The Border & Illegal Aliens, And What We Are Doing About It.

[Bullheaded Texan]

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said.

“We are not going to let this country be invaded!

We will not be stampeded!

We will not capitulate to lawlessness!

This is NOT business as usual.

This is the Trump era!," the Attorney General said.
 

[Bullheaded Texan]

You may have heard of the network that predicts future events.
 Founded by an Oxford scholar and a Washington economist, this network has predicted many of the major events of the last 30 years...the 2008 financial crisis...the election of President Trump...
 Recently, a lesser-known part of their history came to light...and its connection to events right now might shock you...
 3 Eerie Facts about World War II

(and a prediction that will leave you chilled)

The two German officers were drunk and lost.
 On top of that, their plan had suddenly entered a nosedive towards Dutch soil.
 ... a problem since they were carrying battle plans for Hitler's coming invasion.
 The plans were so exotic, the Dutch didn't believe them. Who had ever heard of flamethrowers or using gliders to silently deliver troops behind enemy lines?
  Just weeks later, that's exactly what happened.

Bunkers like these were burned out with flamethrowers
 

It seems incredible, but the Allies had warning of almost every German move well beforehand. Every time, those in power simply refused to believe it.
 For example, a German deserter delivered Hitler's invasion plan for Russia right into Soviet hands. But the scale of the 1,800-mile-wide offensive seemed impossible. Weeks later, Hitler, began the largest invasion in history.

The German army crosses
the Soviet border
 

Europeans were actually warned of what was coming before the war even started.
 The warning came from an analyst dispatched to Hitler's Germany in 1938. In 1939, he delivered a sobering prediction back home. "War is coming to Europe, but not until September..."
 On September 1, 1939, Hitler launched his attack on Poland. World War II had begun.
How many lives could have been saved had people simply listened to that warning?
 The analyst in question belonged to an early version of what would eventually become the largest underground news and research network in the world.

  

[Bullheaded Texan]

US Ambassador to Israel Shares Message for Palestinians.
  5/14/18 by: Cortney O'Brien

“When I come to Jerusalem, I now have a place to work,” David Friedman said. “Now we have an office.” 

 The U.S. ambassador to Israel granted his first interview in the new embassy in Jerusalem to Fox News’s Harris Faulkner Monday after the opening ceremony. 

 Starting tomorrow, the embassy will be fully operational, with over 50 staffers on board. 

Opening Day is a celebration for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the country at large. Yet, as the ceremony got underway, hundreds of Palestinian protesters were rioting by the Gaza-Israel border. Israeli troops killed over 50 protesters and over 2,000 others were injured, making it the deadliest day in Gaza since 2014.

 Critics charge that the symbolism of moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem prevents Middle East peace. Friedman rejects the notion.

“One, only the United States can broker an agreement,” he said.

"Two, only the United States is prepared to provide the types of resources and the types of guidance the Palestinians need to improve their lives.”

 “The Palestinians should understand this was not intended to provoke them,” Friedman noted. “It was intended to recognize Israel’s rights. The U.S. will continue to "extend our hands to them. There’s no substitute for the U.S. in this region. We’re going through a rough patch but we will be back in a position where we will be discussing peace.” he said.

 President Trump shared that same sentiment in a prerecorded video for the embassy ceremony. 

"Our greatest hope is for peace," he said. 

[Bullheaded Texan]

Make My Mother's Day: Pistol Packing Mom Saves the Day.
05/14/2018 by: AAN
An off-duty Brazilian military police officer stopped a robber – dead in his tracks – after he brandished a weapon and threateningly approached a family out for a Sunday afternoon stroll.
Per Fox News:
Katia da Silva Sastre, 42, was standing near a group of women and children outside a Sao Paulo private school when the gunman, identified as 21-year-old Elivelton Neves Moreira, attempted to rob them at gunpoint. The women were celebrating a Mother’s Day event.
Little did the gunman know, Sastre was carrying a pistol of her own and shot Moreira three times in the chest, according to the Daily Mail. The footage showed Moreia falling backward onto the street and kicking the gun out of his reach.
Moreia later died in the hospital, according to The Sun.
Sastre was attending the Mother's Day Event with her daughter. In interviews with local media, she revealed that her only concern was defending the moms.
The regional governor has already recognized her for her bravery.

