Border "Crisis" is Based on Propaganda in Accord w/the Appetite of Trump’s Neuropeon Base: Native-born persons commit crimes @ higher rates than immigrants & Border Crossings in Decline for 2 Decades

trump white trash.jpg

From [HERE] The mayor of this Texas border city has been dealing with a crisis.

This week, he declared a state of emergency. Drones filled the skies and emergency vehicles raced down the streets. But none of it had anything to do with illegal immigration.

It had to do with the weather.

A severe thunderstorm caused widespread flooding throughout the Rio Grande Valley in recent days. That other crisis — the one President Trump says has been unfolding on the border because of illegal immigration — is largely a fiction, the mayor, Tony Martinez, and other Brownsville residents and leaders said.

“There is not a crisis in the city of Brownsville with regards to safety and security,” said Mr. Martinez, who has lived in Brownsville since the late 1970s. “There’s no gunfire. Most of the people that are migrating are from Central America. It’s not like they’re coming over here to try to take anybody’s job. They’re trying to just save their own lives. We’re doing fine, quite frankly.”

Mr. Martinez is a Democrat in a mainly conservative state, and many Republicans in Texas, like Mr. Trump, have raised an alarm over the numbers of migrants still flowing into Texas. But there is evidence, in federal data and on the ground in places like Brownsville that the immigration crisis Mr. Trump has cited over the past week to justify the separation of families is actually no crisis at all.

There has been no drastic overall increase in the number of immigrants crossing the border, and while the rugged frontier along the Rio Grande Valley has long been a transit point for drugs and the trouble that goes along with them, the violence of Mexico’s drug wars seldom spills into the United States.

In remarks and news releases this past week, Mr. Trump has repeatedly sounded alarm bells on the “crisis” and “mess” of illegal immigration at the southwestern border. At an event Friday with families whose loved ones had been killed by undocumented immigrants, Mr. Trump suggested that immigrants commit more crimes than citizens do. And at a campaign rally on Wednesday, he said that “illegal immigration costs our country hundreds of billions of dollars.”

“We have to do something about immigration in this country,” Mr. Trump said at a cabinet meeting on Thursday. “For 50 years, and long before that, it was a disaster. But over the last 20, 25 years, it’s gotten worse.”

The numbers suggest that this is not true.

Unauthorized crossings along the border with Mexico have sharply declined over the past two decades, according to government data. From the 1980s to the mid-2000s, the government reported annually apprehending around 1 million to 1.6 million people who tried to cross the southwestern border illegally. That number has been halved in recent years. By month, border apprehensions averaged more than 81,588 under President George W. Bush, declined to more than 34,647 under President Barack Obama and now stand at 24,241 under Mr. Trump.

The president is correct in citing a spike in illegal border crossings that occurred in March: The 37,393 individuals apprehended was a 203 percent increase over the same period in March 2017, though the number was lower than in 2013 and 2014.

Research shows that incarceration rates of both legal and undocumented immigrants across the country are lower than those of native-born Americans, and that the net economic impact of immigration is positive. Mr. Trump’s reference to illegal immigration costing “hundreds of billions of dollars” likely came from a heavily flawed study from an anti-immigration group that pinned the cost at $116 billion annually. Adjusting for the flaws, the impact would more accurately be stated as $3.3 billion to $15.6 billion, according to the libertarian Cato Institute.

As the numbers show, there is a stark disconnect between Mr. Trump’s border rhetoric and the reality of life in border cities like Brownsville.

While statistics show that native-born Americans commit crimes at higher rates than immigrants, Mr. Trump has long pushed a narrative that suggests otherwise.

“Americans have long believed that immigrants are more likely than natives to commit crimes and that rising immigration leads to rising crime,” the National Academy of Sciences wrote in a 2015 study. “This belief is remarkably resilient to the contrary evidence that immigrants are in fact much less likely than natives to commit crimes.

According to a 2017 report from the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, 1.53 percent of native-born Americans are incarcerated, compared with 0.85 percent of undocumented immigrants and 0.47 percent of legal immigrants.

The Marshall Project, in a 2018 analysis of data from 200 metropolitan areas over the last few decades, found that crime has fallen despite the immigrant population increasing. Other studies have found that the immigration has little effect on crime.

Inviting the families to speak to the public was another strategy for the president, who has railed against undocumented immigrants since his days on the campaign trail and whose rhetoric about them has intensified in recent days. He has branded many illegal immigrants as “murderers and thieves” who want to “infest our country.”

For Mr. Trump, the stories fit perfectly into his dark message about the threats coming over the border, which whipped up his supporters at rallies and helped motivate his voters at the polls. Stories from the victims’ families put a human face on Mr. Trump’s demand for a sprawling wall along the southern border. [MORE]

In a way, this is old news: Washington rhetoric has been colliding with realities on the ground for decades, regardless of the topic or the administration. But the president’s repeated descriptions of a chaotic, crime-ridden border have frustrated millions of Americans who live and work on the Southwest frontier.

“There’s this misconception that we’re in this lawless land, and it’s the wild, wild frontier, and it’s not,” said the Brownsville police chief, Orlando C. Rodriguez. “We see actually a downward trend in crime in Brownsville over the past few years, and the numbers are just getting better every year.”

There were a total of six homicides in Brownsville in 2017, up from four in 2016. Aggravated assault cases were at 259 in 2017, down from 264 in 2016 and from 292 in 2015. Robbery was at 133 in 2017, up from 130 in 2016 but down from 154 in 2015. Asked whether the city’s population of undocumented immigrants was committing widespread crime, Chief Rodriguez said they were most definitely not.

“To say that illegals are running around in Brownsville causing problems, we just don’t see it,” the chief said.

In Nogales, Ariz., which borders and shares its name with a Mexican city, the number of violent crimes plummeted by more than 70 percent from 1997 to 2016. Similar trends can be seen in San Luis, Somerton and Yuma. The overall crime rate in Arizona has also dropped by more than a third from 1993 to 2016. During that same time, the state’s undocumented-immigrant population more than doubled, according to the Pew Research Center.

President Trump has often cited crimes committed by the transnational gang MS-13 in cities as far from the southern border as New York. Gang members have indeed been responsible for a wave of violence, though some of them were born in the United States, and much of their mayhem is targeted at immigrant communities.

