by 15,000 to round up, detain and deport the undocumented immigrants living among us. Instead of focusing on criminals, they make all undocumented people priorities for enforcement, and through a process called “expedited removal,” they severely reduce due process protections.

Murguía says Trump’s immigration orders through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are based entirely “on falsehoods” about illegal aliens, arguing that illegal immigration is down and it does not pose as much of a threat as the Trump Administration purports.

The La Raza president also parroted the talking points that illegal aliens help grow the economy by paying taxes every year:

And the cost of the undocumented? Their contributions to the economy far outweigh their burden. According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, undocumented immigrants pay $11.6 billion in taxes each year. According to the Social Security Administration, undocumented workers contribute $15 billion annually to the fund, but only withdraw an estimated $1 billion.

This claim has been repeatedly debunked by groups like the Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR), which found in a comprehensive study that illegal immigration costs American taxpayers a whopping $113 billion, as Breitbart Texas reported.

Murguía also claims that there is “little evidence that most undocumented immigrants pose a threat to national security.”

But, in documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest back in 2016, research found that there have been 580 individuals convicted of terrorism in the U.S. since the September 11th attacks, with 380 of those individuals being foreign-born terrorists, as Breitbart News reported.

Murguía refers to the recent deportation of Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos, an illegal immigrant living in Phoenix, Arizona, with her two children for 20 years.

“A woman who was a resident of Phoenix for 20 years was also deported, leaving behind her two U.S.-citizen children,” Murguía writes in the piece. “They are hardly security threats, but will be ‘enforcement priorities’ under Homeland Security’s new policy.”

Nonetheless, Murguía did not mention that Garcia de Rayos had been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in 2008 after she was found to be illegally using a Social Security number to work at a theme park, as Breitbart Texas reported.

In 2013, a judge ordered Garcia de Rayos to return home to Mexico, but she instead was required to periodically meet with immigration officials due to lax enforcement policies under former President Obama.

Murguía goes on to claim that the Trump administration has “declared war”, referring to ICE’s efforts to deport criminal illegal immigrants as “stalking people leaving church or going to the movies.”

Murguía’s piece concludes with a plea for the rest of the open borders lobby and amnesty advocates to continue to try to hold up deportation processes by the Trump Administration, writing “we’re deploying every tool we’ve got to oppose this ill-conceived policy — in the media, in the courts and in peaceful protests in the streets.”

Robert Reich Implies Trump Incited Sweden’s Migrant Riots

by EZRA DULIS22 Feb 2017

Robert Reich, a professor at UC Berkeley and former U.S. Secretary of Labor, has insinuated that President Donald Trump incited Monday’s riots in Sweden — echoing his unproven conspiracy theory just weeks ago that Breitbart News organized violent demonstrations at his university.

“Trump’s lies have consequences,” Reich wrote Tuesday afternoon on Twitter. “48 hrs after his comments on Sweden, riots broke out in an immigrant community.” His statement refers to President Trump’s comments at a Florida rally this weekend, describing problems in the European country due to heavy migration from Muslim-majority nations:

We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening. We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this. Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.

Establishment journalists mocked this segment of the rally speech, assuming Trump falsely claimed a terror attack had occurred recently in Sweden. Later on, he tweeted that he had seen a report on Sweden on Fox News Friday night. On the primetime show Tucker Carlson Tonight, one segment covered widespread unemployment among asylum seekers in Sweden.

However, just two days later, chaotic migrant riots shut down taunts from Swedish politicians and left-wing reporters. The violence in Rinkeby, a suburb of Stockholm with a large immigrant population, reportedly began after police made a drug-related arrest. Attackers targeted police officers, property, and bystanders. One freelance journalist described the scene as “like a war zone,” and migrant rioters hospitalized a photojournalist for Dagens Nyheter, one of Sweden’s largest newspapers.

Reich, 70, has since deleted the tweet — after a wave of more lucid users found and mocked his theory.

capture

capture

Earlier this month, Reich similarly blamed conservatives for violence that made national headlines and embarrassed leftists. After protesters shut down a speech at UC Berkeley by then-Breitbart Tech Senior Editor Milo Yiannopoulos, Reich claimed that he “heard there’s some relationship there between [instigators of arson and physical attacks] and the right wing and the movement that is affiliated with Breitbart News.”

