Compiled by Lisa Phillips of OpDeepState.com
Updated April 26, 2019
Gary of Grindall61 and Alex from the New American on USMCA and What it Means for You
The USMCA legislation contains UN Agenda 21, open borders, and the TPP. Gary Grindall explains in this video:
How the United States Immigration System Works
U.S. immigration law is very complex, and there is much confusion as to how it works. The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), the body of law governing current immigration policy, provides for an annual worldwide limit of 675,000 permanent immigrants, with certain exceptions for close family members. Lawful permanent residency allows a foreign national to work and live lawfully and permanently in the United States. Lawful permanent residents (LPRs) are eligible to apply for nearly all jobs (i.e., jobs not legitimately restricted to U.S. citizens) and can remain in the country even if they are unemployed. Each year the United States also admits noncitizens on a temporary basis. Annually, Congress and the President determine a separate number for refugee admissions.
Laws, Regulations, and Guides Immigration and Nationality Act
Important to note: The McCarran-Walter Act was repealed in 1990: MCCARRAN-WALTER ACT REBORN?
Updated November 3, 2018
Now a FOURTH caravan has left El Salvador to join other groups of migrants trekking through Mexico on their way to the US
- Some 2,000 migrants traveling in two groups departed El Salvador’s capital of San Salvador Wednesday
- First, largest caravan numbering 4,000 planned to rest at least a day or longer in the southern city of Juchitan beginning Wednesday
- Its leaders are trying to convince Mexican authorities to arrange transportation for them to Mexico City some 700 miles away
- Second caravan of 1,000 was trailing 250 miles behind the first and was in Tapachula, Mexico
- US Border Patrol this week warned Texas landowners along the southern border to get ready for the arrival of ‘armed civilians’
- Head of the Texas Minutemen militia said he already has members at three points of the state’s border with Mexico, with up to 100 more expected to arrive in the coming days
Published on October 31, 2018
Some 2,000 migrants traveling in two groups departed El Salvador’s capital Wednesday morning on their way to the US by way of Mexico, making it the fourth caravan to embark on the 1,000-journey in the last two weeks. Continue article plus video here
But who and what is behind these caravans?
The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert Relationship: Money, Mossad, and the CIA
The Israeli coup in Honduras: Honduras and the Israeli Coup: A New Special Relationship #Immigration
Updated October 18, 2018
Honduran migrant caravan grows to 4,000 amid spike in U.S. border crossings
The Mexican government has sent 500 extra federal police to its border with Guatemala in anticipation of its arrival, say documents obtained by NBC News
October 17, 2018
by Julia Ainsley
Honduran migrants walk toward the United States in Chiquimula, Guatemala, on Wednesday. A migrant caravan set out on Oct. 13 from the impoverished, violence-plagued country and was headed north on the long journey through Guatemala and Mexico to the U.S. border.Orlando Estrada / AFP – Getty Images
WASHINGTON — A caravan of migrants fleeing Honduras has grown to 4,000, and the Mexican government has sent 500 additional federal police to its border with Guatemala in anticipation of their arrival, according to U.S. government documents obtained by NBC News.
Part of the caravan, which has split into two groups, is approaching the Mexico-Guatemala border amid a surge in border crossings on the U.S.-Mexico border.
In September, U.S. Border Patrol agents apprehended more than 41,400 undocumented immigrants, up from 37,544 in August, according to numbers not yet released publicly but obtained by NBC News. The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the numbers of families and children traveling on their own surged to record levels in September.
The CIA Democrats: A balance sheet of the primaries
September 21, 2018
by Patrick Martin
With the end the primary season, the Democratic Party leadership and their allies in the national security apparatus have completed the first stage of what might be termed a “friendly takeover” of the Democrats by candidates recruited from among military, CIA and civilian national security cadres.
The World Socialist Web Site first identified the phenomenon of the CIA Democrats in a series published in March. At the time we noted the large number of candidates drawn from the military-intelligence apparatus seeking Democratic nominations in competitive congressional districts. If the Democrats won the November election, we warned, such military-intelligence operatives would hold the balance of power in the new House of Representatives.
Of the 44 districts we identified in March—since grown to 46—military-intelligence candidates have won 30 nominations, a success rate of about 66 percent or two-thirds. That testifies to their extensive support from the Democratic Party leadership, from longtime financial backers of the Democrats, and from the top levels of the national security establishment.
There are 115 districts rated as competitive by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) or by groups specializing in the district-by-district analysis of congressional races. The 30 military-intelligence candidates account for more than one quarter of the Democratic candidates in these districts, making them the largest single group, ahead of state and local politicians (26), lawyers (20), millionaires (15), other professionals (8), former Obama aides (3) and miscellaneous (13).
