The Wall, The Barrier, The Fence, Etc.

It's happening! Heavy equipment arriving as early as Monday!

Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector issued the press release today to local media!

Congress finds border wall solution for Trump leaves democrats in shambles. Rep. Mo Brooks proves how to build a wall without congress or national emergency. Brooks primarily focused on  Title 10, Section 284 of the U.S. Code (meaning the Army and other military servicemen can build the wall).

If Trump goes this route, Pelosi loses big time.

Posted yesterday:

https://www.facebook.com/ivankatrumpfashions/videos/233211897587459/

Bwahaha... Vit sent me a warning saying "Done with it", and deleted this post:

The Wise And Powerful wrote:

Because the unpopped kernels mingle freely at the bottom of the can.

This must be a model of Trump’s brain.

President Trump's wall costs less than the ObamaCare website.

Let that sink in, America!

Illegal Alien Scandal Rocks California – It’s Even WORSE Than You Think

They’ve gone too far this time…

For years, sanctuary states have been protecting illegal aliens.

And in some disgusting cases, they’ve actively protected illegal criminals.

It’s one thing to give shelter to border jumpers without knowing who they are; it’s still breaking federal law, but one could argue it’s compassionate.

It’s quite another thing to harbor known illegal immigrant criminals and HIDE them from American authorities.

Yes, the sanctuary state of California really does this, as shocking new testimony reveals.

It came from Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) Executive Director Dale Wilcox during an exclusive interview with Breitbart News Tonight.

And this will make your blood boil:

“The sanctuary state of California refused 5,600 requests by federal immigration officials over two years to turn over criminal illegal aliens, state data finds.

…Wilcox revealed that within a 27-month period, the state of California had failed to honor about 5,600 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers…

…which are the holds ICE agents file to local jails and police to request that an illegal alien be turned over to them for arrest and deportation.”

Not only that, but over 3,400 of those 5,600 were labeled “Level 1” or “Level 2” offenders.

What’s that mean?

It means that the majority of these illegal criminals had been charged with crimes like kidnapping, robbery, drugs, fraud, sexual assault, and homicide.

Added Wilcox:

“The bottom line is, sanctuary cities are neither humane or compassionate.

They’re dangerous policies that cost Americans lives…

What will it take for these anti-borders politicians to wake up and put the safety and security of their citizens, their legal residents before the interests of criminal aliens?”

Exactly: what WILL it take?!

Did you have any idea the sanctuary policy was this insane, that it would even shield confirmed criminals from our OWN authorities?

And Wilcox is absolutely right when he says this craziness can cost the lives of American citizens.

For example, he cited the specific case of California deputy Riley Jarecki, who was almost killed by three-time deported illegal alien Javier Hernandez-Morales.

As it turns out, local officials had refused to turn Hernandez-Morales over to ICE agents for deportation.

Said Wilcox:

“Its own deputy almost got killed as a result of its refusal to honor ICE detainer requests.

And this individual had been deported three times in the past…

…so they say there’s no need emergency or need for a wall, this criminal alien is just walking back into the country.”

This tears it.

This IS an emergency and a crisis, and we DO need a border wall. Or, at the very least, greatly improved border security.

We simply can’t allow this to keep happening!


Source: Breitbart

MARCH 10, 2019 / 5:16 AM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
Exclusive: In budget, Trump to ask Congress for $8.6 billion for border wall
Roberta Rampton
6 MIN READ

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump on Monday will ask the U.S. Congress for an additional $8.6 billion to help pay for his promised wall on the U.S-Mexico border to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking, officials familiar with his 2020 budget request told Reuters.

The demand, which drew swift criticism from Democrats, is more than six times what Congress allocated for border projects in each of the past two fiscal years, and 6 percent more than Trump has corralled by invoking emergency powers this year.

Democrats, who oppose the wall as unnecessary and immoral, control the U.S. House of Representatives, making it unlikely the Republican president’s request will win congressional passage. Republicans control the Senate.