The professor offered no evidence, but CNN anchor Don Lemon egged him on to expound the theory instead of fact-checking the assertion. Reich also found sympathetic ears in Salon, Newsweek, and UC Berkeley’s official blog; they all reprinted a piece where he speculated that “that Yiannopoulos and Breitbart were in cahoots with the agitators in order to lay the groundwork for a Trump crackdown on universities and their federal funding.”

After Breitbart Tech pointed out the left-wing press’s eagerness to spread Reich’s conspiracy, the Washington Post poured cold water on the narrative, calling the supposed plot “phantasmagorical.”

Dobbs – Trump Must Purge State Dept, Come Down Hard On Intel Agencies – Soon

By Rick Wells

Lou Dobbs has a few thoughts on “the left’s war on President Trump and the left’s actions are arguably nearing sedition. President Trump today slammed leakers following the resignation of General Michael Flynn as his National Security Adviser.” The President tweeted “the real scandal here is that classified information is illegally given out by ‘intelligence’ like candy. Very un-American!”

Dobbs notes, “The President also praised columnist Eli Lake who says bureaucrats and former Obama officials are possibly behind these leaks.” He plays a clip of the Lake comments, following that up with his view that, “I believe we’re witnessing a full on assault by the left here, the establishment, the left-wing national media, all working to bring down the Trump administration.”

“In fact, a new analysis shows,” says Dobbs, “the network morning shows devoting 18 times the amount of coverage to a so-called White House crisis compared to the illegal leaks. Republican leaders also failing to speak out forcefully against those leaks and the leakers. But the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is calling for the leakers, the nine unnamed current and former officials cited by the Washington Post, to be jailed.”

Dobbs goes further, saying, “President Trump, in my opinion, must end tenure for federal workers, must purge the State Department, and bring both the State Department and our intelligence community under the control of this President. To not do so and not do so quickly will only createmore opportunities for obstructionism and put in jeopardy the entire Trump agenda, if not Mr. Trump’s Presidency itself.

OBAMA EXPANDED NSA POWERS DAYS BEFORE LEAVING OFFICE, NOW THEY’RE BEING USED TO SABOTAGE TRUMP

screen-shot-2017-02-16-at-9-39-22-am

Paul Joseph Watson – FEBRUARY 16, 2017

After President Trump won the election, Obama quietly expanded the NSA’s ability to spy on innocent Americans just days before leaving office.

Seeing as how the deep state, which includes the NSA and FBI, appear to be leaking all of Trump’s private phone calls with foreign leaders and took down General Michael Flynn by spying on his calls and leaking them to their friends in The Washington Post and The New York Times, the story is being looked at in a completely new light.

As the The New York Times reported on January 12th:

In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.

The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.


Trump questioned whether the NSA and FBI were behind a multitude of leaks handed to the New York Times and Washington Post.

The change means that far more officials will be searching through raw data. Essentially, the government is reducing the risk that the N.S.A. will fail to recognize that a piece of information would be valuable to another agency, but increasing the risk that officials will see private information about innocent people.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch signed the new rules, permitting the N.S.A. to disseminate “raw signals intelligence information,” on Jan. 3, after the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., signed them on Dec. 15, according to a 23-page, largely declassified copy of the procedures.

These are Obama loyalists who reports suggest may have worked to sabotage Trump by ousting Flynn in order to preserve Obama’s Iran deal.

Previously, the N.S.A. filtered information before sharing intercepted communications with another agency, like the C.I.A. or the intelligence branches of the F.B.I. and the Drug Enforcement Administration. The N.S.A.’s analysts passed on only information they deemed pertinent, screening out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal information.

Now, other intelligence agencies will be able to search directly through raw repositories of communications intercepted by the N.S.A. and then apply such rules for “minimizing” privacy intrusions.

“This is not expanding the substantive ability of law enforcement to get access to signals intelligence,” said Robert S. Litt, the general counsel to Mr. Clapper. “It is simply widening the aperture for a larger number of analysts, who will be bound by the existing rules.”