It is also true that Brownsville and other Southwest cities have their share of crime, poverty and social ills as a result of their proximity to the border.

The drug trade fuels public corruption. Stash houses in residential neighborhoods hide smuggled people and drugs. Police chases of smugglers’ vehicles often end in tragedy — in deadly collisions, fatal shootings and rollovers.

But such incidents often happen on or near “the line,” as many people refer to it — the physical border along the Rio Grande — or around the Border Patrol’s traffic checkpoints farther north. Out in the towns and neighborhoods, in the malls and the movie theaters, the border is at times a world away. [MORE]

[No Lost & Found Policy] Judge to ICE Cop in Court: "If someone at the jail takes your wallet, they give you a receipt. They take your kids, & you get nothing? Not even a slip of paper?"


Milk Carton Search. From [HERE] I sat across from my new client, a petite woman from Central America in her late 20s or early 30s, behind the plexiglass at the El Paso County Detention Facility. She had fled her country with her preteen son. Like many of the clients I’ve represented in the past four weeks, she had been charged with illegal reentry. She had no interest in discussing the charges, though. All she wanted to ask about was her son, who had been taken from her when she crossed the border. 

“Where is my child?” She demanded. “Why did this happen? Who took him? When will they tell me anything?” She made no effort to be courteous as she fired one question after another at me.

To all of her questions, I had to answer: I don’t know.

She stared me in the eye, indignant. “Why don’t you know?” she asked. “You’re my lawyer.”

As an assistant federal public defender, I’m not used to being in this position. I take pride in being able to provide information to clients, who are relying on me. I usually spend meetings cultivating the client’s trust, sharing legal expertise and answering their questions. In a typical meeting, the defendants in a federal criminal case ask the same questions: How much time am I looking at? What do these charges mean? Is my judge fair? Should I go to trial or plead guilty? But things are different in El Paso now.

In the wake of the Trump administration’s policy to purposely separate parents and children at the U.S.-Mexico border, my clients now ask: Where is my little girl? Who’s taking care of her? When do I get to see her again? Will they deport me without her? How will she be protected and by whom? How can I talk with her? Who will give her medicine if she’s sick? Gone are concerns about sentencing. It’s all about the parent and the missing child, separated not just by plexiglass and jail bars but by a gulf of the unknown. The president Wednesday signed an executive order ending the policy, but that changes nothing for my clients or the thousands of other parents who have already lost their kids at the border. The government does not yet appear to have a plan for reuniting families it has separated.

The client meetings have been crushing. One man sobs, asking how his small child could defend himself in a detention facility. One cries so uncontrollably, he is hardly able to speak. Question after crying question piles up from one client to the next. One man, short and large, sat hunched over for most of our conversation, weeping. Through tears, he stuttered and glanced up at me as he tried to explain what happened. The worst moment came when I held up a sheet with my office’s phone number and some other information. He said, with embarrassment, that he couldn’t read. The plight of these clients is compounded when a client can’t spell his missing child’s name, or even his own, in English or Spanish.

I have to explain to these parents that I might never be able to answer their questions. I can’t promise that they’ll be able to speak to their children, or know their whereabouts or who is taking care of them, or whether they’ll be sent back home without their kids. 

Why so many unknowns? This administration appears to have no infrastructure, policy or plan in place to deal with the destruction of families seeking refuge or a new life in our country. The disarray and confusion are on full display at the detention hearings I’ve attended for my clients — proceedings to determine whether a charged individual will be allowed to stay out on bond while their criminal case is pending.

During the hearing, the federal prosecutor puts an agent on the stand to give an account of what’s happened in the case, and then I am able to cross-examine. You would never know from the agent’s testimony that we’re dealing with a parent who has been separated from a child. That is not mentioned in the complaint. The prosecutor asks no questions about the child. At no point do they discuss the child. The child might as well not exist.

During cross-examination of one agent, I asked if she was aware that my client was arrested with his 4-year-old daughter. She said no. I was shocked, but this is the game. I asked whether she was the lead investigator, and if she had talked to field agents in this case. She said yes. I asked if it had become known to her that my client had his 4-year-old child with him. Yes, she said, but added that she didn’t know the child was a 4-year-old female.

The judge just glared at her. 

This is how it goes. I ask about the child; the government objects; the judge forces the agent to answer. The answer is always the same. 

“Do you know the location of the child?” No or unknown. 

“Did you provide my client with information as to the location of his child?” No or unknown. 

“Did you provide my client with any information as to how he could go about finding his child?” No or unknown. 

In a rare instance, one agent said a child was in a particular city — one far from El Paso. But of course, no details were known regarding the child’s specific location.

At another hearing before a different judge, as one of my colleagues asked the agent on the stand about the whereabouts of our client’s child, the prosecutor objected to the relevance of the questions. The judge turned on the prosecutor, demanding to know why this wasn’t relevant. At one point, he slammed his hand on the desk, sending a pen flying. This type of emotional display is unheard of in federal court. I can’t understand this, the judge said. If someone at the jail takes your wallet, they give you a receipt. They take your kids, and you get nothing? Not even a slip of paper?

Our office does what it can. If we’re lucky, we can determine that a client’s child is at least in the vicinity of El Paso. But those “answers” come only after calls and calls and calls to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). The process is so chaotic and byzantine that our office has tasked investigators, paralegals, administrative staffers and interns with calling and sitting on hold, waiting to speak to someone. Some of our investigators have waited nearly an hour just to get a person on the line. And once they find someone, their inquiries are met with vague statements that the child is in the United States. The ORR demands to speak directly to the parent of the child. We explain that the parent is in federal custody at local detention facilities, to no avail. We ask the local jails to facilitate the calls with the ORR. It took more than an hour for one call to be set up, so the jails stopped doing it. 

Meanwhile our clients, these traumatized parents, remain in custody on felony charges, despite no criminal history and, in many cases, only a single prior contact with the United States. They have no answer to the question any parent would have: When do I get to hold my beloved child again? Despite Trump’s declaration that he is ending the policy, I have little confidence that answers will be forthcoming.