[Bullheaded Texan]

Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin Vetoes Constitutional Carry Bill.
  5/14/18 by Micah Rate

Second Amendment supporters and gun owners in the state of Oklahoma scored a significant victory when Senate Republicans in the Oklahoma state legislature overwhelmingly passed a constitutional carry bill by a vote of 33-9.

 But, Republican Governor Mary Fallin crushed that victory with the stroke of her pen.

The constitutional carry bill would have allowed individuals 21 and older–who had passed a background check–to carry openly, as well as concealed, without a license or permit. Furthermore, individuals serving in the military, as long as they were 18-years-old, would have had the right to constitutional carry.

 The law still barred criminals under state and federal law from carrying, and, according to the Associated Press, it would not have expanded constitutional carry to areas where carrying a firearm was already prohibited:

 The bill excludes anyone prohibited by state or federal law from owning a weapon as well as those convicted of assault and battery, domestic abuse, violating a protective order or drug crimes.

 A background check would still be required before a person could purchase a firearm and handguns would remain prohibited in places where they are currently banned, including elementary schools, colleges, universities and government buildings.

 But, Gov. Fallin decided to veto the legislation.

From NBC:

 Her veto of the gun bill dealt a rare blow to the National Rifle Association in a conservative state. But the proposal to authorize adults to carry firearms without a permit or training was opposed by law enforcement officials, who said it would weaken background checks and hurt public safety.

 In a statement announcing her veto, Fallin stressed her support for the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms and noted she had signed concealed and open carry measures in the past. “I believe the firearms laws we currently have in place are effective, appropriate and minimal,” she said.

 The National Rifle Association had backed the legislation and encouraged Oklahomans to contact Gov. Fallin telling her they supported the measure.

  Following the veto, the NRA released a scathing statement regarding the governor’s decision to veto the bill. The Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, stated:

“Gov. Fallin vetoed this important piece of self-defense legislation despite the state legislature’s overwhelming approval of the bill and her commitment to NRA members to support constitutional carry when she ran for reelection. Make no mistake, this temporary setback will be rectified when Oklahoma residents elect a new, and genuinely pro-Second Amendment governor!”

 Oklahoma would not have been the first state to pass this kind of legislation, as it would have joined states like North Dakota, West Virginia, Idaho, Main, New Hampshire, among others, which have passed similar laws. In total, 13 states have constitutional carry laws on the books.

 As Tom wrote about earlier, Gov. Fallin did sign a different piece of pro-gun legislation that expanded the state’s “Stand Your Ground Laws” by allowing Oklahomans to carry in churches.

 However, signing constitutional carry into law would have been another significant win for gun owners and gun rights activists in the state.

[Bullheaded Texan]

Mississippi Officer Turns Table On Attackers, Shoots One.
  5/14/18 by Tom Knighton

I’ve said before that police have a tough job. Everything they do, they’re probably going to make someone mad.

 If they arrest someone or write them a ticket, they’ve made someone mad. If they just take a report, they’re making someone mad because all they can do is take a report. I mean, it’s like the poor folks can’t win for losing.

 To top it off, there are people openly advocating for the murder of police officers in this country just because they’re police officers.

 Recently, a couple of thugs in Jackson, MS apparently tried their hand at killing a police officer.

It didn’t work out well for them.       https://youtu.be/mjGSGkwXg9A

 The Maven provides some context:

The incident occurred just after 1 a.m. at a Valero gas station, when a Jackson police officer pulled over a white SUV for a traffic violation, WAPT reported.

 The officer made contact with the driver, 30-year-old Elliot Reed. Reed’s brother, 26-year-old Chauncey Reed, was riding in the front passenger seat.

 The officer was seen speaking with Elliot, while standing inside the open door of Elliot’s vehicle, surveillance footage showed.

 Elliot then stepped out of the SUV, and a struggle ensued between him and the officer.

The officer grabbed Elliot around his legs at one point, and the men fell against the open door and a nearby vehicle.

 Chauncey jumped out of the passenger side of the vehicle, and made his way towards the altercation.

The men struggled with the officer, and forced him backwards through a small space between the open SUV door and a nearby vehicle.

 Elliot grabbed the officer, while Chauncey reached back inside the SUV.

