Biden Border Policy Ignores U.S. Interests

The Biden Administration continues to ignore the will and best interests of the American people regarding illegal immigration.

Recent polls indicate that illegal immigration is the most frequently cited problem noted by Americans. Gallup notes that “a record-high 55% of U.S. adults, up eight points from last year, saying that “large numbers of immigrants entering the United States illegally” is a critical threat to U.S. vital interests.” A Monmouth survey found that “More than 8 in 10 Americans see illegal immigration as either a very serious (61%) or somewhat serious (23%) problem.”

During his State of the Union Address, President Biden attempted to blame opposition to legislation as a factor. However, rather than addressing the problem, the bill would have actually made the issue permanent by allowing vast numbers to enter the nation before any meaningful action was taken.

The dilemma is unique, in that this wasn’t a challenge that occurred, but rather one that was self-induced by the Biden Administration when it reversed existing measures that had been working.

Public reaction has become further inflamed due to recent and stunning revelations that the Biden White House secretly flew 320,000 illegals into the U.S. from Latin American airports. Any Administration spin that this was a problem they hoped to deal with fell apart. It is obvious that the president has actually encouraged, aided and facilitated unlawful entry into the country, despite the massive financial and criminal challenges it causes.

A House Judiciary Committee report reports that “Far from disincentivizing the flood of illegal immigration by detaining and removing illegal aliens, President Joe Biden and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas continue to release illegal aliens into U.S. communities en masse. In fact, in early December 2023, DHS officials admitted that “an average of 5,000 illegal aliens are currently being released into the U.S. each day at the border.” Even Secretary Mayorkas has acknowledged the high rate of releases, telling Border Patrol “that the current rate of release for illegal immigrants apprehended at the southern border is ‘above 85 [percent].”

House Republicans have released extraordinary statistics:

Since Joe Biden took office:

There have been 8.7 million illegal crossings nationwide.
- There have been OVER 7.2 MILLION illegal crossings of our Southern Border.
  - The total number of illegal immigrants who have entered through our Southern Border is greater than the population of 36 states. Including;
    - Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
- There have been 1.8 million known gotaways who evaded U.S. Border Patrol.
Since the start of FY 2024 there have been OVER 1 million illegal immigrant encounters.
In January, there were 176,205 illegal immigrants encountered at the Southern Border.
- January was the 35th straight month, where monthly illegal immigrant encounters have been higher than even the highest month seen under President Trump.
Under Biden, over 340 of these individuals whose names appear on the terrorist watchlist were stopped trying to cross the Southern Border.
- So far in FY24, there have been 58 individuals whose names appear on the terrorist watch list who have been stopped trying to enter the U.S. illegally between ports of entry.
- This total is more than the encounters in all FY17, FY18, FY19, FY20, FY21, and FY22 combined.
Over 20,000 Communist Chinese nationals have illegally crossed the Southern Border since FY24 began in October.
- Communist Chinese nationals are exploiting Joe Biden’s failed Far Left open border policies at “record-breaking figures,” becoming “the fastest-growing demographic entering the country illegally.”
- The surge in Communist Chinese nationals encountered at our Southern Border has raised serious concerns that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is exploiting the Biden border crisis for nefarious reasons.
- There are OVER 60 instances of Joe Biden and his Administration taking actions that undermined our nation’s border security, including halting the construction of the border wall.
- In August 2022, Biden and his Administration decided to make the border crisis WORSE by formally ending former President Trump’s successful ‘Remain in Mexico’ program.”
- The Biden Administration announced on May 10, 2023, that it would allow for the release of some migrants into the U.S. with no way to track them.
  - Biden’s Department of Homeland Security has now admitted that 40 percent of catch-and-release migrants have disappeared.

Why would President Biden pursue a policy that has clearly caused significant financial hardships for cities and states? A KFF study notes that “Immigrants, including naturalized citizens, lean more towards the Democrats when asked which political party represents their own views, which party best represents the interests of immigrants overall, and whether immigrants were better off under the Biden or Trump presidencies.”

Photo: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

What does the Reversal of Harvey Weinstein’s Conviction Portend for Donald Trump?