Most of the organizations that investigate and rate congressional races are projecting that the Democrats will win more than the 23 seats required to take control of the House, and possibly as many as 50 or 60. In the latter scenario, CIA Democrats could make up as much as half of the new class of first-time representatives.
There is one particularly ominous aspect of the politics of this group of candidates. Despite their personal involvement in the wars of the past two decades, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the overall operation of the vast US national-security establishment, many of the CIA Democrats say nothing at all on their websites about foreign and military policy. This strongly suggests that they are backers of an aggressive expansion of US military intervention and political subversion around the world, but they choose to conceal that fact from the voters of their districts.
What follows is a complete list of the 30 military-intelligence Democrats who are on the ballot November 6, together with the details of their careers in the national security apparatus. The list includes new candidates not previously identified, and new information on all the candidates.
The candidates are listed by alphabetical order of their state. The facts and photographs are all taken from the candidates’ own websites. It is notable that they see long records with the national-security apparatus as their principal credentials for office, not as something to downplay. Equally notable, not one of these candidates draws any negative, let alone anti-war, conclusions from their own participation in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen and other countries.
To find your state’s candidates, please refer to this article: The CIA Democrats: A balance sheet of the primaries
Be sure to read all the supporting links, because TWO caravans of illegal immigrants are headed straight for the US-Mexico border, where Congressional seats are up for grabs.
Mexico Says It Will Disband The Caravan, But Organizers Say Some Of Its Members Will Continue North
Mexico says it will let pregnant women and people with disabilities stay while others must leave. But caravan organizers declare victory, saying officials finally have recognized its members have the right to seek asylum.
The route of the Caravan Against Fear is now available
The Caravan Against Fear begins in Northern California on April 10, 2018 and will visit cities in the Bay Area and Central Valley before arriving in Los Angeles and Southern California where the border wall between San Diego, CA and Tijuana, Mexico stretches out into the waves of the Pacific Ocean. After Easter, the Caravan will head east along the border –through Arizona, New Mexico and Texas– to the Gulf of Mexico. The Caravan will join with resistance struggles in big border cities like San Diego and El Paso; as well as those in small towns and indigenous communities. We will traverse the diversity and vast open spaces in what the ACLU has called the “Constitution Free Zone” along our 1954-mile border with Mexico.
This video (mirrored) was published on March 31, 2018 courtesy of Caravan Against Fear
A ‘Refugee Caravan’ Is Headed to the U.S. and Getting Bigger Every Day
by Jorge Rivas
March 26, 2018
An estimated 1,500 migrants from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador started a month-long journey on Sunday to the United States, where they intend to seek political asylum. Organizers say the “refugee caravan” includes many women, unaccompanied minors, and entire families who are migrating through Mexico any way they can.
The migrants started their journey in Tapachula, Chiapas, near the Guatemala–Mexico border around 7 AM on Sunday. They walked, took public transportation, and hitchhiked their way to their first destination in the town of Huixtla, where many of the migrants camped outdoors. Their entire journey is more than 2,000 miles long.
Those participating in the caravan will attend workshops to prepare them to request asylum when they reach the U.S. The migrants are expected to reach U.S. points of entries in California sometime next month.
Texas Caravan of Illegals
White House Press Release April 2, 2018: What You Need to Know About Catch and Release
WHAT: Our immigration system continues to encourage and allow an influx of aliens to illegally cross our borders and resettle in American communities.
Porous borders, legal loopholes, and insufficient immigration enforcement resources allow aliens to illegally cross our borders and often prevent their removal once here. Waves of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) and Family Units have been exploiting these weaknesses in our immigration system for years in order to enter and remain in the country.
Since fiscal year (FY) 2016, more than 107,000 UACs have been released into the interior of the United States. 2,895 UACs were released into the U.S. in February 2018 alone, bringing the total for FY 2018 thus far to 13,186. Once released, most UACs remain here by failing to either show up for court hearings or comply with removal orders. As a result, only 3.5 percent of UACs who are apprehended are eventually removed from the U.S. The surge of UACs entering and remaining in the U.S. is in addition to the more than 167,000 Family Units which were apprehended between FY 2016 and February 2018. Nearly all apprehended family units are also released into the U.S. due to judicially-imposed constraints on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s authority to detain them.
This flow of illegal aliens into American communities stands to only grow as a caravan of hundreds of Central Americans currently traveling through Mexico heads toward the U.S. border.
WHY: Catch and release loopholes encourage more and more illegal immigration into the U.S.