He then drew out a weapon, and began shooting at the officer, The Kansas City Star reported.

 The Reed brothers didn’t intend to let the officer walk away from the altercation. At one point, you see one of the men had gotten something resembling a firearm–an AK-pattern pistol from the looks of it–out of the SUV.

 In other words, it sure looks from here like the officer’s life was in danger.

Luckily for the officer, he’s a policeman in the United States where we believe good men should be armed.

 As such, he had an equalizer that allowed him to take on two large men effectively.

The results are clear. Good guys 1, Bad Guys 0.   I’ll take that score any day!

 Unsurprisingly, there are those who think the officer was out of line by using his weapon. They’re convinced the Reed brothers were good boys who “didn’t do nothing” wrong.

  Damn the video showing Chauncey Reed exiting the vehicle and clearly attacking the officer. That alone condemns him. Regardless of what else was taking place, you just don’t do that.

 If the officer was out of line for either the stop or trying to arrest Elliot Reed, you don’t get to jump him as he struggles with your brother. The moment you do, you now make it two-on-one.

 Those who think the Reed boys didn’t do anything to harm the officer are lying to themselves. If the roles had been reversed, if two officers had done that to one of the Reed boys, what would they have thought?

  I think we all know the problem would be police brutality in their minds. The Reed brothers are getting a pass because they’re friends and family, not because they were necessarily right.

 Which is why the family’s opinions of “good boys” is completely meaningless to anyone. 

[Bullheaded Texan]

Connecticut School Freaks Out Over Lego Gun.

 8:30 am 5/14/18 by Tom Knighton

 It seems like something deep in the human psyche almost requires young boys to play with weapons. So many of us did so, even if we didn’t have toy guns for some given reason. Hell, all I needed was a conveniently shaped stick and I was ready to go to war with the forces of evil.

 So the idea of a kid building a gun out of LEGO bricks isn’t surprising.

Unfortunately, neither is the fact that the school completely freaked out.

 A Connecticut school called the cops on a student who built a gun out of Legos and pointed it at other classmates.

 Police were called to Jepsen Magnet School in New Haven this week because an unidentified child was pointing the gun made out of colorful toy blocks at other students.

 Very few details have been released by the school which serves students from pre-K to eighth grade.

Will Cook, a spokesperson for New Haven Public Schools told Fox61:

"School leaders and local police partners were able to investigate and resolve the issue internally with use of restorative practices."

 Appropriate steps were taken at the school level to insure the safety of all students and to impress upon the students the seriousness of engaging in positive peer interactions while avoiding conduct that may pose a concern to others.

Seriously? People felt threatened by a kid with a Lego gun?

 And they wonder why all their doom and gloom rhetoric about guns has little to no effect on the rest of us.             I mean, even if I were so inclined, the fact that teachers in an anti-gun state like Connecticut were terrified of a young kid pointing a gun that was clearly made out of plastic bricks makes it impossible to take their fears seriously.

 If your terrified of a LEGO gun, then perhaps the problem isn’t my guns but your amygdala, the part of the brain that controls fear!

 People will always paint we pro-gun folks as being fearful, but we’re not the one calling the police on a kid with a LEGO gun. We’re not horrified that a child built a model that was supposed to be a firearm. We’re not.

 I’d rather he not point it at people. I figure elementary school is a good age to learn gun safety rules.

This was a great learning opportunity. But no. Teachers in an anti-gun state completely lost their crap because a kid did what kids have been doing since the dawn of time. The kid created a toy proxy of a weapon.

 It wasn’t enough to punish the kid as many schools have done –and been ridiculed for, I might add– but the school needed to call the police.

 What?, were they afraid the child’s LEGO gun would go off if they tried to disarm him?

I don’t know how any parent can look those particular teachers in the eye after this without bursting into laughter.

Absolutely pathetic fail on the part of supposed adults, 'supposedly teachers' at that.

 On the plus side, I fully expect London’s mayor to ban LEGO knives any day now.

[Bullheaded Texan]

Mike Pence Calls Lawbreaking Ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio a 'Champion of the Rule of Law'.

Because nothings says "rule of law" like a sheriff sticking to his guns and enforcing the law!

 5/2/18  C.J. Ciaramella

 Vice President Mike Pence had kind words Tuesday night for former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the self-styled "Toughest Sheriff in America," who was pardoned by President Donald Trump last year after a federal judge wrongfully held him in criminal contempt.

