Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON President Donald Trump plans to join with two Republican senators to unveil legislation that would place new limits on legal immigration. It would seek an immigration system based on merit and jobs skills instead of family connections.

Trump was appearing with Republican Sens. David Perdue of Georgia and Tom Cotton of Arkansas at the White House on Wednesday to discuss the bill. The president said at an Ohio rally last month that he was working with the conservative senators to create a new immigration system for America.

Trump has made cracking down on illegal immigration a hallmark of his administration and has tried to slash federal grants for cities that refuse to comply with federal efforts to detain and deport those living in the country illegally.

His involvement will put him at the center of efforts to make changes to the legal immigration system. Previewing the event, White House officials said the bill would aim to create a skills-based immigration system to make the U.S. more competitive, raise wages and create jobs.

The White House said that only 1 in 15 immigrants comes to the U.S. because of their skills, and the current system fails to place a priority on highly skilled immigrants.

Perdue and Cotton introduced the legislation in February that would change the 1965 law to reduce the number of legal immigrants, limiting the number of people able to obtain green cards to join families already in the United States.

The bill would also aim to slash the number of refugees in half and eliminate a program that provides visas to countries with low rates of immigration.

Trumps appearance was aimed at bringing attention to the bill, which has been largely ignored in the Senate, with no other lawmaker signing on as a co-sponsor. GOP leaders have showed no inclination to vote on immigration this year.

Some immigrant advocates have criticized the proposal, saying that slashing legal immigration would hurt industries like agriculture and harm the economy.

Our system is broken, but the response should be to modernize it, not take a sledgehammer to it, said Jeremy Robbins, executive director of New American Economy, a group of business leaders, mayors and others backed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg that advocates for comprehensive immigration reform.

38.907192 -77.036871

Original post:
President Trump pushes immigration changes - fox8.com

July 31, 2017 10:15 PM

NORTH TEXAS (CBSDFW.COM) Arrests of undocumented immigrants in North Texas have nearly doubled since President Donald Trump took office.

Statistics obtained by CBS 11 show theyve gone up by nearly 40 percent, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In a Fort Worth tortilla shop that doubles as a restaurant, almost everyone is an immigrant, both legal and not. This morning, an undocumented woman ate a late breakfast and planned for what she believes is inevitable deportation.

Its pure fear now, she said. If I talk to other immigrants, its the same. Just fear.

The mother and wife agreed to speak to CBS 11 if we didnt show her face or give her name. She says she came to the United States seven years ago to earn money to pay for her kids education in Mexico. Since Trump took office, she and her family have been saving money in case theyre deported.

We already bought boxes so we can start packing our things and sending them to Mexico, she said.

As a candidate, Trump said he would crack down on illegal immigration. As president, many say hes kept his word. CBS 11 obtained numbers showing how many undocumented immigrants were arrested in North Texas in the first few days of his presidency.

According to ICE, 2,586 undocumented immigrants were arrested in the first five months of 2016. In that same time period this year, 4,969 undocumented immigrants have been taken into custody. Thats an increase of almost 40 percent.

It should be 100 [percent], said Tim Bothe, a Fort Worth resident.

The presidents stance on immigration is a big reason Bothe voted for him. Bothe supports the approach ICE is taking under its new leadership.

ICE will no longer exempt any class of individuals from removal proceedings if they are found to be in the country illegally, said ICE in a statement.

Under the Obama Administration, ICE focused on so-called criminal immigrants, those who had felonies and other rap sheets. In the first 100 days of the Trump administration, ICE arrested 4,155 criminal immigrants and 814 non-criminal. In 2016, ICE arrested 2,337 criminal immigrants compared to 249 non-criminal immigrants.

Its our country, said Bothe. Are we not supposed to protect our rights and our families and all our citizens here in America?

View original post here:
Arrests Of Undocumented Immigrants Climbing In North Texas - CBS DFW

The president continues to use data incorrectly with his claim that border crossings have decreased significantly. (Meg Kelly/TWP)

As you know, the border was a tremendous problem and now close to 80 percent stoppage. President Trump, remarksat a Cabinet meeting, July 31, 2017

You know, the borders down 78 percent. Under past administrations, the border didnt go down, it went up. But if it went down 1 percent, there was like this was a great thing. Down 78 percent. Trump, speech in New York, July 28, 2017

Curbing illegal immigration is a major promise by President Trump, and he frequently touts successes in doing so. While Southwest border crossings have, indeed, declined as a result of Trumps rhetoric, its not nearly as dramatic as 78 or 80 percent. Moreover, Trump now says illegal immigration went up under previous administrations which is false.

Lets dig in.

Border activity bucked seasonal trends in the fall and winter of 2016. Usually, theres a seasonal lull through winter months, before apprehensions of undocumented immigrants start climbing back up. Apprehensions tend to peak from March to May, before coming down again in the late summer and through the fall.