Catch and release loopholes, which are the result of statutory and judicial obstacles, encourage illegal immigration into the U.S. and prevent the removal of aliens once they are here. Currently, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can only detain UACs for a few days before releasing them to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for resettlement into the United States. Immigration enforcement efforts are further hamstrung by the fact that current federal law exempts UACs from non-contiguous countries, such as El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, from being promptly returned to their home countries. This results in nationals from these and other countries entering and never leaving.
Foreign nationals see how easy it is to enter the United States, and how hard it is for federal immigration authorities to remove aliens who enter illegally, and are accordingly drawn to the United States. In the absence of lasting solutions to the problems that riddle our immigration system, we can only expect the flow of illegal immigration into our country to continue.
H.R. 4760: Securing America’s Future Act of 2018 “Build The Wall” Psyop
Unfortunately, the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 was repealed in 1990.
H. R. 4760 Securing America’s Future Act of 2018 “Build the Wall” legislation was defeated in the House of Representatives! Good job everyone who opposed this tyranny! We at OpDeepState.com oppose illegal immigration, and we urge all Americans to read all the legislation carefully before supporting any legislation coming out of Washington, D.C.
MCCARRAN-WALTER ACT REBORN?
November 18, 1990
by David Cole
With a whimper, not a bang, the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act is gone. In one of its last acts, the 101st Congress repealed this embarrassing remnant of the McCarthy era, a law that permitted the exclusion and expulsion of immigrants with politically “incorrect” beliefs and associations. Long criticized, the law appeared especially ludicrous in the wake of the Cold War.
But before we congratulate our representatives for courageously eradicating this 1950s relic, we should ask whether the new law that replaced it is in fact a change for the better. From the perspective of one who has litigated under the McCarran-Walter Act for many years, it looks unfortunately like more of the same. The new law continues to draw ideological lines and may well increase the administration’s ability to exclude and deport aliens for political reasons.
Under the McCarran-Walter Act, aliens could be kept out of the country and expelled after they entered if they advocated Communist ideas, belonged to Communist organizations, or espoused such doctrines as the destruction of property. Moreover, the government could bar entry to those whose presence it deemed “prejudicial to the public interest,” an open-ended phrase that proved handy when spokespersons opposed to administration policies sought to visit. If the government wanted to keep an alien out but didn’t want to reveal its evidence for doing so, it could dispose of the necessity for a hearing before an immigration judge merely by asserting that its decision was based on confidential information.
In short, in the McCarran-Walter Act we applied to aliens a range of principles and practices that we would have considered constitutional anthema if applied to citizens: guilt by association, persecution for one’s beliefs, censorship of anti-government speech and secret “Star Chamber” enforcement proceedings.
The 1990 law has been heralded as a long-awaited repudiation of these principles. It is not. For example, immigrants can still be excluded for mere membership in the Communist Party. As a result, we will continue to require all immigrants to answer a question long ago repudiated for citizens: “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” The new law also bars representatives and officials of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the “Communist” party of the 1990s. Thus, guilt by association remains the operative principle.
Two additional grounds for deportation, concerning “terrorism” and “foreign policy,” raise even broader problems. Just as the 1952 Congress responded to the threat of Communism by outlawing a wide range of legitimate but unpopular political activity, so the 1990 Congress has used the threat of “terrorism” to enact similarly sweeping provisions. The new law defines “terrorism” to include, among other things, the use of a firearm or explosive “with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.”
An organization that has engaged in such conduct is a “terrorist” organization. And, according to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the law makes deportable anyone who has raised money or recruited members for such an organization. Under this standard, the government could deport every alien who collected donations for the African National Congress during Nelson Mandela’s recent American visit, and Mr. Mandels himself would be barred from entering.
Still broader is a new “foreign policy” ground. Under this provision, the United States can expel or exclude any alien whose presence poses “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.” The law warns that this judgment generally should not be based on lawful “beliefs, statements or associations,” but even allows that basis if the secretary of state is willing to call the foreign policy interest “compelling.” This gives the secretary virtual carte blanche, for what court will second-guess that Cabinet member’s judgment that an alien’s presence poses “compelling” or even “potentially serious adverse policy consequences”?
To make matters worse, where the government seeks to exclude aliens for “terrorist” or “foreign policy” reasons, it can use the same “confidential information” procedure available for ideological exclusions under the McCarran-Walter Act. The government’s ability to deny all access to the information upon which it bases its decisions greatly exacerbates the potential for unchecked ideological action.
Reports of the McCarran-Walter Act’s death are greatly exaggerated. Its spirit lives on in the 1990 revisions, which continue to deny immigrants the very freedoms of belief and association upon which this nation of immigrants was founded. Far from repudiating the ideological litmus test, Congress merely adjusted it to today’s paranoias. The national pastime of witch hunting did not begin with the McCarran-Walter Act, and unfortunately it will not end with its repeal.