While I’m an admittedly zealous defense attorney, always looking to challenge federal prosecutors on behalf of my clients, I’m generally able to step back and understand, if not agree with, the government’s reasoning for prosecuting federal crimes. Debate about what constitutes a crime and what is a fair punishment is as old as civilization. I believe it’s a valid and valuable discourse. But I cannot, for the life of me, understand or accept how the government believes that justice supported taking children from their parents at our borders. The government has discretion in charging crimes, removing individuals and all other aspects of criminal and immigration proceedings. The guiding principle should be to seek justice. 

But after seeing parents whose children were stolen away by the government, with no plan to reunite them, I know I am not seeing justice at work. And I don’t know how this will end.

Like the Unknown Number of Puerto Ricans Killed after Hurricane by Govt Malfeasance, Liar Trump 'Really Doesn't Care' or Know How Many Families He Destroyed ["Separated 2300"] or ["Re-United "512"]

trump fucks .jpg

Why Do We Believe these Numbers Provided by Racists & Parroted by Elite Media? If a Fly was in your soup would you continue to eat it? Exactly "2300" families separated and "500" blah blah reunited, is there any way to corroborate these figures provided by incompetent Government liars?

No Lost & Found Policy. Authorities made the decision to take children from their parents without a plan to reunite families, resulting in numerous cases of parents and children having no contact since being forcefully separated. One investigation reported that "The policy is being applied in such an opaque and ad hoc manner that government case workers, public defenders, federal prosecutors, judges, and the Border Patrol do not have clear answers about if, when, or where children will be reunited with their parents, or even whether separated parents are able to communicate with their kids by phone." When asked if separated parents will "just fall into a black hole" and be unable to reunite with their children unless they hire a lawyer, a Justice Department official replied that once the parent is in ICE custody, the child is taken into the Health and Human Services system, and the government does not try to reunite them. [MORE]

Watch Ho-Rep Rice at 14:57. From [HERE] The United States government has reunited 522 migrant children who were separated from adults as part of President Trump’s “zero tolerance” immigration policy, the Department of Homeland Security said late Saturday.

The government “knows the location of all children in its custody and is working to reunite them with their families,” the department said in a statement.

After weeks of public pressure, Mr. Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday meant to end the separation of families at the border by detaining them together for an indefinite period instead.

The separations began after the federal government announced in April that it would pursue a “zero tolerance” policy of criminally prosecuting every adult who illegally crossed the border or tried to do so.

While adults were sent to jail or indefinite detention, more than 2,300 children were separated and sent to government-licensed shelters or temporary foster care.

Government efforts to match separated migrant children with their guardians face considerable obstacles. Additionally, the process of reuniting families as well as the indefinite detention they face once they’re back together could have psychological consequences for parents and children alike, experts said.

The department said in the statement that 16 more children were expected to be reunited with adults within 24 hours. Earlier attempts for those children were delayed because of weather conditions that affected their ability to travel.

Some children will remain separated from the adults they were traveling with if a family relationship cannot be established or if there are concerns about the children’s safety with those adults, the department said.

As of Wednesday, there were 2,053 separated children being held in federal Department of Health and Human Services facilities, the statement said. Children can talk by telephone or video to a parent or guardian twice a week.

How Many White Immigrants Have Been Arrested? "New England Patriots" Shut Down Highways in Maine & NH Targeting Non-Whites who Look & Sound illegal

Border Patrol nazi.jpg

Liar Border Patrol Insists They Pay No Attention to Skin Color & Accent to Determine Who Might Appear To Them to Be Illegal. In a statement Customs and Border Protection said "Travelers have the right to remain silent." "Travelers who cooperate are passed through quickly, unless the agent suspects they are in violation of federal law. Travelers who refuse to cooperate may be referred to a secondary examination area to allow agents to conduct additional questioning to determine the traveler's citizenship or residency."

We are taught that the 5th Amendment protects everyone, even innocent people, from the need to answer questions if the truth might be used to help create the misleading impression that they were somehow involved in a crime that they did not commit. [MORE] This is Whitenology. The 4th and 5th Amendment are illusions to most non-white people. Race Soldiers so frequently abuse their power that no one can make a compelling argument that constitutional rights afford Non-White people any real protection from the Government. As explained by undeceiver Dr. Amos Wilson: "Laws in and of themselves will not protect us; laws are words written on paper; laws protect no one. Laws are no stronger than those who enforce them."

border patrol in NH.jpg

HI HOW ARE YOU? SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS. The following article was written by racist suspects at the NYT. The effort here is to notify about what Border Cops are doing but also to make it appear more reasonable. Whether done consciously or subconsciously White journalists often rationalize oppressive conduct done by their government. As stated by Neely Fuller, "There is no known code of White Supremacy that can be formally recognized as such in a single set of words or pictures. The basic code of white supremacy is the total pattern of everyday thought, speech and action of the individual white persons who practice it. All things that help to promote it are apart of the white code."

From [HERE] and [HERE] For 11 hours on Wednesday, drivers who wanted to travel through a remote stretch of northern Maine were asked a simple question: Where were you born?

Border Patrol agents closed off all southbound lanes of Interstate 95 north of Bangor, Me., stopping drivers, searching outside their cars with drug-sniffing dogs and refusing to let them pass until they disclosed their citizenship. At least one encounter was captured on cellphone video.

“Good afternoon, ma’am, U.S. Border Patrol immigration inspection,” an officer told two reporters with the Bangor Daily News who had heard about the checkpoint, about 80 miles from the Canadian border, and decided to drive to it and record their interaction. “What country are you a citizen of?”

The driver protested. “If you want to continue down the road, then yes, ma’am, we need to know what country you’re a citizen of,” the agent said.

The checkpoint in Maine was set up several days after agents conducted a three-day checkpoint on a New Hampshire highway, at least the second checkpoint in that state so far this year.

The recent checkpoints in Maine and New Hampshire resulted in the seizure of drugs and the arrest of at least six people on charges of being in the country illegally, according to Customs and Border Protection. Federal officials say the checkpoints are vital to confiscating illegal weapons, capturing suspected terrorists and catching people believed to be in the country illegally. [Vital to maintaining a corporate police state of terror and intimidation of non-whites.] 

