Obama Releases 220 Illegal Alien Kids PER DAY As Border Crisis Escalates

by
January 4, 2017

Illegal Aliens

During the month of November alone, the Obama administration sent enough border-crossing illegal alien children to live in American communities to fill up 12 Washington, D.C. middle schools.

In fact, strung out over the entire 30-day period, the Obama administration processed and turned loose an astonishing 6,623 illegal alien kids who’d recently crossed the U.S.-Mexico border unlawfully, averaging more than 220 kids per day. The administration released about 600 more kids in November than they did during the month of October, when 6,051 children were sent to live with sponsors in the U.S. pending their day in immigration court. FY2016 data reveals the vast majority of these children are teens claiming to be between 15 and 17 years of age.

The incoming flood of illegal aliens, including unaccompanied minors, ramped up during the final few months of FY2016 and into the first days of the new fiscal year, and has yet to slow down. While border agents have apprehended another 14,128 unaccompanied kids at the Mexican border between October and November, the administration’s Office of Refugee Resettlement turned loose 12,674 UACs in that same time frame.

With 10 months still to go until the end of the fiscal year, the administration has already released roughly 25 percent of the total number of unaccompanied kids set free to live in the United States last year, when a total of 52,147 children were sent to live with sponsors. If this pace continues, the number of kids caught and released into the U.S. will easily outpace any recent year including FY2014, when a new wave of juvenile border crossings caught the nation’s attention and overwhelmed border resources.

51 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • justinwachin says:

    President Trump needs to begin sending these kids back home to live with their parents or relatives. We already have enough immigration laws. We need to begin enforcing them. President Obama didn’t do his job. He failed to ignore laws which did not meet with his world view. Fortunately Obama’s reign of error will soon end. Hopefully our next president will enforce the laws.

    1. bobnstuff says:

      In this case the law is being enforced. The law say that these people must have a hearing. That law was passed under the last republican president. Trump will have to follow the same law until the congress changes it, if they can figure out how to do it.

  • Jimmie Cooper Boswell says:

    just another cruel and unusual method used by obama, to destroy america and it’s culture with non-american criminals. just as importing muslims, is another method to destroy america and it’s culture.

    1. Lilliedcarey says:

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !uu47c:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !uu47c:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash337NetworkLightGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!uu47c:….,…….

  • Rick D. says:

    I think Obozo should volunteer to let all of them live in his new home in D.C. Just don’t call the police if any personal items go missing!!

  • Tiger says:

    So let us add to this number, these children’s parents, siblings and other family members who if children they allowed to cross alone, then you have such a sizable number that they MUST BE DEPORTED. Bottom line, they have to go. We cannot as a country allow just two types into our country, Hispanics and Muslims both have many children and procreate like fungus among us.

    Every single man from Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Tunisia all countries that back Terrorism need to go. DEPORT them. They are not citizens and they are by their numbers alone a true threat to our country. O has put into place, as did Merkel and others an invasion an invading army that will take out, in short order countries they are in and replace the White people, this is their goal.

    Merkel who brought in millions of refugees, now saying that Radical Islam the biggest threat to Germany. NO JOKE? Indeed as Trump said they and we have brought in the Trojan Horse. I say send it back

    1. bobnstuff says:

      Guess what, under our present law we can’t just deport them. They must have a hearing before they can be sent back. Those hearings are backed up 60 weeks. If we keep these kids in detention till their hearings it will cost about $100,000 each. Maybe the Republicans will move now to fix the problem since it won’t help Obama. Back two years ago President Obama asked for help with this problem from congress and congress did nothing, they just said no. Until the law is changed the problem will be with us.

      1. Tiger says:

        Guess what yes we can. You see O broke every single immigration law we have. The 14th Amendment does NOT give citizenship to any child dropped here by a parent from another country. That child is what it’s parents are. We have over 800 Long term Family friendly empty Detention Centers across this country. Built by H.R.645. They can all go there. Guess what the countries they come from can be spoken to and they can fund them. Not our responsibility, they are illegal. Guess what, they are not allowed by law to get any government benefits, only reason they do is because of the Anchor Baby status that will go away. Guess what else they cost us over 1 billion dollars a year along with the refugees so that money can just be put towards any keep they need.