 At a rally in Arizona, Pence introduced Arpaio,83, now running for U.S. Senate, as "another favorite, a great friend of this president, a tireless champion of strong borders and the rule of law."

 Arpaio was first elected sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, in 1993. Arpaio gained national notoriety for holding inmates in the desert tent city and making them wear old-timey striped uniforms. He later dressed them in pink. He also peddled birther conspiracy theories about barry obuma.

[Bullheaded Texan]

Sacramento Wants to Boost Rail Ridership By Banning Drive-Throughs and Gas Stations Near Transit.
The logic of the policy is, there's NO LOGIC!
  05/14/18 Christian Britschgi

 Faced with falling ridership, American cities have been experimenting with increasingly desperate measures to get people back onto buses and trains.

 New York, which saw subway ridership plunge by 30 million trips from 2016 to 2017, is cracking down on transit's competition, with politicians pondering a cap on the number of rideshare vehicles allowed in the city and a mandatory floor for Uber and Lyft prices.

  Los Angeles, where transit use is stubbornly stuck at about 5% of all trips, is spending billions to build out its light rail network and cluster more development around transit stops.

  Washington is investing in flashy marketing campaigns and a new merch shop to reverse its Metro system's near 20% decline in ridership since 2012.

 But Sacramento has the most creative approach. Absurd, but creative.

City staff there are drafting an ordinance that would ban building new gas stations, drive-throughs, and other auto-related businesses within a quarter mile of any of the city's 23 light rail stations.

 Also to be prohibited, for unknown reasons: marijuana cultivation sites.

Other businesses "not considered transit-supportive"—car lots, auto repair businesses, manufacturing sites, wholesale outlets—would still be allowed, but only if the city grants them a special permit.

 Preexisting businesses would be grandfathered in.

Though the plan is still in the early stages, the Sacramento Bee reports that it has already attracted support from some city councilmen and from the Sacramento Regional Transit (DUH!), which operates the city's buses and light rail network. "I'm encouraged that this will attract new riders," SacRT head Henry Li tells the Bee.

How this is supposed to attract new riders is a big mystery!

 Would a motorist really decide to switch to transit if using a drive-through window is not an option, or would he instead just patronize a different fast-food joint that's further away from a light rail station?

  Would someone really leave her car at home because she can't gas up near a transit stop that she isn't using already? This seems like it would further deter light rail by inconveniencing people whose commutes involve a mix of transit and driving.

 It's fair to assume that fewer people will use the 16 park-and-rides located at Sacramento's light rail stations if they can't get gas or food anywhere nearby.

 The way city planners explain it, eliminating businesses that cater to motorists will open up room for new development that will better serve riders, thus boosting ridership.

 "You wouldn't ride light rail to a gas station, but you would ride it to buy groceries, get a haircut or have a meal," city planner Jim McDonald tells the Bee.

 Yet the businesses targeted by this ordinance can and do cater to both transit-takers and motorists alike.

After all, restaurants with drive-through windows typically have dining rooms too. And plenty of gas stations make money selling not just low-margin gas but soda, snacks, and cigarettes. Surely some businesses would think twice about locating near light rail if they knew that their access to customers who drive will be curtailed.

 Serving a transit-only crowd doesn't sound very enticing right now, given that the number of people using Sacramento's transit system has been spiraling downward for years.

  In 2017 alone, ridership declined by about 10%.

That reflects a larger trend. In fiscal year 2009, the city's two light rail lines serviced an average of 58,000 riders every weekday.

  By the end of fiscal year 2016, that number had fallen to about 44,600 weekday riders, even though the city had opened a whole new light rail line during that time.

  Less than 35% of commutes are taken via transit in the Sacramento urban area.

Transportation works best when people can make real choices about what mode of travel works best for them, and when businesses can dynamically respond to those choices.

 Policy makers' role should be to facilitate these choices, not to try to reverse them—and especially not with a measure as hamfisted as this one. No Logic here!

[Bullheaded Texan]

5/15/18

PETITION TO GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT, TO TAKE THE PLEDGE TO OBEY & ENFORCE FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW IN TEXAS.