The proposal comes on the heels of a bruising battle with Congress over wall funding that resulted in a five-week partial federal government shutdown that ended in January, and could touch off a sequel just ahead of a trifecta of ominous fiscal deadlines looming this fall.

“President Trump hurt millions of Americans and caused widespread chaos when he recklessly shut down the government to try to get his expensive and ineffective wall,” said Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer in a joint statement on Sunday.

“Congress refused to fund his wall and he was forced to admit defeat and reopen the government. The same thing will repeat itself if he tries this again. We hope he learned his lesson,” said the two top Democrats in Congress.

Asked on Fox News Sunday about the new wall funding request and if there would be another budget fight, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said, “I suppose there will be ... He’s going to stay with his wall and he’s going to stay with the border security theme. I think it’s essential.”

Broadly speaking on the budget, Kudlow told Fox, “The president is proposing roughly a 5 percent across-the-board reduction in domestic spending accounts.”

Regardless of whether Congress passes it, the budget request could help Trump frame his argument on border security as the 2020 presidential race begins to take shape, with the president seeking re-election.

“Build the wall” was one of his signature campaign pledges in his first run for office in 2016. “Finish the wall” is already a feature of his re-election campaign, a rallying cry plastered across banners and signs at his campaign rallies.

“It gives the president the ability to say he has fulfilled his commitment to gain operational control of the southwest border,” an administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said of the budget request.

“We have provided the course of action, the strategy and the request to finish the job. It’s a question of, will Congress allow us to finish the job,” a second administration official said.

Funding legislation needs to be passed before Oct. 1 - the start of the 2020 federal fiscal year - or the government could shut down again. If Congress and the White House fail to agree to lift mandatory spending caps set in a 2011 law, steep automatic cuts in many programs would kick in. Around the same time, Trump and lawmakers must agree to lift the debt ceiling, or risk a default, which would have chaotic economic fallout.

722 MILES OF WALL

Trump’s wall request is based off a 2017 plan put forward by Customs and Border Protection officials to build or replace 722 miles (1,162 km) of barrier along the border, which in total is estimated to cost about $18 billion.

So far, only 111 miles (179 km) have been built or are under way, officials said. In fiscal 2017, $341 million in funding was allocated for 40 miles (64 km) of wall, and in 2018, another $1.375 billion was directed to 82 miles (132 km).

For fiscal 2019, Trump demanded $5.7 billion in wall funds, but Congress appropriated only $1.375 billion for border fencing projects.

Following the rejection of his wall funding demand, Trump declared the border was a national emergency - a move opposed by Democrats and some Republicans - and redirected $601 million in Treasury Department forfeiture funds, $2.5 billion in Defense Department drug interdiction funds and $3.6 billion from a military construction budget, for total spending of $8.1 billion for the wall.

The administration has not estimated how far the 2019 funds will go, but officials said average costs are about $25 million per mile (1.6 km).

Trump’s $8.6 billion in proposed wall funding for fiscal 2020 would include $5 billion from the Department of Homeland Security budget and $3.6 billion from the Pentagon’s military construction budget. The budget proposal will also include another $3.6 million in military construction funding to make up for any projects delayed by the wall, officials said.

The Department of Homeland Security is one of a few priority areas to get a boost in Trump’s budget plan, which seeks to slash funding to many non-defense programs.

Trump will propose an overall 5 percent increase to the Department of Homeland Security budget over fiscal 2019 appropriations, including $3.3 billion, or 22 percent more, for Customs and Border Protection, and $1.2 billion more for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a 16 percent hike, officials said.

The budget proposal includes a plan to hire more than 2,800 law enforcement and support personnel for the agencies, and 100 immigration judge teams, officials said.

Trump faces both political and court battles to free up the money he wants for the current fiscal year. Many lawmakers accused Trump of overstepping his constitutional powers by declaring an emergency to free up the funds. The House has already voted to revoke the emergency, and the Senate is likely to do the same this week. Trump is expected to veto the resolution.