But Patrick Toomey, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, called the move an erosion of rules intended to protect the privacy of Americans when their messages are caught by the N.S.A.’s powerful global collection methods. He noted that domestic internet data was often routed or stored abroad, where it may get vacuumed up without court oversight.

“Rather than dramatically expanding government access to so much personal data, we need much stronger rules to protect the privacy of Americans,” Mr. Toomey said. “Seventeen different government agencies shouldn’t be rooting through Americans’ emails with family members, friends and colleagues, all without ever obtaining a warrant.”

Is this what happened to Flynn?

Is this why Trump’s calls with foreign leaders are being illegally leaked to the press in order to sabotage his presidency?

It sure as hell looks like that’s the case.

Remember, the point at which Donald Trump broke away from the pack and secured his victory during the primaries was when the Colorado GOP decided to deny Americans their right to vote and handed Ted Cruz all the state’s delegates, then tweeted: “We did it. #NeverTrump.”

A very similar story is now happening with the deep state’s open sabotage. Even though Americans came out in droves to elect a populist leader promising massive change, the deep state is sabotaging his presidency to prevent him from implementing the agenda his supporters voted for.

The Colorado GOP’s act of sabotage backfired spectacularly and was the turning point which secured Trump and his supporters their victory, if this deep state sabotage is exposed just the same, this too could be the turning point which sinks the establishment and secures our populist revolution.

Media panic as White House lets lesser known outlets ask questions…

screen-shot-2017-02-13-at-5-19-46-pm

By Kelly Riddell

The mainstream media isn’t liking the new set up at the White House: Lesser name news outlets are being called on during press briefings, rather than the old, established bellwethers.

During his press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, President Donald Trump called on two news outlets: WJLA a local ABC news affiliate, and the Daily Caller. Both failed to ask him about the fate of his national security adviser Gen. Michael Flynn, who has been marred in a controversy that he spoke to Russian authorities before Mr. Trump took office.

And the mainstream media immediately pounced – saying Mr. Trump was picking favorites in order to avoid questioning on Mr. Flynn.

“By handpicking reporters, Trump manages to get through a news conference without being asked about Flynn,” New York Times reporter Peter Baker lamented on Twitter – failing to mention that all U.S. presidents handpick reporters.

Bloomberg’s Angela Greiling Keane helped him clarify.

“By *handpicking* friendly reporters. To be fair, the previous WH also handpicked reporters. But it was very different than this,” she tweeted.

Mark Murray at NBC News was equally flummoxed.

In response to a tweet from Lizzie O’Leary – who aptly pointed out that White Houses have been calling on specific reporters “they know won’t grill them since time immemorial,” Mr. Murray responded: “But not during bilateral pressers with world leaders, where questions typically go to wire reporters (AP, Reuters).”

Hadas Gold at Politico, quoted NBC Journalist Brian Williams, who noted on-air “what wasn’t being asked” at the press conference, adding the New York Times and Washington Post weren’t called upon.

Deputy Washington Editor of the New York Times, Jonathan Weisman, wasn’t pleased.

“Biggest papers in the U.S. blare headlines on embattled National Security Adviser Flynn. Trump calls on WJLA & Daily Caller, no Flynn questions,” he tweeted.

Too bad.

The reporters at WJLA and the Daily Caller may have dropped the ball in their line of questioning – but that’s not Mr. Trump’s fault.

The mainstream media – especially CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post – have largely been combative of Mr. Trump’s presidency. Why would they think they would then be given preferential treatment at his press conferences? Because they’re the establishment?

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here.

It’s refreshing to see a White House give voice to lesser known news outlets – it’s more democratic in a way, opening the press corps up to different lines of questioning.

For, the mainstream media have tried to control the narrative for way to long. Them complaining they’re losing it is comical.

Klein: The Left’s Latest Desperate Tactic – Smear Trump As ‘Mentally Ill’

By Aaron Klein

Since President Donald Trump took office on January 20, a trend has been emerging in which news media outlets have featured articles quoting health care professionals questioning the billionaire’s mental stability in a seeming bid to delegitimize the president.