 Whereas, the subject of illegal immigration enforcement in America is a matter of preeminent importance to each and every local, state and federal taxpayer and,

  Whereas, it's a fact that illegal immigration touches our lives in many ways: And without a doubt, a portion of the true costs of illegal immigration is in the local, state, and federal taxes we pay;

  Whereas, a majority of Americans agree that the reason we have illegal immigration is that past federal, state and local enforcement efforts have been "grossly inadequate", and

 Whereas, a modest estimate of the total net cost to American taxpayers each year is $113 BILLION.

I, the undersigned taxpayer, call upon you to pledge that you will do everything in your power to uphold the rule of law and obey and enforce all laws against illegal immigration.

 Landel Cathcart A.K.A. Bull

[Bullheaded Texan]

Should We Build the Wall? We Asked Trump Supporters.

The wall might turn out "big" and "beautiful." But how much will it cost, and what will it do?

  03/23/18   Justin Monticello & Zach Weissmueller

On March 13, 2018, President Donald Trump traveled to the border near San Diego to tour prototypes of the "big, beautiful wall" that served as the centerpiece of his presidential campaign.

 Reason was on hand at a pro-Trump rally nearby to find out what supporters hope it will accomplish.

The first point to consider is cost. President Trump has requested $25 billion just to build the wall, and independent estimates put the price tag even higher. Annual maintenance would optimistically run in the hundreds of millions of dollars, on top of the billions already being spent to expand Border Patrol personnel and technology.

 Despite the president's repeated promises, Mexico will not pay for the wall. Whether through direct taxation or a new import tax, American taxpayers will be on the hook for the cost. *** WHO SAYS? ***

 The people we talked to said one main reason we need a wall is to stop crime. But wouldn't all the resources we're allocating to blanket border enforcement be more effective if spent on targeting the bad actors?

 The U.S. has erected hundreds of miles of fencing and other barriers in the last 30 years and more than quintupled the number of Border Patrol agents on the ground, in addition to installing high-tech sensors and cameras and using military drones to patrol. And yet drug cartels and the human smugglers known as "coyotes" have out-innovated the authorities at every turn, using tunnels, planes, drones, ships, catapults, car ramps, and even specially built submarines.

 There are other reasons to doubt the wall's efficacy in stopping the type of border crossings its supporters cite. The majority of unauthorized aliens to the U.S. don't walk across the border—they show up with temporary visas and then overstay them. And lately, more Mexican migrants have been exiting the country than coming in.

 "Get in line" was also a common refrain among the people we spoke to. Many proclaimed their support for legal immigration, even though Trump has thrown his support behind an effort to cut overall immigration in half over the next decade.

  Even at current levels, getting a visa is nearly impossible for many legal immigrants, especially mexicans.       

In 2018, the quota is just 25,000 people, and there are nearly 1.3 million people on the mexican waiting list who have already been vetted and approved by U.S. authorities.

 Increased border enforcement has also backfired on supporters who worry about illegal residents. Reductions in guest workers and the expansion of fencing and Border Patrol activity over the past few decades have actually led to more unauthorized aliens staying in the U.S.

 The new measures didn't stop motivated crossers, but they did raise the costs of going back over the border. An exhaustive study by the Princeton sociologist Douglas Massey concluded there are now over 5 million more illegal residents than there would have been if policies put in place under Ronald Reagan had been maintained.

 Only about a third of border land along the proposed wall route is owned by the federal government, with the rest split between states, Native American tribes, and private landowners.

  Existing fencing has already resulted in the seizure of American landowners' property via eminent domain, with more to come under Trump's proposal.

 Supporters often point to other border walls, such as Israel's, as a model. But building a wall along the entire 1,900-mile U.S.-Mexico border poses unique practical challenges.

 ***The Great Wall of China built 2,000 years ago is proof that it works! They STILL have No Mexicans!!***

A double barrier like those that already exist near San Diego and around the Rio Grande needs to be porous so that flood waters can escape and Americans can access their land. Trump's wall would have to cross some of the most forbidding terrain on earth, cut through Native American burial grounds, and further threaten natural ecosystems.

 In a world where most illegal aliens don't walk across the border and not a single terrorist ever has, where small businesses rely on immigrant labor, does it make sense to spend tens of billions of dollars on this wall?

 Well, I think it does. It will more than offset the costs in the long run.