A coalition of state governments led by California has sued Trump to block the emergency move, though legal experts have said the lawsuits face a difficult road.

Pics and video at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-budget-wall-exclusive/exclusive-in-budget-trump-to-ask-congress-for-8-6-billion-for-border-wall-idUSKBN1QR0CW

BUILD THE WALL

DEPORT THEM ALL

oliver clotheshoffe wrote:

BUILD THE WALL

DEPORT THEM ALL

I certainly agree.

US-Mexico border wall: Pentagon authorises $1bn transfer
BBC | 4 hours ago

The Pentagon has authorised the transfer of $1bn (£758m) to army engineers for new wall construction along the US-Mexico border.

The funds are the first under the national emergency declared by President Donald Trump to bypass Congress and build the barrier he pledged during his election campaign.

Democrats have protested against the move.

The funds will be used to build about 57 miles (91km) of fencing.

President Trump has called the situation at the southern border a "crisis" and insists a physical barrier is needed to stop criminals crossing into the US. His critics say he has manufactured the border emergency.

A Pentagon statement said acting US Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan had "authorised the commander of the US Army Corps of Engineers to begin planning and executing up to $1bn in support to the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Patrol".

A major land grab by Trump

The statement cited a federal law that "gives the Department of Defence the authority to construct roads and fences and to install lighting to block drug-smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States in support of counter-narcotic activities of federal law enforcement agencies".

As well the 18ft-high (5m) "pedestrian fencing", the funds will cover road improvements and new lights.

Democratic senators complained that the Pentagon had not sought permission from the appropriate committees before notifying Congress of the funds transfer.

"We strongly object to both the substance of the funding transfer, and to the department implementing the transfer without seeking the approval of the congressional defence committees and in violation of provisions in the defence appropriation itself," the senators wrote in a letter to Mr Shanahan, CNN reported.

Mr Trump declared the emergency on 15 February after Congress refused his requests for $5.7bn (£4.4bn) to construct the wall. By declaring an emergency he sought to bypass Congress and build the wall with military funding.

Democrats branded the declaration unconstitutional.

The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed a resolution to overturn the emergency last month, and 12 Republicans later sided with Democratic Senators to get it through the Senate.

However, Mr Trump vetoed the resolution earlier this month.

Congress will now need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override him, which correspondents say is unlikely to happen.

MARCH 26, 2019 / 4:08 AM / UPDATED 26 MINUTES AGO
U.S. House fails to override Trump veto, upholding border wall emergency
Susan Cornwell
5 MIN READ

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday failed to override President Donald Trump’s first veto, leaving in place the “national emergency” he declared last month to build a U.S.-Mexico border wall that Congress has not funded.

Democrats who control the House did not attract enough Republican support, falling some three dozen votes short of the two-thirds majority vote needed to overturn Trump’s veto. Just 14 Republicans joined 234 Democrats in voting to override, one more Republican than had bucked Trump in a previous House vote on the border wall emergency. One Democrat and two Republicans did not vote.

With the 248-181 tally, Trump is now likely to continue scouring federal accounts for money he wants redirected to building a border wall, which he says is needed to curb illegal immigration and drug trafficking.

However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Representative Joaquin Castro, author of the resolution to overturn Trump’s move, said lawmakers would keep trying to block him through the regular congressional process of appropriating funds, as well as reviewing his emergency declaration again six months from now.

The battle over Trump’s emergency declaration also shifts to the courts, with various legal challenges already underway that could slow Trump’s building plans for some time. A coalition of 16 states sued in federal court in February to stop Trump’s border wall emergency; another four states joined the lawsuit this month.

“Thank you to the House Republicans for sticking together and the BIG WIN today on the Border,” Trump wrote on Twitter after the House vote. “Today’s vote simply reaffirms Congressional Democrats are the party of Open Borders, Drugs and Crime!”