  Without the Jewish star affixed to the clothing of all Jews aged 6 and older (and meticulous record keeping) there was no way to tell who was a semite and who was not in Nazi Germany. In the system of racism/white supremacy there is no need for non-whites to wear a star; they are targeted by skin color. 

Without the Jewish star affixed to the clothing of all Jews aged 6 and older (and meticulous record keeping) there was no way to tell who was a semite and who was not in Nazi Germany. In the system of racism/white supremacy there is no need for non-whites to wear a star; they are targeted by skin color. 

But drivers who encounter the checkpoints have long complained about them, saying they create unnecessary traffic jams and largely inconvenience local residents. They have also drawn the attention of legal groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, who have questioned the constitutionality of the checkpoints and sued the federal government twice in the past year over immigration stops in New Hampshire and Maine.

However, Border Patrol agents Claim they have been given broad legal authority, which has expanded during the current administration, to conduct the stops and other operations, and to ask anyone about their immigration status.

Inspections have also extended to bus and train stops, where federal agents in Florida, Maine, New York and Washington State have recently asked riders about their immigration status.

While the agency’s name might suggest that its purview is limited to the immediate border, officers can [do whatever they want under the law of the jungle] work in any area within 100 miles of the perimeter of the United States. It is a wide swath of the country that is home to an estimated 200 million Americans and fully covers at least 11 states. Maine’s international borders with Canada and the Atlantic Ocean make the entire state open to immigration authorities.

 Border Patrol Hunting for Non-Whites in NH last month. [  MORE  ]

Border Patrol Hunting for Non-Whites in NH last month. [MORE]

Such searches are common in New Hampshire, but one conducted last year was clouded in controversy after a New Hampshire judge ruled some of the searches were unconstitutional.

During Border Patrol stops made last year, several dozen people were charged with allegedly possessing small amounts of drugs for personal use after unlawful searches by cops.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire represented 16 of the people charged in a lawsuit fighting the charges.

The courts concluded their Fourth Amendment rights had been violated, highlighting evidence collected by customs and border protection agents could not be used in court. [MORE]

Attorneys representing the government in that case said the agents were in their jurisdiction and did not need warrants to conduct searches of people's vehicles.

It is difficult to determine how often the Border Patrol conducts highway checkpoints or stops riders at transportation stations. Customs and Border Protection issues news releases about the results of some of the stops but does not publish comprehensive details on how often they occur or how many people are stopped.

The nearly six-minute video of the Maine encounter offered a window into the reach and power of the Border Patrol at a time when its enforcement of the Trump administration’s “zero-tolerance” policy has come under intense criticism. The reporters asked a Border Patrol agent why the checkpoint had been set up.

“It’s just a random checkpoint. It’s within 100 miles of the border,” the agent said. “We just occasionally set them up to see what we can catch.”

The agent added that the officers look for signs that include how people answer their questions and if they speak with an accent. He argued the stops were fair and free of potential bias because every person who passed through the checkpoint was asked the same question.

Border Patrol officers have long come under criticism for why they decide to stop some people and not others. They have been accused of making subjective and arbitrary judgments. Customs and Border Protection instructs agents not to consider a person’s race or ethnicity.

Agents are also barred from considering a person’s language, an issue that surfaced in an encounter in Montana last month. A Border Patrol agent overheard a woman speaking Spanish to a friend inside a convenience store in Havre, a small town about 30 miles south of Canada. He stopped the women and asked for their proof of citizenship, later telling them that their Spanish had raised suspicions. The friends were United States citizens.

Emma E. Bond, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, said she found it troubling that the Border Patrol agent in the Maine video mentioned that officers take note of a person’s accent.

“The Fourth Amendment requires explicit, neutral limitations on the conduct of individual officers,” Ms. Bond said Friday. “Yet here, the Border Patrol officer in the video claimed that 'it’s the agent’s [subjective] determination’ whether to detain people and that suspicion could be based on ‘accent, could be anything.’”

The Maine checkpoint, which led to one person being arrested on immigration-related charges, was set up following a similar checkpoint last Friday through Sunday on Interstate 93 in Woodstock, N.H., about 90 miles from the Canadian border. Federal agents there arrested five people suspected of being in the country illegally and seized “various narcotics and drug paraphernalia,” the agency said.

“Operations of this type are within the jurisdiction of the Border Patrol and performed in direct support of immediate border enforcement efforts,” said Steve Sapp, a spokesman at Customs and Border Protection, “and as a means of preventing smuggling organizations from exploiting existing transportation systems to travel to the interior of the United States.”

The A.C.L.U.’s offices in New Hampshire and Maine have challenged the Border Patrol’s immigration checks on highways and at bus stops. The group filed a lawsuit in New Hampshire last year after a checkpoint in Woodstock resulted in the arrest of several people on drug charges. Last month, a judge agreed and ruled in favor of the A.C.L.U., saying that the stops violated both state and federal constitutions.

Ms. Bond said her group sued last month to obtain details on checkpoints and immigration inspections in Maine, after the federal government declined to provide them.

“We know there is a nationwide crackdown on immigrants and increased C.B.P. presence at bus stops,” Ms. Bond said. “Coupled with highway checkpoints, it’s hard not to feel that we are living in a ‘show-me-your-papers’ state.”

‘These aren’t our kids’ - FoxNews for racists Offers Occult Explanations to Defend Obedient Allegiance to Imaginary Geographic & Racial Distinctions ["Our" "Border"]

fox news balls deep .jpg

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Borders - arbitrary geographical abstractions - economic and cultural impediments and surprisingly ineradicable. 2) imaginary geographic distinctions and occult political restrictions. Borders are what allows fences (internetworks of stolen goods) to be erected and trafficked through. (See Corporate State, Political Borders & States). 

political borders - arbitrarily delineated and enforced geographical boundaries of power for a nation-state and rule over the people within those boundaries.   "Within a nation-state, title to land demarcates boundary of ownership for the private individual.   By creating ownership of, or claim to land, ipso facto, creates both political and occult value by preventing use and/or occupation of land by those who whish or mean to do so.   Those with intent to occupy land may do so only through purchase (subject to usury) or conquest. In this lose/lose scenario, either choice is demeaning. By contrast, aboriginal peoples who are more in touch with spirituality believe they belong to the land, they do not own the land." -John Casperson.