The New York Court of Appeals has upheld the ruling by the trial judge we closed yesterday’s article with. “Defendant argues that CPL 30.10 (4) (a) has only been applied to cases involving nonresidents,” the Court of Appeals stated. However, “[n]owhere does this provision distinguish between residents and nonresidents and we cannot read into the statute a limitation not adopted by the legislature…If the legislature intended this tolling provision to apply only to nonresidents or that courts should factor residency into a tolling analysis, it would have said so expressly.” (Citation omitted.) Further, “the statute [does not] contain any requirement that the tolling period apply once authorities know that a crime has been committed and, as with defendant’s proposed exclusion for New York residents, we reject defendant’s invitation to rewrite the statute to provide such limitation.” Thus, it is irrelevant whether Donald Trump was a resident of New York or not, nor does it matter whether or not the New York County District Attorney had any intention to charge the former President with a crime at the time the offense allegedly occurred. The time he spent outside New York stops the Statute of Limitations from running out. But what if Donald Trump (like Weinstein) had been in and out of New York during the time period in question? According to the Court of Appeals, “‘all periods of a day or more’ during a defendant’s absence from the state ‘should be totaled and toll the Statute of Limitations’…Logically, then, even a day’s absence counts.” (Citation omitted.) Thus, as we warned in May of last year, the prosecution of Donald Trump is not time-barred, based upon the extended time periods he spent outside of New York, serving his country as President of the United States. This issue, while significant, is only one ruling which could impact the Trump case. During the trial, we have witnessed several rulings which affect the former President’s ability to defend himself. For instance, in their opening statement to the jury, Prosecutors stated “This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover-up…[t]he defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 election, then covered it up.” In fact, according to The Hill, “[a]lthough Trump faces charges of falsifying business records, prosecutors will tell jurors a story that ranges from sex to politics to accounting, attempting to convince them that Trump criminally covered up a hush money deal to influence the 2016 presidential election. The district attorney’s first oration to the jury echoed two of Trump’s other criminal cases, which revolve around his alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 presidential election results after losing to President Biden. “It was election fraud – pure and simple,” [the prosecutor] said in his opening remarks.” Donald Trump is charged with falsifying his business records to disguise a “hush money” payment made to a woman who alleged he had an affair with her. That charge has been elevated to a felony based upon an intent to hide an underlying crime. The crime has never been adequately specified, but it appears to involve the violation of federal elections laws that enumerate the appropriate expenditure of campaign contributions. Now the Manhattan DA’s office is changing their theory by claiming the underlying crime is outright federal election fraud – an uncharged crime. Further, “[i]f Donald Trump takes the stand, prosecutors will be allowed to grill him under oath about several adverse rulings in his past civil cases, Justice Juan Merchan ruled…Prosecutors will be allowed to elicit testimony about Trump being found liable for fraudulently inflating his business assets in a suit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. They will also be allowed to question him about defamatory statements he made about writer E. Jean Carroll. In a civil case last year, a federal jury determined that Trump sexually abused Carroll in a department store in the 1990s, and in two civil cases, Trump was found liable for defaming Carroll. Merchan also ruled that, if Trump testifies, prosecutors can ask him about fines he received for violating a gag order in the business fraud case when he verbally attacked the law clerk of the judge overseeing that case.” Even Politico had to concede that this was “a significant loss for the former president that will complicate his self-declared plan to testify in his own defense.” This ruling is much more than a “loss” that complicates Trump’s ability to testify in his own defense. In fact, if Judge Merchan maintains this position, and also lets stand the prosecutor’s attempts to use proof that Trump allegedly “subverted” the 2020 Presidential election, under the Court of Appeals’ ruling in the Weinstein case, permitting these prejudicial matters into evidence is most certainly reversible error. “Every person accused of a crime is constitutionally presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial and the opportunity to present a defense, the Court of Appeals states in People v. Weinstein. “Under our system of justice, the accused has a right to be held to account only for the crime charged and, thus, allegations of prior bad acts may not be admitted against them for the sole purpose of establishing their propensity for criminality… It is our solemn duty to diligently guard these rights regardless of the crime charged, the reputation of the accused, or the pressure to convict.” In Harvey Weinstein’s case, “the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose. The court compounded that error when it ruled that defendant, who had no criminal history, could be cross examined about those allegations as well as numerous allegations of misconduct that portrayed defendant in a highly prejudicial light. The synergistic effect of these errors was not harmless. The only evidence against defendant was the complainants’ testimony, and the result of the court’s rulings, on the one hand, was to bolster their credibility and diminish defendant’s character before the jury. On the other hand, […]