Trump declared the national emergency on Feb. 15 in an attempt to bypass Congress and move taxpayer funds for the wall away from other uses already approved by the legislature. Bipartisan majorities of both the House and Senate rejected his move, voting to terminate the emergency before the president vetoed their resolution on March 15.

Democrats argued the Republican president had overstepped his authority by going around Congress, because the legislature has the power to control spending under the U.S. Constitution.

“We take an oath to the Constitution, not to the president of the United States,” Pelosi said on the House floor.

But Republicans insisted Trump had acted legally under a 1976 law known as the National Emergencies Act, under which previous presidents had declared dozens of emergencies.

“The president has the authority to act. The president is using the authority Congress has given him,” said Republican Representative Sam Graves.

Trump’s position was possibly strengthened by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusion after a 22-month investigation that the Republican president’s campaign team did not collude with Russian interference in the 2016 election. Moscow has denied meddling.

That political victory for Trump may make it more challenging for Republicans to defy the president on a range of things, including his signature issue, the border wall.

“Even though the two issues clearly aren’t related, it increases the president’s strength and popularity and puts him in a stronger position,” Republican Representative Tom Cole said before the House vote.

After the vote, Pelosi and Castro said in a statement that Congress would keep working through the appropriations process to “terminate this dangerous action” by the president.

Indeed, earlier Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee sought to deny the Pentagon the authority to reprogram funds for the wall, an action that could potentially set up another courtroom battle.

The Pentagon had announced Monday that it was shifting $1 billion from military construction projects to build part of the wall. But Democratic Representative Adam Smith, the Armed Services Committee’s chairman, said Tuesday the panel did not approve the proposed use of Pentagon funds.

The leader of the 20-state lawsuit to stop the border wall emergency, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, said after the House failed to override Trump’s veto that the states “are ready to fight long and hard to stop his (Trump’s)fabricated emergency in its tracks.”

For two years, Congress has refused to meet Trump’s demands for funding the wall he promised in his 2016 election campaign, although it appropriated some funds for border fencing and other barriers.

This year, Trump sought $5.7 billion in wall funding. When Congress refused, the standoff triggered a month-long partial government shutdown. That ended when the president agreed to $1.37 billion for border barriers, far less than he wanted.

The president then declared the emergency, vowing to divert funds from other accounts for the wall.

Reporting by Susan Cornwell; Additional reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Tom Brown

Published 50 mins ago
Arizona woman arrested, accused of leading Border Patrol agents in a car chase with illegal immigrants in her trunk: officials
By Elizabeth Zwirz | Fox News

An Arizona woman was taken into custody this week after Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials said she led agents on a car chase while two illegal immigrants were hidden in her trunk.

Border Patrol agents at an immigration checkpoint near Amado, Ariz., came in contact with the unidentified 28-year-old woman on Thursday and sent her for a secondary inspection, the agency said in a news release.

“Instead of pulling into the inspection area, the driver accelerated and merged onto the highway, leading agents on a pursuit for approximately one mile,” CBP said.

The woman was arrested after she stopped her car; she “is being charged with human smuggling,” officials said.

The pair of immigrants, both of whom were from Mexico, were found when agents searched the car, CBP said. They "will be processed for immigration violations," according to the news release.

APRIL 25, 2019 / 10:28 PM / UPDATED AN HOUR AGO
Over 1,000 migrants break out of southern Mexico detention center
Jose Torres
2 MIN READ

TAPACHULA (Reuters) - More than a thousand migrants broke out of a detention center in southern Mexico on Thursday evening, authorities said, in a fresh sign of how a surge in arrivals has stretched the country’s resources to the limit.

More than half of the roughly 1,300 migrants later returned to the Siglo XXI facility in the border city of Tapachula in Chiapas state, but about 600 are still unaccounted for, the National Migration Institute said in a statement.

Migrants from Cuba, who make up the majority of the people being held at the center, were largely behind the breakout, the institute added. Mexican newspaper Reforma reported that Haitians and Central Americans were also among those who fled the facility, which has been crammed with people.