From [HERE] Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade defended President Trump on Friday by pointing out that while his harsh “zero tolerance” policy may have resulted in thousands of children being separated from their parents at the southern border, at least the kids affected aren’t Americans.

“Like it or not, these aren’t our kids. Show them compassion, but it’s not like he’s doing this to the people of Idaho or Texas,” he said. “These are people from another country.”

Host Ainsley Earhardt replied by saying that Trump “just wants to make sure we vet who’s coming across the border, in case it’s MS-13 or drugs.”

A short time later, host Steve Doocy expressed hope that “by the grace of God, something will happen in Congress” on immigration policy “one way or the other.” (Family separations have resulted from a policy implemented by Trump that he had the power to end at any time.)

But at roughly the same time as Doocy was expressing that sentiment, Trump tweeted that “Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November.”

Trump, of course, has also frequently used dehumanizing language about undocumented immigrants, referring to them as “animals” who will “infest” the country. The White House has gone as far as to distribute an official press release referring to MS-13 members as “animals” 10 separate times.

No Expense Spared as Voyeuristic NY School District Authorities Propose Using Facial Recognition Technology on Kindergartners in Lockport Public Fool System

Hungry Cop Watching You.jpg

From [HERE] Next year, students as young as 4 or 5 years old who attend public school in Western New York’s Lockport School District could be subject to surveillance from facial recognition technology. [this school district is overwhelmingly white - but who do you think this test run is for?]

News reports indicate the district plans to have the invasive and error-prone technology installed by next school year. Earlier this week, the New York Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to the New York State Education Department urging it to consider students and teachers’ privacy in reviewing the use of surveillance technology by school districts. We also sent a freedom of information request to the district seeking details on how and where the technology will be used as well as who will have access to the sensitive data that gets collected.

Lockport spent almost $4 million to acquire the facial recognition system, using state money allocated for schools meant to upgrade or improve their infrastructure and technology. Most schools spent the money on things like Wi-Fi, new computers, or 3D printers.

Lockport, however, made the multimillion-dollar purchase despite the fact that the district could face a budget shortfall of nearly $1 million. The district has said if it doesn’t receive additional state aid, it plans to cut transportation and sports programs, reduce kindergarten to half days, and close elementary school libraries.

Beyond the incredible expense, these kinds of surveillance systems also pose serious privacy and safety risks for everyone at Lockport schools, especially children. In the system Lockport purchased, once a person’s facial image is captured by the technology and uploaded, the system can go back and track that person’s movements around the school over the previous 60 days.

It’s easy to imagine that students will feel like they are constantly under suspicion. Lockport is sending the message that it views students as unpredictable, potential criminals who must have their faces scanned wherever they go.

This has the potential to turn every step a student takes into evidence of a crime. Youthful misbehavior or simply hanging out with friends could be criminalized. Worse, students seeking confidential assistance from a counselor or school clinic will be caught in the system’s dragnet.

Lockport apparently plans to implement facial recognition into all its public schools, which means students as young as 4 or 5 could have their movements tracked and their faces uploaded into the district’s database.

We’re also concerned about who has access to that database. It’s unclear who from the district, the for-profit software vendor, the police department, or each individual school will have access. It’s also unclear whether federal or state agencies will have access to the database, too, but Lockport indicated in its proposal that it wanted funds for “interfaces to local state and federal crime databases.”

These databases could include those used for immigration enforcement. That could make parents of immigrant students afraid to send their children to school for fear that they or their children could end up on ICE’s radar. Our freedom of information request is designed, in part, to get to the bottom of these important questions. All students in New York State have a right to an education regardless of immigration status, but that right is put in danger if families are scared to go to school.

Facial recognition is also notoriously inaccurate, especially when it comes to identifying women, young people, and people of color. This means that innocent students are likely to be misidentified and punished for things they didn’t do.

As troubling as Lockport’s facial recognition system is, what is perhaps even more worrying is the fear that other districts will follow the district’s lead. Deputy Superintendent Jeffrey Rabey told the Buffalo News that his district is seeking state funding for the same facial recognition system that Lockport is installing. Even more troubling is that Rabey told the News he’d like to use the technology to track students who commit “some type of offense against the code of conduct.” That means this dangerous technology could be utilized to enforce minor infractions like dress code violations.

The state Education Department must not allow this to happen. The department, and its chief privacy officer, must revisit Lockport’s application requesting state funds for the technology and should make it clear that this technology does not belong in schools. Going forward, all applications for surveillance technology by schools must be reviewed by the Education Department’s chief privacy officer, and parents, teachers, and students must be given adequate opportunity to weigh in.

Students should think of schools as a safe place to learn. They should not worry that their every move is being monitored or that their pictures could end up in a law or immigration enforcement database simply because they came to class. Big Brother should have no seat in New York public schools.

"Screaming For Help & No One Came" to Locked Room at "Gender Annihilation Center": Suit Says Oklahoma Jail Deprived Murdered Black Man his Constitutional Right to Safety - 30 Dead Since 2016

From [HERE] The mother of a man fatally beaten inside the Oklahoma County jail has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Sheriff P.D. Taylor and the county commissioners.

Maurice Pendleton was killed by unsupervised inmates after being placed on a basketball court in the jail on July 18. The mother is seeking monetary damages in the lawsuit filed Friday in Oklahoma County District Court.

"I want justice to be served for my son," Mae Pendleton told news reporters outside the jail before she nearly fainted. Her attorneys and others held her up as she walked away.

"Maurice's life mattered," attorney Damario Solomon-Simmons said. "This jail caused the death of Maurice Pendleton."

ok county jail.jpg

Since 2016, more than 30 inmates have died after being booked into the jail, the attorney noted.

The lawsuit alleges Maurice Pendleton was deprived of his constitutional right to safety while in the jail. It also alleges the jail has a long history of "unconstitutional conditions."

It's the latest in a series of lawsuits over Oklahoma County jail deaths.

Four inmates are charged with second-degree murder in the fatal beating that prosecutors called gang-related. A trial is set for August.

