Both parties make money off perpetuating immigration problems

2,718 Views | 17 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by GrowlTowel
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Understanding The Big Racket.

Massive illegal immigration is supported by both sides of the professional political machine. There are few issues more unifying for the K-Street purchased voices of DC politicians than keeping the borders open and the influx of illegal aliens as high as possible. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce pays politicians to keep this system in place.

All Democrats and most Republicans support mass immigration. Almost no DC politicians want to take action on any policy or legislation that stops the influx. There are billions at stake. None of the GOP leadership want to actually stop illegal immigration; it's a lucrative business. Almost all of the CONservative groups and politicians lie about it.

The religious right is also part of the problem. In the past 15 years illegal immigration and refugee settlement has been financially beneficial for them. The prior actions of Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck et al show they are as committed to facilitating illegal immigration as Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Flake, Ben Sasse, Kevin McCarthy, Lisa Murkowski and the rest of the Decepticons.

Washington DC and the activist media, are infested with illegal immigration supporters; the issue is at the heart of the UniParty. Follow the money. It's the Acorn model:



There is no greater disconnect from ordinary Americans on any singular issue than the policy positions of Democrats and Republicans in Washington DC surrounding immigration. President Donald Trump is confronting their unified interests.

All political opposition to the Trump administration on this issue is structured, planned and coordinated. The issue is a valuable tool for the professional political class to sow chaos amid politicians.

The resulting crisis is useful for them; therefore they fuel the crisis.




Southwest Key has been given $310,000,000, in taxpayer funds so far in 2018. And that's just one company, in one part of a year. This specific "Private Company" nets 98.76% of earnings from government grants (link).


Quote:

[Houston Mayor Sylvester] Turner said he met with officials from Austin-based Southwest Key Programs, the contractor that operates some of the child shelters, to ask them to reconsider their plans. A spokeswoman for Southwest Key didn't immediately reply to an email seeking comment.
"And so there comes a point in time we draw a line and for me, the line is with these children," said Turner during a news conference Tuesday. (link)

"The thought that they are going to be putting such little kids in an institutional setting? I mean it is hard for me to even wrap my mind around it," said Kay Bellor, vice president for programs at Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which provides foster care and other child welfare services to migrant children. "Toddlers are being detained." (link)
Do you know why kids are targeted for smuggling?

They are worth more money; that's why.



"Faith Based Immigration Services" is a code-speak for legalized human smuggling.

Human smuggling is big business. If you dig in to the IRS 990 forms you'll see a lot of, well, "generous" wage/benefit perks. Golf, florists, cafe's, mysterious leases, land purchases, third party mortgages, $$$ Spouses on the payroll, etc.

So when you've got each individual immigration business making multi-hundreds of millions; and politicians getting kick-backs (lobbyists); and bribes to Mexican government officials; and payments to smugglers; who do you think actually wants the business to stop?



The "faith-based" crew (Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck, etc.) don't want it to stop, because facilitating illegal alien import is now the financial bread and butter amid groups in their base of support. The man/woman in the pew might not know; but the corporation minister, preacher or priest (inside the process) surely does.

The Wall Street, big GOPe, U.S. Chamber of Commerce crew doesn't want it to stop because they benefit from it (cheap labor), and the taxpayers -not them- are the ones funding it.



Sad thing is, it's you and me that are paying the South American human smugglers through U.S. taxpayer funds. Laundered through the immigration business bagmen at U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and/or, U.S. Catholic Charities, or Southwest Key Programs Inc; or Baptist Child and Family Services Emergency Management Division (BCFS-EMD), just to name a few.

These immigration groups, get *MASSIVE* HHS grants and then pay-off the DC politicians and human smugglers, including MS13. Billions of dollars are spent, and the business has exploded in the past six years.
It's a vicious cycle. Trafficked children are more valuable than adults because the organizations involved get more funding for a child than an adult. Each illegal alien child is worth about $56,000 in grant money. The system is full of fraud.

From prior research approximately 65% of the money they get is spent on executive pay and benefits, opaque administrative payrolls, bribes, kick-backs to DC politicians and payoffs to the South American smugglers who bring them more immigrants.

As best it can be determined, approximately 35% ($19,000) is spent on the alien/immigrant child; maybe. It gets sketchy deep in their accounting.

All of those advocates gnashing their teeth and crying on television have no idea just who is controlling this process; and immigration idiots like Ted Cruz are only adding more fuel, more money, to the bottom line:






President Trump is not only threatening to secure the border, he's threatening a Washington DC-based business model that makes money for a lot of interests. The operation also has side benefits for the participants; child sexploitation, child labor, and yes, much worse (you can imagine).

LINK
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~ John Adams
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
Neither party would allow that to happen.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~ John Adams
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
Once in a while you make an actual point and, as such, I will respectfully respond.

How would comprehensive immigration reform have any impact on the estimated 600,000 people walking illegally into our country every year? The gist of the Obama bill was to legalize the Dreamers and to provide for more boarder security. However, many in your party have likened the boarder security to the KKK or Nazis. How can the current, smaller boarder security be KKK/Nazis but a future, larger boarder security not be?

Comprehensive immigration reform will not stop the flow of illegals into the country. And you know dang well the that left will not tolerate a larger, boarder security to round up illegals and ship them out.

All comprehensive immigration will do is legalize millions here illegally. The left will never change its love affair with millions of unskilled illegals pouring into the country.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
Once in a while you make an actual point and, as such, I will respectfully respond.

How would comprehensive immigration reform have any impact on the estimated 600,000 people walking illegally into our country every year? The gist of the Obama bill was to legalize the Dreamers and to provide for more boarder security. However, many in your party have likened the boarder security to the KKK or Nazis. How can the current, smaller boarder security be KKK/Nazis but a future, larger boarder security not be?