Mexico has returned 15,000 migrants in the past 30 days, officials have said, amid pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to stem the flow of people north.

On Wednesday Trump reiterated threats to close part of the U.S.-Mexico border if Mexico doesn’t block what described as a new caravan of migrants headed north.

The majority of migrants moving through Mexico are from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, but Cubans are also joining in large numbers. More than 1,000 people from Cuba are now in Chiapas, according to Mexican officials.

Exclusive - Trump administration proposal would make it easier to deport immigrants who use public benefits
Reuters • May 3, 2019
By Yeganeh Torbati

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration is considering reversing long-standing policy to make it easier to deport U.S. legal permanent residents who have used public benefits, part of an effort to restrict immigration by low-income people.

A Department of Justice draft regulation, seen by Reuters, dramatically expands the category of people who could be subject to deportation on the grounds that they use benefits.

Currently, those legal permanent residents who are declared to be a "public charge," or primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, can be deported - but in practice, this is very rare.

The draft regulation would use a more expansive definition to include some immigrants who have used an array of public benefits, including cash welfare, food stamps, housing aid, or Medicaid.

While the plan is at an early stage, might not become official government policy, and is likely to attract lawsuits, it is one part of efforts by the Trump administration to restrict legal immigration, in addition to its efforts to reduce illegal immigration to the United States.

The full possible impact is not known, but the change in policy could affect permanent residents - also known as "green card" holders - who are legally entitled to use public benefits soon after their arrival in the United States, such as refugees.

Department of Justice spokesman Alexei Woltornist said the agency "does not comment on or confirm draft regulations."

U.S. law allows for the deportation of immigrants who have become "public charges" within five years of admission if their reason for seeking help preceded their entry to the United States - for example, if they had a chronic health condition that was not disclosed.

But due to a 1948 ruling, the deportation of immigrants for using public benefits has been strictly limited to cases in which the government has demanded payment for public services, and the person has failed to pay. Immigration lawyers said they have rarely if ever heard of someone being deported for using public benefits.

The draft rule indicates the government would override that precedent to allow for deportation of some permanent residents who have used certain public benefits within five years of admission.

For the plan to go into effect, it would be subject to public comment, after which it could be revised. Attorney General William Barr would then have to sign off on it.

The public benefits in question include Supplemental Security Income (SSI), given to disabled and older people; the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps; Section 8 housing vouchers; many Medicaid benefits; and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), a cash assistance programme.

According to federal policy, many permanent residents do not qualify for public benefits unless they have had a green card for five years, making it unlikely they could be targeted for deportation on the basis of "public charge" even under the draft rule.

But dozens of states have looser rules - for instance, allowing pregnant women and children who are permanent residents to access Medicaid without a waiting period.

And the effort to tighten the rules could affect thousands of immigrant veterans, refugees and asylees, who are eligible to receive many benefits without time restrictions. Active members of the military would not be affected.

Administration officials had earlier indicated that the Justice Department, which oversees U.S. immigration courts, planned to issue a regulation on who can be deported for using public benefits, but its details were not previously known.



'NEW TERRITORY'

Immigrant advocates said the impact of the possible change is unclear, because it would be such a departure from long-standing practice.

"We're in new territory here because this has never been tested," said Charles Wheeler, an attorney with the Catholic Legal Immigration Network non-profit group. "I'm concerned that it's going to be targeted at permanent resident aliens who otherwise thought they were free and clear to receive SSI and other public benefit programs."

The change, if implemented, fits with broader Trump administration efforts to squelch legal immigration by transforming public-charge rules. The administration has also slashed refugee admissions and imposed a broad travel ban on citizens of several mostly Muslim countries.

The Justice Department's draft proposal is based on a similar plan by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to significantly broaden the definition of what it means to be a public charge.

While DHS can decide whether to grant or deny immigration benefits, DOJ's immigration judges can also decide whether a resident ought to be deported.

The DHS is expected soon to tighten regulations so that a "public charge" would be any foreigner "who receives one or more public benefits," including an array of cash and non-cash benefits, such as food stamps, housing vouchers, and Medicaid.