Reserving the Right to Murder Blacks & Latinos who Murder Whites, New Hampshire Governor Vetoes Bill to Abolish "Death Penalty"

NH governor sununu.jpg

From [HERE] New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu [official website] vetoed a bill [text] Thursday that would have abolished the death penalty.

Currently, the law states: "A person convicted of a capital murder may be punished by death." The bill proposed that those found guilty would instead be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

In New Hampshire, very few situations warrant the possibility of being sentenced to death. In a statement [PDF], Sununu said that he is on the side of the victims:

To repeal the death penalty in its entirety today would deprive the Cates' and other crime victims of the justice they deserve. Abolishing the death penalty in New Hampshire would send the wrong message to those who commit the most heinous offenses within our State's borders, namely that New Hampshire is a place where a person who commits an unthinkable crime is guaranteed leniency. New Hampshire is not and will never be a safe haven for those who would murder a police officer, cause a death during the commission of an aggravated sexual assault or home invasion, or commit any other capital offense.

In New Hampshire, there is currently one person on death row, Michael "Stix" Addison, a Black man who killed Michael Briggs, a white cop, while the last time there was an execution was 1939. This is not the first time that New Hampshire has almost abolished capital punishment [JURIST report].

Targeted by Skin Color: Study Says Extrajudicial Police Killings Harm the Mental Health of Blacks [Governmental Rule by Intimidation =Terrorism]


From [HERE] Activists for racial justice have long expressed concern that the rash of headline-grabbing police killings of black Americans was damaging the mental well-being of African-American communities.

A report published in The Lancet, a leading British medical journal, on Thursday appears to give credence to those concerns.

Using mental health survey data and a database of police shootings, a team of health researchers concluded that when police officers in the United States kill unarmed black people, it damages the mental health of black Americans living in those states.

The mental health of white Americans was not similarly affected, the researchers found. Nor were negative health effects associated with police killings of unarmed white Americans or armed black Americans.

While these findings might seem unsurprising, particularly to African-Americans, the researchers contended that their study was a significant attempt to assess the measurable, if indirect, harms that police violence has inflicted on the broader psychological and emotional well-being of African-Americans.

“‘Having seen something so horrific and traumatic that happened to someone else, I’m reminded in a very painful and salient way that the deck might be stacked against me,’” Atheendar S. Venkataramani, one of the study’s authors, said of how black people might perceive police killings. “It’s really about all the kinds of insidious ways that structural racism can make people sick.”

"Nobody Used Any Use of Force." White Sergeant Recorded Telling NC Troopers to Lie After Cops Stomped & Attacked Black Man w/Flashlights, Gun & K9 - had broken eye socket, nose & 21 Dog Bites

goswick statement .jpg

From [FTP] and [MORE] A North Carolina judge released a series of disturbing videos last month showing the horrifying attack on a man who had done nothing but walk down the road. Kyron Dwain Hinton, 29, had harmed no one and committed no crime when he was surrounded by police, mauled by a K9, pistol whipped, kicked, punched, and stomped on—for nearly five minutes.

Absent from the series of video released last month, however, was another video from later on that night in which officers were instructed by their sergeant to cover up what happened. That video is now part of the investigation and has ensnared yet another cop.

The incident happened on April 3 and the videos are so horrifying that the officers involved have actually been charged for it.

Troopers Tabithia L. Davis and Michael G. Blake were fired Friday for their role in the beating and they have been charged with assault inflicting bodily injury and willfully failing to discharge duties. Their patrol sergeant, R.W. Goswick was also placed on administrative leave for his role in instructing the troopers to cover it up. The trooper was captured on video telling his officers to lie.

Dashcam video from the scene captures Goswick telling Davis, Blake, and another trooper Zachary C.Bumgardner to lie on their statements and report “no use of force on our part.”

Goswick would conclude—in spite of the horrific video showing otherwise and officers admitting to the abuse—that all the troopers did was “assist in holding the man down” and “that nobody threw any punches.”

style>.mcclatchy-embed{position:relative;padding:40px 0 56.25%;height:0;overflow:hidden;max-width:100%}.mcclatchy-embed iframe{position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%}

According to police, they received a series of calls about a man walking down Raleigh Boulevard around 10 pm. When police responded to the area, they found Hinton.

First on the scene was the North Carolina Highway patrol, followed by Raleigh police. Things remained calm as officers talked to Hinton until Wake County Deputy Cameron Broadwell arrived on the scene with his police dog, Loki.

Hinton was peacefully standing there, talking with deputies when deputy Broadwell decided the time for talking was over. Without cause or provocation, Broadwell begins shouting at Hinton to get on the ground.

“Get on the ground now or you’re gonna get bit,” the deputy calls out. “Get on the ground or you’re gonna get bit. Get on the ground or you’re gonna get bit.”

Hinton appears confused and frightened and does not immediately get on the ground. At this point, Broadwell forces the dog to bite Hinton and as he goes down, Broadwell begins punching Hinton in the face.

“Get him, get him, get him!” Broadwell screams as more than a half dozen cops pile on top of this unarmed man.

The chaos and gore was so horrific that even one of the officers yelled, “Get that f—king dog out of here!”

Hinton, who was clearly distressed, can be heard saying “Yahweh help,” and “God is good.”

After nearly five minutes of dog biting and beating, the dust settled and police attempted to justify the pseudo lynching they just dished out.

“He wouldn’t get on the ground,” Broadwell said, claiming that he thought the situation was a 10-80, police code for a chase in progress. But there was no chase, and Hinton—although he may have been in a diminished mental state—was simply talking with police, who had him entirely surrounded.

“I sicced my dog on him while he was in the middle of the street,” the deputy tells another officer as he breathes heavily, catching his breath. “My dog bit him in the side. I’ve got to take pictures of the dog bite. I got to get my camera, man.”

During a portion of the video, Broadwell is heard saying, “I’m glad my radio broke, man. I punched him in the face while Loki was biting him.”

Another officer then says, “hey,” as if to warn him he was being recorded on body camera.

Broadwell then responds, “Yeah, yeah, it’s fine. I gave him a chance to get down on the ground.”

Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman wrote in a petition that during the struggle, “a voice believed to be that of Trooper M.G. Blake is heard commanding one or more of the officers on the scene to start hitting Mr. Hinton in the head, to hit him in the head again, and to hit his head with a flashlight.”