The writer is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and a volunteer staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights.
Background Information on La Raza (Hispanic Communists)
As you read the following article by Patrick Martin, keep in mind the official name of the Socialist/Marxist party in question is the Democrat Party, not the “Democratic” Party.
March 7, 2018
by Patrick Martin (with added information from the web)
An extraordinary number of former intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon, National Security Council and State Department are seeking nomination as Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections. The potential influx of military-intelligence personnel into the legislature has no precedent in US political history.
If the Democrats capture a majority in the House of Representatives on November 6, as widely predicted, candidates drawn from the military-intelligence apparatus will comprise as many as half of the new Democratic members of Congress. They will hold the balance of power in the lower chamber of Congress.
Both push and pull are at work here. Democratic Party leaders are actively recruiting candidates with a military or intelligence background for competitive seats where there is the best chance of ousting an incumbent Republican or filling a vacancy, frequently clearing the field for a favored “star” recruit.
A case in point is Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA operative with three tours in Iraq, who worked as Iraq director for the National Security Council in the Obama White House and as a top aide to John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence. After her deep involvement in US war crimes in Iraq, Slotkin moved to the Pentagon, where, as a principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, her areas of responsibility included drone warfare, “homeland defense” and cyber warfare.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has designated Slotkin as one of its top candidates, part of the so-called “Red to Blue” program targeting the most vulnerable Republican-held seats—in this case, the Eighth Congressional District of Michigan, which includes Lansing and Brighton. The House seat for the district is now held by two-term Republican Representative Mike Bishop.
The Democratic leaders are promoting CIA agents and Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. At the same time, such people are choosing the Democratic Party as their preferred political vehicle. There are far more former spies and soldiers seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party than of the Republican Party. There are so many that there is a subset of Democratic primary campaigns that, with a nod to Mad magazine, one might call “spy vs. spy.”
The23rd Congressional District in Texas, which includes a vast swathe of the US-Mexico border along the Rio Grande, features a contest for the Democratic nomination between Gina Ortiz Jones, an Air Force intelligence officer in Iraq, who subsequently served as an adviser for US interventions in South Sudan and Libya, and Jay Hulings. The latter’s website describes him as a former national security aide on Capitol Hill and federal prosecutor, whose father and mother were both career undercover CIA agents. The incumbent Republican congressman, Will Hurd, is himself a former CIA agent, so any voter in that district will have his or her choice of intelligence agency loyalists in both the Democratic primary and the general election.
CNN’s “State of the Union” program on March 4 included a profile of Jones as one of many female candidates seeking nomination as a Democrat in Tuesday’s primary in Texas. The network described her discreetly as a “career civil servant.” However, the Jones for Congress website positively shouts about her role as a spy, noting that after graduating from college, “Gina entered the US Air Force as an intelligence officer, where she deployed to Iraq and served under the US military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy” (the last phrase signaling to those interested in such matters that Jones is gay).
According to her campaign biography, Ortiz Jones was subsequently detailed to a position as “senior advisor for trade enforcement,” a post President Obama created by executive order in 2012. She would later be invited to serve as a director for investment at the Office of the US Trade Representative, where she led the portfolio that reviewed foreign investments to ensure they did not pose national security risks. With that background, if she fails to win election, she can surely enlist in the trade war efforts of the Trump administration.
How this article was prepared
The House of Representatives is currently controlled by the Republicans, with a majority of 238 compared to 193 Democrats. There are four vacancies, one previously held by the Democrats. To reach a majority of 218 seats in the next Congress, the Democrats must have a net gain of 24 seats.
The DCCC has designated 102 seats as priority or competitive, including 22 seats where the incumbents are not running again (five Democrats and 17 Republicans), and 80 seats where Republican incumbents could be defeated for reelection in the event that polls predicting a sizable swing to the Democrats in November prove accurate.
The World Socialist Web Site has reviewed Federal Election Commission reports filed by all the Democratic candidates in these 102 competitive districts, focusing on those candidates who reported by the latest filing date, December 31, 2017, that they had raised at least $100,000 for their campaigns, giving them a financial war chest sufficient to run in a competitive primary contest. In addition, there a few cases where a candidate had less than the $100,000 cutoff, but was unchallenged for the nomination, or where last-minute retirement or resignation has led to late entry of high-profile candidates without an FEC report on file. These have also been included.