The DOJ's draft proposal mirrors that and also directs immigration judges to consider the use of public benefits as a heavily weighted negative factor when determining whether to admit a foreigner to the United States.

The State Department is also trying to restrict entry to the United States of people it suspects might use public benefits.

Last year, it gave U.S. consular officers more discretion to reject visas for people they believe may become public charges. The number of people refused immigrant visas on public-charge grounds was four times higher in 2018 than in 2017, and the highest total since 2004.

In addition to considering new standards for deporting legal residents, the DOJ is also looking at requiring foreigners seeking permanent residency status to submit a declaration to an immigration judge that demonstrates their self-sufficiency. The form asks for a detailed listing of assets, income, and debts, among other information.

Non-Citizens Commit 42% Of Federal Crimes, Despite Being Only 7% Of US Population
Fri, 05/17/2019 - 17:45
Authored by Victor Skinner via TheAmericanMirror.com,

A new federal report shows non-citizens in the United States commit nearly half of all federal crimes, or more than six times their proportion to the American population.

For 2017, data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Surveyshows non-citizens comprise about 7 percent of the country’s population, but the 2018 Annual Report and Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics shows they committed more than 40 percent of all federal crimes.

The United States Sentencing Commission reviewed 321,000 sentencing documents in fiscal year 2018 and outlined several statistics in the annual report:

In fiscal year 2018, the courts reported 69,425 felony and Class A misdemeanor cases to the Commission. This represents an increase of 2,552 cases from the prior fiscal year, and the first increase since fiscal year 2011.

The race of federal offenders remained largely unchanged from prior years. In fiscal year 2018, 54.3 percent of all offenders were Hispanic, 21.2 percent were White, 20.6 percent were Black, and 3.8 percent were of another race. Non-U.S. Citizens accounted for 42.7 percent of all federal offenders.

Immigration cases accounted for the largest single group of offenses in fiscal year 2018, comprising 34.4 percent of all reported cases. Cases involving drugs, firearms, and fraud were the next most common types of offenses after immigration cases. Together these four types of offenses accounted for 82.9 percent of all cases reported to the Commission in fiscal year 2018.

A breakdown of crimes in the report shows about 92 percent of immigration crimes, or about 21,835 cases, involved non-citizens. But they also committed other crimes at far higher rates than their 7 percent proportion of the population as a whole.

Cases involving drug possession, for example, were nearly evenly split between citizens and non-citizens with 361 and 339, respectively. In other words, non-citizens violated federal drug possession laws at a rate roughly seven times higher than citizens.

Statistics were similar for violations of national defense, with 30 percent of cases involving non-citizens, as well as money laundering at 27 percent, drug trafficking at 24 percent and murder at 18 percent. Other crimes committed at higher rates include kidnapping, fraud/theft/embezzlement, extortion/racketeering, burglary, assault, “commercialized vice,” and environmental crimes, among others.



The largest numbers of crimes occurred in border states, and areas with sanctuary policies. Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Florida and southern California were among the most heavily concentrated areas for federal crimes. Data in the Sentencing Commission’s report show the Fifth Circuit Court covering Texas and the Ninth Circuit Court covering California and Arizona are the busiest, with about 26 and 20 percent of cases, respectively.

In the vast majority of cases involving both citizens and non-citizens – 87.8 percent – the offenders were sentenced to prison. For the roughly 29,000 non-citizens convicted of federal crimes in fiscal year 2018, that statistic was 98.5 percent, according to the report.

Rapid DNA testing reveals a THIRD of migrants faked family relationship with children to claim asylum during ICE pilot of the procedure in Texas

ICE ran the pilot for a few days this month in El Paso and McAllen, Texas
About 30% of migrants tested with rapid DNA were lying about familial relations
Migrants with children can claim asylum and avoid detention in most cases

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7045351/Rapid-DNA-testing-reveals-migrants-faked-family-relationship-kids.html

'100%' of illegal immigrant families being released into U.S., Homeland Security says
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Thursday, May 23, 2019

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan said Thursday that “100%” of illegal-immigrant families in the new border surge are being released into communities, rather than being held and deported.