“These commands were given multiple times and were interlaced with profanities,” Freeman said. “At one point, an officer can be seen hitting and kicking Mr. Hinton while he is on the ground.”

Despite officers admitting on video that they severely beat Hinton, as the News Observer reports, Goswick said “that no use of force by the Troopers on the scene could be seen,” Freeman stated, before later adding that the Highway Patrol’s use of force policy indicates that “striking an individual in the head with a flashlight is considered use of deadly force.”

For two months, the police departments blocked all the footage from being released. However, last month, Wake County Superior Court Judge A. Graham Shirley responded to the multiple requests from media and finally released the video.

According to the News Observer, Hinton initially was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting a public officer and assault on a law enforcement animal, but Wake prosecutors dismissed all charges against him.

For walking down the road, Hinton was severely beaten, mauled by a K9 and hospitalized for several days. He suffered 21 dog bites all over his body, a broken nose and a fractured eye socket.

Trump's Rallying Message to his Racist Neuropeon Believers: "Your Beef is Mine!" & Thanks For Your Imagined Participation in Democracy

trump moron 50.jpg

From [HERE] As Republicans try to keep their midterm election strategy focused on the economy, tax cuts and falling unemployment, President Trump sent his clearest signal yet on Monday that he intends to make divisive, racially charged issues like immigration central going into the campaign season.

Facing bipartisan criticism over his administration’s family separation practice on the border, Mr. Trump renewed the sort of bald and demagogic attacks on undocumented immigrants that worked well for him politically in his 2016 presidential campaign. He inveighed against “the death and destruction that’s been caused by people coming into this country” and vowed that “the United States will not be a migrant camp and it will not be a refugee holding facility.”

Republicans typically handle immigration gingerly in an election year, as they try to appeal to Hispanic voters, independents and moderates across divergent districts. But with more Americans still opposing the tax measure than supporting it, Mr. Trump’s allies believe that trying to link Democrats to crimes committed by undocumented immigrants and gangs like MS-13 will do more to galvanize Republican voters and get them to the polls in November than emphasizing economic issues.

“People don’t turn out to say thank you,” said Corey Lewandowski, one of the president’s top political advisers. “If you want to get people motivated, you’ve got to give them a reason to vote. Saying ‘build the wall and stop illegals from coming in and killing American citizens’ gives them an important issue.”

This fear-oriented approach reflects the degree that Mr. Trump has put his anti-immigration imprint on the Republican Party. The same raw appeals Mr. Trump made in 2016 about immigrants illegally crossing the border have not abated among most of his Republican supporters. 

And his supporters say the party has little choice in an election where Democrats are eager to register their opposition to a president they despise — and that the only way to succeed in a campaign driven by turning out the party base is to focus on what grass-roots conservatives care most about. [hatred of non-whites]

“It’s an issue folks are emotionally attached to,” said Andy Surabian, a Republican strategist and former Trump aide. “I know that upsets some people in the donor class, but it’s the reality of where the party is.”

Mr. Trump’s anti-immigrant remarks are aimed at the conservative base of the party that elevated his candidacy and is dominant in red states and House districts, especially those with largely white populations. The Republican grass-roots were already hawkish on immigration, while the president’s takeover of the party has further diminished its pragmatist wing. And while hard-line Republicans are a minority of the country’s voters, the G.O.P. cannot retain its grip on Congress without this bedrock of its base going to the polls. [MORE]

Report Links Deaths in Non-White Immigration Detention Centers to [intentionally] Poor Medical Care

From [HERE] Insufficient medical care contributed to more than half the deaths reported by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) between December 2015 and April 2017, according to a report [HRW website] issued on Wednesday by a collaboration of advocacy groups.

The 72-page report analyzes 15 "Detainee Death Reviews" ICE released from December 2015 through April 2017, finding that "eight of the 15 public death reviews show that inadequate medical care contributed or led to the person's death." The experts found evidence of inferior and dangerous practices including "unreasonable delays, poor practitioner and nursing care, and botched emergency response."

Among the cases reviewed, one case involved the suicide of a person with mental disabilities who was improperly put in isolation, as well as a person who was not given adequate care or concern after suffering three seizures.

The report claims the reviews illustrate that the same types of healthcare and oversight failures point to a systemic deficit in immigration detention facility health care and urges for action.

"The lapses occur in both publicly and privately run facilities, and are not being addressed by existing oversight and monitoring systems...We believe these deficits warrant immediate attention and action by Congress, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and state and local governments that have authority over the facilities."

The urgency of reform further correlates to the increased number of immigrants in detention centers. In 1994, approximately 6,800 people were held in immigration custody on any day, whereas today, the daily average is nearly 40,500 people. Further, "the Trump administration has asked Congress to allocate US$2.7 billion for Fiscal Year 2019 to lock up a daily average of 52,000 immigrants in immigration detention facilities, a record number representing nearly 30 percent expansion over the previous year."

The report was published by Human Rights Watch, the National Immigrant Justice Center, the Detention Watch Network and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Black NBA Player Dared to Question White Authority During Parking Ticket Detention at 2AM in Empty Lot, So Provocative, Hyper-Alert Milwaukee Overseers Assaulted Him to En-Force the Law - Suit Filed

sterling brown .jpg

White Cop: "I OWN THIS [the streets]" From [HERE] According to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Milwaukee, Sterling Brown, a guard for the Milwaukee Bucks who is black, was wrongfully arrested and mistreated because of his race by a police department with a history of excessive force against black people.

The suit claims one of eight police officers named as defendants in the suit pulled his gun and another used a stun gun on Brown after he was already subdued and being held on the ground by several other officers.

In addition to the eight officers, the city of Milwaukee and its police chief, Alfonso Morales, are defendants in the case. Local media has reported that most of the officers involved are white. The suit seeks unspecified damages.

Brown’s attorney, Mark Thomsen, told Reuters on Tuesday that Brown was not motivated by money in filing the suit, but rather seeks a change in the way Milwaukee police treat young black men.