Yet in fall 2016, apprehensions kept increasing. People rushed to enter the country, which was an indication that Trumps rhetoric may have sent a message to people who had planned to cross the border from Mexico, to do so before the election. Experts say Trumps anti-illegal-immigration rhetoric played a role.

After November 2016, the number of apprehensions and people deemed inadmissible at the border declined rapidly. In April 2017, the monthly number of apprehensions and people deemed admissible reached the lowest point since at least 2000, Customs and Border Protection datashow.

Since April, however, apprehensions started climbing again. This increase is consistent with seasonal trends. (The light blue line represents fiscal 2017 in the CBP chart below.)

Its unclear exactly what data Trump is using to claim a decline of up to 80 percent in border crossings. The White House did not respond to our inquiry.

His figure is consistent with the change in apprehensions data from the highest point in fiscal 2017 (November 2016, at 47,210) to the lowest point (April 2017, at 11,126), which is a 76.4 percent decline. That is a cherry-picked figure that shows the biggest possible decline in a given fiscal year including the months before he took office. When you compare the data from his first full month in office (February 2017) with the latest data (June 2017), the decline is between 8 and, 14 percent.

Another way to look at this data is using year-over-year trends. From June 2016 to June 2017, the number of people apprehended or deemed admissible declined 52.6 percent. As FactCheck.org noted, its still a significant decline, but not as high as 80 percent.

Clearly, monthly figures are quite susceptible to cherry-picking. So lets take a broader look at the data.

This shows Southwest border apprehensions have steadily declined since their peak at more than 1.6 million people in fiscal 2000. There have been temporary spikes since 2000 most recently, there was an uptick in apprehensions of Central American unaccompanied children and their families in 2016, after a significant drop in 2015. The fiscal 2016 annual apprehensions are back down to early-1970s levels.

So Trump is incorrect that under past administrations, the border didnt go down, it went up, and that the border was a tremendous problem before his administration.

There are many reasons for this decline, including economic and work conditions on both sides of the border. In recent years, there has been a shift in border migration. The number of Mexicans caught trying to cross the border illegally is dropping, and the number of families and children fleeing rampant violence and crime in Central America is increasing.

When Trump debuted this talking point, we awarded just One Pinocchio for his use of CBP data. He was largely correct about the largedeclines, but his apples-to-oranges method led to numbers that were slightly off.

But apprehensions are going up again. His figure now reflects the biggest possible decline even though it measures figures from before he became president, and does not use the most up-to-date data. While monthly and annual figures are susceptible to cherry-picking, the decline under his presidency is as low as 8 percent, and the decline in June 2017 compared with June 2016 is 52.6 percent. That places his claim at the Three-Pinocchio range.

Then this talking point spins out of control when Trump falsely says border activity actually went up, not down, before his administration. In reality, illegal border crossings are back down to early-1970s levels, and apprehensions have steadily declined since their peak in 2000, with temporaryupticks here and there. Trump earns Four Pinocchios.

(About our rating scale)

Send us facts to check by filling out this form

Keep tabs on Trumps promises with our Trump Promise Tracker

Sign up for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter

Do you rate this claim as true or false? More Pinocchios for false, fewer based on your opinion of the statement's truthfulness. (The check mark means you think the statement is true, not that you agree with the rating.)

We need to verify that you are an actual person.

This is a non-scientific user poll. Results are not statistically valid and cannot be assumed to reflect the views of Washington Post users as a group or the general population.

Here is the original post:
President Trump's claim that illegal immigration went up under past administrations - Washington Post

Judge Nap Blasts OR Gov't After 20-Time Deportee Allegedly Assaults Woman

Krauthammer: Scaramucci Firing Shows Trump WH 'Bounced Off the Bottom'

Tucker Carlson debated former DNC Deputy Press Secretary Jose Aristimuno on the merits of illegal immigration, after a woman was allegedly assaulted by a "meth head" who was previously deported 20 times.

"This is the exact reason you don't want sanctuary cities in the first place," Carlson said.

Aristimuno said the incident was "horrible" and that suspect Sergio Martinez is "an outlier" when it comes to illegal aliens.

"We actually have facts on this," Carlson responded, after Aristimuno doubted a comprehensive university study the host referenced.

Carlson said the study showed that there is no statistical difference between non-sanctuary cities and many sanctuary cities, but that the violent crime rate is much higher in the latter.

Aristimuno disagreed, saying that he wanted immigration reform but reiterated that sanctuary cities are not a problem.

"Let's just stick to the facts here," Carlson said.

Regarding Martinez, who he called a "homeless meth head," Carlson again asked Aristimuno how many times a person should be deported before authorities take action.

"Three, eight, twenty?" he asked.

Watch more above.