And now some Democratic politicians – and at least one Republican – are calling for Trump to be subjected to a psychiatric examination to determine whether he is fit for office. Some commentators have even suggested invoking the 25th Amendment of the Constitution, which allows for the commander-in-chief’s removal from office if the “president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

This comes after the left’s multiple failed attempts to overthrow Trump’s presidency, including the recount efforts supported by Hillary Clinton; a doomed campaign to get Trump’s electors to defect before the Electoral College voted in December; and claims that Russian “hacking” impacted the 2016 election.

The health care professionals quoted in recent weeks attempting to diagnose Trump seem to be violating the so-called Goldwater Rule, which was established by the American Psychiatric Association after similar unsupported attacks against Senator Barry Goldwater during his 1964 presidential campaign, which was widely considered a threat to the political establishment.

The APA’s Goldwater Rule forbids psychiatrists from commenting on someone’s mental status unless they first carry out an examination and the doctor is authorized by the patient to speak to the public.

On Thursday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said she would back a proposal suggested by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) during a meeting with the Washington Post’s editorial board to consider legislation requiring all presidents to get medical and mental health examinations. Chaffetz clarified that he wasn’t referring to Trump’s rhetoric.

Post columnist Ruth Marcus related:

In a meeting last week with The Washington Post editorial board, Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz, chair of the House Oversight Committee, said he was weighing legislation to require presidents to undergo an independent medical examination, including mental health. Chaffetz cautioned that he wasn’t “talking about some of the rhetoric that’s flying around” about Trump. Still, he said, “If you’re going to have your hands on the nuclear codes, you should probably know what kind of mental state you’re in.”

Right on cue, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) tweeted last week about whether Trump should get a mental health exam.

screen-shot-2017-02-06-at-5-16-24-pm

A group calling itself “Citizen Therapists Against Trumpism” has been created, with a manifesto that includes a litany of wild claims.

Last week, U.S. News and World Report ran a story titled, “Temperament Tantrum: Some say President Donald Trump’s personality isn’t just flawed, it’s dangerous.”

The article quotes John D. Gartner, described as a “practicing psychotherapist who taught psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins University Medical School,” claiming Trump is “dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president.”

Gartner’s quotes have since been picked up by numerous news media outlets in order to question Trump’s emotional health.

The Independent newspaper featured a story that also questioned Trump mental stability, titled, “’Malignant narcisissm’: Donald Trump displays classic traits of mental illness, claim psychologists.” The piece cited mental health professionals commenting on Trump’s alleged narcissism.

The article partially drew from a New York Daily News story published last week titled, “President Trump exhibits classic signs of mental illness, including ‘malignant narcissism,’ shrinks say.”

“Narcissism impairs his ability to see reality,” Dr. Julie Futrell, a clinical psychologist, told the newspaper while pointing out that she never actually treated Trump.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, who has no medical degree, weighed in on Trump’s health status, tweeting that the president is “obviously mentally ill.”

screen-shot-2017-02-06-at-5-20-06-pm

The campaign to question Trump’s mental health may have an ultimate goal in mind.

Last Month, Will Rahn, political correspondent and managing director of politics for CBS News Digital wrote a commentary piece at CBSNews.com titled, “An obscure way to oust an American president.”

He pointed to the 25th Amendment as a way to declare a president unfit for command:

Regardless of whether Trump is suffering from some kind of mental ailment, the Constitution does provide a manual for what to do in case of presidential incapacity in the form of the 25th Amendment. In particular, a provision within Article 4 of the amendment lays out how a president can be forced to surrender his powers should he be ruled unable to fulfill his duties.

Rahn conceded the procedure, which would require action from the vice president, is highly unlikely:

There’s a lesson there for Mike Pence, should he ever take a look at Article 4 and start thinking it might be wise to ascend to the presidency a little early: failing in that effort would end his career, not to mention the careers of the secretaries who sign up to help him. That alone is a powerful incentive to avoid using the law.

So while it’s plausible that this president could be removed from office for reasons of mental illness, it’s still exceptionally unlikely he would. And, in any event, Mr. Trump would have to get a whole lot weirder than he’s been already before anyone could start seriously thinking about Article 4.

Last week, Breitbart News reported Rosa Brooks, a former Obama administration official, outlined four ways to “get rid” of Trump, including declaring him mentally unfit for command or carrying out a military coup.