Comprehensive immigration reform will not stop the flow of illegals into the country. And you know dang well the that left will not tolerate a larger, boarder security to round up illegals and ship them out.

All comprehensive immigration will do is legalize millions here illegally. The left will never change its love affair with millions of unskilled illegals pouring into the country.
Here's is what the Republicans would not allow a vote on because they knew it enjoyed broad support and would have passed. Tell me what part(s) of this comprehensive plan you object to:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/01/29/read-president-obamas-immigration-proposal/?utm_term=.a30e40c0ce2d
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
We could have had it 8 years before that if the Democrats didn't paint GWB into a box. This isn't a 1 way street
Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trey3216 said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
We could have had it 8 years before that if the Democrats didn't paint GWB into a box. This isn't a 1 way street
What did the Dems do to paint GWB into a box?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

trey3216 said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
We could have had it 8 years before that if the Democrats didn't paint GWB into a box. This isn't a 1 way street
What did the Dems do to paint GWB into a box?
Do you pray to the DNC every morning?

Are you an NPC?

You are the only person who won't criticize both parties on this site.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~ John Adams
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
Once in a while you make an actual point and, as such, I will respectfully respond.

How would comprehensive immigration reform have any impact on the estimated 600,000 people walking illegally into our country every year? The gist of the Obama bill was to legalize the Dreamers and to provide for more boarder security. However, many in your party have likened the boarder security to the KKK or Nazis. How can the current, smaller boarder security be KKK/Nazis but a future, larger boarder security not be?

Comprehensive immigration reform will not stop the flow of illegals into the country. And you know dang well the that left will not tolerate a larger, boarder security to round up illegals and ship them out.

All comprehensive immigration will do is legalize millions here illegally. The left will never change its love affair with millions of unskilled illegals pouring into the country.
Here's is what the Republicans would not allow a vote on because they knew it enjoyed broad support and would have passed. Tell me what part(s) of this comprehensive plan you object to:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/01/29/read-president-obamas-immigration-proposal/?utm_term=.a30e40c0ce2d
The part you seemed to overlook. How does comprehensive immigration reform keep illegals from flowing over the boarder?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

cinque said:

trey3216 said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
We could have had it 8 years before that if the Democrats didn't paint GWB into a box. This isn't a 1 way street
What did the Dems do to paint GWB into a box?
Do you pray to the DNC every morning?

Are you an NPC?

You are the only person who won't criticize both parties on this site.
"But even the bill's promise of an extra $4.4 billion for more border enforcement did not quell Republican opposition"

Twice as many Democrats voted for GWB's bill than did Republicans
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

Doc Holliday said:

cinque said:

trey3216 said:

cinque said:

We could have had comprehensive immigration reform years ago if the Republicans would have allowed the Obama bill that had wide bipartisan support to come to the floor.
We could have had it 8 years before that if the Democrats didn't paint GWB into a box. This isn't a 1 way street
What did the Dems do to paint GWB into a box?
Do you pray to the DNC every morning?

Are you an NPC?

You are the only person who won't criticize both parties on this site.
"But even the bill's promise of an extra $4.4 billion for more border enforcement did not quell Republican opposition"

Twice as many Democrats voted for GWB's bill than did Republicans
So you are cool with expanding an existing boarder security by 4.4 billion? Agencies many on the left already believe are akin to the KKK? What does another 4.4 billion bring the number of illegals crossing down to? Until the number is at or near zero, there can be no comprehensive immigration reform.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

From The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.


And good for them since you cannot answer the question. What you want to do is legalize the illegals and welcome more and more access.

How many illegals do we need? Until that is answered, there can be no compromise.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

From The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.


And good for them since you cannot answer the question. What you want to do is legalize the illegals and welcome more and more access.

How many illegals do we need? Until that is answered, there can be no compromise.
Says who?
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

From The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.


And good for them since you cannot answer the question. What you want to do is legalize the illegals and welcome more and more access.

How many illegals do we need? Until that is answered, there can be no compromise.
Says who?


Me. My side will never compromise until the question is answered. How many illegals do you need?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

KFrom The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.


And good for them since you cannot answer the question. What you want to do is legalize the illegals and welcome more and more access.

How many illegals do we need? Until that is answered, there can be no compromise.
Says who?


Me. My side will never compromise until the question is answered. How many illegals do you need?
I thought you were serious.
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

GrowlTowel said:

cinque said:

KFrom The Hill:

The Senate voted 68-32 Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, advancing President Obama's top second term priority and setting up a protracted battle with the House.

Senators took the rare step of voting from their desks to mark the occasion while Vice President Biden (D-Del.) presided from the dais. The Senate used the same formal procedure to pass ObamaCare three years ago.


The bill's authors fell just short of their goal to win 70 votes for the legislation but said the robust bipartisan vote creates a strong mandate for the House to act next month on the issue.

Thus is the bill House Republicans refused to bring to the floor.


And good for them since you cannot answer the question. What you want to do is legalize the illegals and welcome more and more access.

How many illegals do we need? Until that is answered, there can be no compromise.
Says who?


Me. My side will never compromise until the question is answered. How many illegals do you need?
I thought you were serious.
I am. You?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you listen to the farmers in Georgia and Iowa, we need more than we have.
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Soo, we have 22 million here now but the farmers in Iowa need more? Iowa only has around 3 million people in it.

Again, what is this great compromise you are proposing? Legalize the illegals and just continue to allow more in? Pretty sure we tried that in the 1980s and it didn't work.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.