Morales was named chief in February, but the suit claims he did not handle discipline of the officers well as the stiffest penalty was suspension for three of the officers, varying from two to 15 days. Morales has previously apologized for the arrest. [apology is always political] 

While law enforcement sources initially claimed Brown had been the aggressor, videos show police escalated the situation rapidly while Brown spoke in a frustrated tone of voice but never raised his volume or moved toward officers.

The suit alleges Brown parked in a handicapped parking spot outside a drug store about 2 a.m. on Jan. 26, and was approached by a Milwaukee officer who shoved Brown and subsequently called for backup. The player was never charged with anything in the incident.

Officers surrounded Brown as they questioned him and one pulled out a gun after two policemen noticed what appeared to be targets from a gun range in the player’s car.

Brown, a 23-year-old reserve player on the NBA team, was unarmed.

“It’s simply outrageous that someone would pull their gun” in this situation where Brown posed no serious danger to any of the officers, Thomsen told Reuters.

The suit says that Brown, who was 22 at the time of the incident, “was kneed in the groin by one of the officers” before being thrown to the cold pavement during a night when the wind chill temperature was 26 degrees Fahrenheit (-3 degrees Celsius).

Brown was already on the ground held by officers when he was shocked with the stun gun in the back, the suit claims.

The suit also claims that several of the officers switched off body cameras to conceal their actions and some of them conspired to synchronize their stories after the incident.

Beatings, bags over their heads, racial slurs: Young Non-White migrants detained in Virginia allege abuse in lawsuit

Non-white immigrant children as young as 14 housed at a juvenile detention center in Virginia say they were beaten while handcuffed and locked up for long periods in solitary confinement, left nude and shivering in concrete cells.

The abuse claims against the Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center near Staunton, Virginia, are detailed in federal court filings that include a half-dozen sworn statements from Latino teens jailed there for months or years. Multiple detainees say the guards stripped them of their clothes and strapped them to chairs with bags placed over their heads.

"Whenever they used to restrain me and put me in the chair, they would handcuff me," said a Honduran immigrant who was sent to the facility when he was 15 years old. "Strapped me down all the way, from your feet all the way to your chest, you couldn't really move. ... They have total control over you. They also put a bag over your head. It has little holes; you can see through it. But you feel suffocated with the bag on."

In addition to the children's first-hand, translated accounts in court filings, a former child-development specialist who worked inside the facility independently told The Associated Press this week that she saw kids there with bruises and broken bones they blamed on guards. She spoke on condition of anonymity because she was not authorized to publicly discuss the children's cases.

In court filings, lawyers for the detention facility have denied all the allegations of physical abuse detailed in the lawsuit, which span from 2015 to 2018.

Read More

If You Shot a Cop in the Back Would You Get Arrested? Video Shows Pittsburgh Cop Murder Unarmed, Fleeing Black Teen, Shooting Him in the Back 3X

Sovereign Cops Only Follow the Law of the Jungle in Corporate Police State. From [HERE] and [HERE] An unarmed 17-year-old Black boy was shot and killed by the East Pittsburgh police on Tuesday night as he tried to flee a traffic stop, law enforcement officials said on Wednesday. 

The teenager, Antwon Rose II, was a passenger in a car that had been pulled over because it matched the description of a vehicle that fled an earlier shooting in which a 22-year-old man was wounded, the Allegheny County Police Department said in a statement.

A video that recorded the fatal shooting and was posted on Facebook shows two people running from police vehicles as three shots are fired. One of the people, later identified as the 17-year-old, falls to the ground after getting shot in the back.

“Why are they shooting at him?” the woman recording the video says. “All they did was run and they’re shooting at them!”



The Allegheny County Police Department, which is investigating the encounter, said that two firearms were found on the floor of the car. However, police found the guns after the shooting was over. The location of the guns in the car or proximity to the passengers was not disclosed. When asked if the teenager was found with a weapon on his person, Coleman McDonough, the department’s superintendent, said he was not. No police saw him with a gun at any time. 

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Wednesday quoted Mayor Louis Payne of East Pittsburgh as saying that the officer who shot Antwon was hired in mid-May and had been formally sworn in hours before the shooting.

In a statement on Wednesday night, S. Lee Merritt, a lawyer representing Antwon’s family, said: “We know that he was not armed at the time he was shot down, that he posed no immediate threat to anyone, and that, significantly, the driver of the vehicle he occupied was released from police custody.”

The traffic stop on Tuesday that led to the deadly shooting occurred after multiple 911 calls earlier in the night reported a shooting in North Braddock, Pa., that had wounded a 22-year-old man in the abdomen, the police said. He was treated at a trauma center and later released.

Investigators said a gunman in a passing vehicle had fired nine .40-caliber rounds at the 22-year-old, who returned fire.

The 911 callers provided a description of a vehicle they saw fleeing the scene, the police said, and an East Pittsburgh officer saw a similar vehicle, a silver Chevrolet Cruze that appeared to have ballistics damage to its rear window.

“I’m very confident that that was the vehicle involved in the shooting,” Superintendent McDonough said.

The officer stopped the car at 8:40 p.m. and took the driver into custody.

“While he was putting the driver into handcuffs, two other occupants ran from the car,” the Allegheny County police said. An East Pittsburgh officer started shooting, striking the 17-year-old “several times.”

The teenager was taken to U.P.M.C. McKeesport hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 9:19 p.m., Superintendent McDonough said.

“We believe he was hit three times,” he added. “He was hit in various places on his body.”

The driver of the car was later released after being interviewed.

“At the time we did not feel that charging was called for,” Superintendent McDonough said.

The police are still searching for the second person who ran from the officers. Superintendent McDonough asked that he turn himself in “so that he can give a comprehensive description of what occurred this evening,” the police statement said.

The officer who shot the teenager has been placed on administrative leave, officials said.



Under Pennsylvania law police are "justified in using deadly force only when [the officer] believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or such other person, or when he believes both that:

  • (i)  such force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by resistance or escape; and
  • (ii)  the person to be arrested has committed or attempted a forcible felony or is attempting to escape and possesses a deadly weapon, or otherwise indicates that he will endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury unless arrested without delay."

Here, however, no particularized facts concerning Rose were present as cops never saw him possess a weapon and had no individualized articulable suspicion that he had committed any crime - as they had no facts that he had done anything other than sit in the car.