He said within a month or two, they are also granted work permits, giving them a foothold to live and remain in the U.S. while their cases proceed through the immigration courts — a process that averages two years, and stretches even longer in some overwhelmed regions.

Mr. McAleenan said that system, rewarding unauthorized migrants who jump the border with exactly the thing they seek, is responsible for the record-breaking numbers.

“That is directly how smugglers are advertising,” he told the Senate Homeland Security Committee, adding that it applies not just to families seeking asylum.

The effects on the border have been stunning.

In 2012, only about 10,000 migrants traveling as families — meaning parent and child — were caught by Border Patrol at the border. Over the last two months alone, that number was 111,679 people.

Many of the families end up ignoring their immigration court proceedings, and remain in the U.S. illegally even after they have been ordered deported.

That was brought into stark view this week when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement revealed that an illegal immigrant teen affiliated with the violent international MS-13 street gang came into the U.S. as part of a family unit in 2015.

Josue Fuentes-Ponce and his family did not show up for their immigration hearing in 2017 and they were ordered deported in absentia — yet nobody ever went to look for the family.

The teen remained free in Maryland, where he was accused last year of attempted murder. ICE sought to deport him, but he was released from custody after local authorities did not honor a detainer request.

He now stands accused of the horrific murder of a 14-year-old girl in Maryland last month. Prosecutors say he and another illegal immigrant, 17-year-old Joel Ernesto Escobar, who arrived in the U.S. as an Unaccompanied Alien Child, used a bat to bash the girl and a machete to chop at her, suspecting she was going to rat them out over a gang-related robbery.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/23/100-illegal-immigrant-families-released-dhs/

Published 2 hours ago, Last Update 9 mins ago
Privately funded organization 'We Build the Wall' starts construction of border barrier in El Paso area
By David Montanaro | Fox News

Could a privately funded border wall be the solution to the border crisis?

Former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach explains.

A privately funded organization called "We Build the Wall" began work this weekend on a project to erect a section of border wall in the El Paso sector.

Former Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, said on "Fox & Friends" Monday that the project was undertaken because there is a "ridiculously large gap" near Mount Cristo Rey that drug and human smugglers are taking advantage of.

The barrier will be built on private land. Authorities in the El Paso Sector - which provides support for the counties of El Paso and Hudspeth in the state of Texas and the entire state of New Mexico - apprehends 930 people per day, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

"This is the first time any private organization has built border wall on private land," he told Pete Hegseth, adding that the Army Corps of Engineers had said previously that the strip of land was too rugged for fencing.

He said the project was funded through private donations to the organization.

"We'll keep on building as long as people keep chipping in. The average contribution has been only $67 but so many people have chipped in," said Kobach.

Kobach said plans are in the works to start a second project.

It came on the heels of a federal judge blocking President Trump from building key sections of his border wall with money secured under his declaration of a national emergency, delivering what may prove a temporary setback on one of his highest priorities.

U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam Jr.'s order, issued Friday, prevents work from beginning on two of the highest-priority, Pentagon-funded wall projects — one spanning 46 miles in New Mexico and another covering 5 miles in Yuma, Ariz.

On Saturday, Trump pledged to file an expedited appeal of the ruling.

Trump, who is visiting Japan, tweeted: "Another activist Obama appointed judge has just ruled against us on a section of the Southern Wall that is already under construction. This is a ruling against Border Security and in favor of crime, drugs and human trafficking. We are asking for an expedited appeal!"

While Judge Gilliam's order applied only to those first-in-line projects, he said challengers were likely to prevail at trial on their argument that the president was wrongly ignoring Congress' wishes by diverting Defense Department money.

Video at https://www.foxnews.com/us/we-build-wall-starts-construction-border-texas