The total of such candidates for the Democratic nomination in the 102 districts is 221. Each has a website that gives biographical details, which we have collected and reviewed for this report. It is notable that those candidates with a record in the military-intelligence apparatus, as well as civilian work for the State Department, Pentagon or National Security Council, do not hide their involvement, particularly in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They clearly regard working as a CIA agent in Baghdad, an Army special ops assassin in Afghanistan, or a planner for drone missile warfare in the White House or Pentagon as a star on their résumé, rather than something to conceal.
One quarter of all the Democratic challengers in competitive House districts have military-intelligence, State Department or NSC backgrounds. This is by far the largest subcategory of Democratic candidates. National security operatives (57) outnumber state and local government officials (45), lawyers (35), corporate executives, businessmen and wealthy individuals (30) and other professionals (19) among the candidates for Democratic congressional nominations.
Of the 102 primary elections to choose the Democratic nominees in these competitive districts, 44 involve candidates with a military-intelligence or State Department background, with 11 districts having two such candidates, and one district having three. In the majority of contests, the military-intelligence candidates seem likely to win the Democratic nomination, and, if the Democrats win in the general election, would enter Congress as new members of the House of Representatives.
There are some regional differences. In the Northeast, 21 of the 31 seats targeted by the Democrats have military-intelligence candidates. This area, not the South or Midwest, has the highest proportion of military-intelligence candidates seeking Democratic nominations.
In the West, only 7 of the 23 targeted seats have military-intelligence candidates, while in a half dozen seats the leading candidates are self-funded millionaires, mainly from the IT industry. There has been a wave of Republican retirements in California and wealthy people are bidding for these seats.
The military-intelligence candidates are disproportionately favored by the party apparatus, encouraged to run in districts that are the most likely takeover targets. Military-intelligence candidates account for 10 of the 22 districts selected for the most high-profile attention as part of the “red-to-blue” program, or nearly half. In some cases, military-intelligence candidates have amassed huge campaign war chests that effectively shut out any potential rivals, an indication that the financial backers of the Democratic Party have lined up behind them.
To be continued..
Source: The CIA Democrats: Part one
CIA Agents in Congress is Nothing New
Detailed evidence is presented that reveals how each of the alternative suspects had the means, motive and opportunity to accomplish one or more aspects of the 9/11 events. In light of a forty-year history of deep events and crimes against democracy, Ryan shows how 9/11 fits into the pattern of a deep state operation, how the alternate suspects worked together throughout that history, how each was connected to two men who were in perfect position to coordinate the attacks, and how these suspects can either be charged with 9/11 crimes today or further investigated in focused ways.”
On January 14, 2018, we reported on one such CIA Candidate Chelsea Manning:
Chelsea E. Manning, the transgender former Army private who was convicted of passing sensitive government documents to WikiLeaks, is seeking to run for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, according to federal election filings.
Manning would be challenging Democrat Benjamin L. Cardin, who is in his second term in the Senate and is up for reelection in November. Cardin is Maryland’s senior senator and is considered an overwhelming favorite to win a third term.
Manning declined to speak about her filing or to say why she might be running when reached at her home in Bethesda on Saturday.
She said she might release a statement in the coming days.
“Our only statement on the record is ‘No statement,’ ” Manning said.
Since the LGBT crowd is easier to blackmail than Christian Patriots, the FBI often recruits gay and lesbian employees by tricking them into standing up for the 1st Amendment, as evidenced by Abel Danger’s report.
Patriots Fighting Back
Call the White House and demand President Trump put troops on the Southern border of the United States:
Four hundred sheriffs from across the nation are demanding that Congress act swiftly to pass legislation to secure U.S. borders and enforcing immigration laws, saying that “now is the time to act” by supporting law enforcement officials and putting U.S. citizens’ interests first.
The National Sheriffs’ Association and the Ohio Sheriffs’ Association sent a letter to Congress signed by 400 sheriffs. It urges lawmakers to support President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda.
Keep in mind, the McClarran-Walter Act of 1952 already banned illegal immigration but it was repealed in 1990: H.R. 4760: Securing America’s Future Act of 2018 “Build The Wall” Psyop and there is tyranny contained in this bill.
No matter which political party your candidate represents, make absolutely certain the person you are voting for has NOT SIGNED the letter of allegiance to the Israel Lobby (AIPAC). The Congress(wo)men and Senators controlled by AIPAC are responsible for trying to take away our firearms. To my knowledge, all but one of our “representatives” has signed the letter.
For more information on AIPAC, please refer to this information:
And, if you dare to criticize Israel, legislation has been put forward to fine and imprison all Americans: HR 1697 and S. 720 – The End of the 1st Amendment: Criticize Israel, Go to Jail especially if you are reporting 9/11 Truth.