Bolling: Reagan, Trump Shared 'Similar Outlook for Nation'

Coulter to Trump: Move Jeff Sessions to DHS, Fire Rod Rosenstein

Go here to see the original:
'Let's Just Stick to the Facts Here': Tucker vs. Democrat on Illegal ... - Fox News Insider

Joe Arpaio was found guilty Monday of criminal contempt for defying a judges order to stop detaining illegal immigrants, but the former sheriff isnt going down without a fight.

Shortly after U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton issued her verdict, Arpaio attorney Jack Wilenchik said the longtime lawman of Maricopa County, Arizona, once known as Americas toughest sheriff, plans to appeal and press for a jury trial.

Joe Arpaio is in this for the long haul, and he will continue his fight to vindicate himself, to prove his innocence and to protect the public, Mr. Wilenchik said in a statement.

He said the judge violated the United States Constitution by issuing her verdict without even reading it to the defendant in public court. Her verdict is contrary to what every single witness testified in the case. Arpaio believes that a jury would have found in his favor, and that it will.

Mr. Arpaio, 85, who served as sheriff for 24 years before losing his seventh bid for office in November, faces a maximum six months in jail at his Oct. 5 sentencing, but court watchers say the judge is unlikely to put him behind bars, given his age.

Critics of Mr. Arpaios hard line on illegal immigration, his penchant for seeking publicity and his unorthodox incarceration methods he built a tent city for inmates and had them wear pink underwear cheered the verdict.

For more than 24 years, Joe Arpaio has sowed fear in our communities and tarnished the publics confidence in our law enforcement, said Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Democrat. Todays ruling confirms what many of us have known all along: Mr. Arpaios actions as sheriff were well beyond his jurisdiction, and he knowingly abused his authority for years.

Meanwhile, Arpaio supporters slammed what they described as the injustice of the verdict, insisting that the former lawman was guilty only of attempting to protect the public by enforcing the nations immigration laws when the Obama administration would not.

This is a complete travesty of justice, said James Fotis, president of the National Center for Police Defense, who observed the five-day trial in Phoenix.

As I sat in the courtroom and listened to Sheriff Joe Arpaios trial, I knew any reasonable man or woman who was there to pass judgment on this honest, law-abiding man who gave his life to the rule of law could never find him guilty on the evidence presented, Mr. Fotis said.

Judge Bolton found that Mr. Arpaio violated a 2011 court order barring him from detaining suspected undocumented aliens unless they were implicated in criminal offenses other than being in the country illegally.

From May 2011 to December 2013, the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office Human Smuggling Units shift summaries showed that 171 people were turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without being charged with crimes.

Judge Bolton said Mr. Arpaio showed a flagrant disregard for U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snows preliminary injunction, which became permanent two years later, by conducting business as usual no matter who said otherwise.

Defendant stated on numerous occasions that he would continue to keep doing what he had been doing, Judge Bolton said in her 14-page decision. Defendant said he will continue to enforce illegal immigration laws just seven days after the issuance of the preliminary injunction.

Mr. Wilenchik, who argued during the trial that the Snow order was murky and subject to misinterpretation, said Judge Bolton found that it clearly said something that it did not even say: that the MCSO was prohibited from turning illegal aliens over to Border Patrol or ICE.

Every witness in the case testified that the order was not clear, even though Judge Bolton and her fellow judge say so, Mr. Wilenchik said. Numerous law enforcement agencies also continue to do this. In fact, the DOJ now goes after agencies that refuse to do this.

Before the trial began June 26, Arpaio attorneys fought to bring the case before a jury, but Judge Bolton and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the request.

In May 2016, Mr. Arpaio was found guilty of civil contempt of court, along with three of his aides, in connection with a racial profiling case. Judge Snow said they demonstrated a persistent disregard for the orders of this court.

The legal battle has proved costly to taxpayers: The county last year established a $400,000 fund to pay victims of racial profiling up to $10,000 each while spending nearly $80 million on legal bills associated with cases from his office, according to last years Associated Press estimate.

Cecillia Wang, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the contempt conviction was vindication for the many victims of Joe Arpaios immigration policies, which were unconstitutional to begin with, and were doubly illegal when Arapio flouted the courts order.

Joe Arpaio learned his lesson the hard way no one, not even Americas so-called toughest sheriff, is above the law, she said in a statement.

The trial ended with closing statements on July 6. Early on, Mr. Arapios legal team attempted to call Attorney General Jeff Sessions to testify, but Judge Bolton quashed the defense subpoena.

Mr. Arpaio lost his re-election bid in November by 56 percent to 44 percent to Democrat Paul Penzone, who announced in April that he would shutter the 23-year-old tent city.

Read more from the original source:
Arpaio plans to appeal criminal contempt conviction over detention of illegal immigrants - Washington Times