        Guess what O never asked Congress for anything, he did his own thing. I listened to the Congressional Investigations on illegals and the border and Guess what, I learned so much and all about so many laws on the books that O bypassed.

        So Guess what the problem won’t continue, the immigration laws will be back in place, no more Anchor Babies, no more benefits, no more jobs, no more Sanctuary cities and my Guess is these people will leave on their own accord and get in touch with families across the border. Also the President of Mexico is all about securing the border, getting the gun running and drug running out and I feel sure with some persuasion he can help fund these illegals. In Mexico you ask for food, shelter, medical and jobs you get a cell, you get bread and water and your job is on the chain gang.

        1. bobnstuff says:

          Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or
          enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
          person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

          I think it’s pretty clear just what the constitution says here wouldn’t you say.

          It’s cheaper to send these kids to family or friends then to keep them locked up for over a year. Also the United States can’t force another country to give us money, sorry but that just a fact of life.

          I guess you missed the President asking congress for help but he did and the house gave money to Texas for the use of the national guard but gave Obama nothing, then then left town. Because congress hasn’t supported border protection with funds Obama has been forced to take people off our northern borders and send them south. There are now twice as many border patrol agents on the Mexican border then when Obama took office.

          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/30/immigration-obama-congress-unaccompanied-minors/11766205/

          http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2014/07/09/obama-asks-for-3-7-billion-to-aid-border-but-what-we-really-need-is-comprehensive-immigration-reform/#6b0d51b244c9

          1. bobnstuff says:

            The Blaze is playing a little fast and loose with the facts here. You are only guilty of a crime if you are convicted of it under the eyes of the law and the record will show only convictions. It’s one of the basic parts of our criminal justice system. ICE isn’t the only group who release people they shouldn’t. It happens pretty often. They also hold people that they shouldn’t.

          2. Tiger says:

            ICE has held nobody under O. I listened to the hearings.

          3. bobnstuff says:

            https://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics/2015
            Here are the numbers and it isn’t 0 is it.

          4. bobnstuff says:

            I wonder who those 32,000 people sleeping in those beds that cost us $121 per day are. Why are those people complaining about conditions if there isn’t anyone there.

          5. Tiger says:

            Form the article.

            “Obama made the threat to ICE agents at a town hall meeting held on
            Wednesday in Miami with an audience of select illegal aliens and family
            members sponsored and broadcast by the Spanish language network
            Telemundo and MSNBC. Obama compared ICE to the military where soldiers
            have to follow orders. Obama failed to note that soldiers have a duty to
            disobey orders they know to be unlawful.

            “MR. DIAZ-BALART: But what are the consequences?
            Because how do you ensure that ICE agents or Border Patrol won’t be
            deporting people like this? I mean, what are the consequences?

            “THE PRESIDENT: José, look, the bottom line is, is that
            if somebody is working for ICE and there is a policy and they don’t
            follow the policy, there are going to be consequences to it. So I can’t speak to a specific problem. What I can talk about is what’s true in the government, generally.

            “In the U.S. military, when you get an order, you’re
            expected to follow it. It doesn’t mean that everybody follows the order.
            If they don’t, they’ve got a problem. And the same is going to be true
            with respect to the policies that we’re putting forward.”

          6. bobnstuff says:

            United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

            This is the defining case. The one Mr. King seemed to miss.

            http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/us_constitution/news.php?q=1308252582

          7. Tiger says:

            Legislative History of the 14th Amendment:

            During Congressional debate of the Citizenship Clause it was made
            clear that the drafters did not intend automatic birthright citizenship
            for all persons born in the U.S. Senator Jacob Howard, a drafter of the
            14th Amendment, in floor debate said of the Clause:

            “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States
            who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or
            foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States,
            but will include every other class of persons.”[1]

            Senator Howard also made clear that simply being born in the U.S. was
            not enough to be a citizen when he opposed an amendment to specifically
            exclude Native Americans from the Citizenship Clause. He said, “Indians
            born within the limits of the United States and who maintain their
            tribal relations, are not, in the sense of this amendment, born subject
            to the jurisdiction of the United States.”

            Notice the reasoning deployed, Native Americans maintain their tribal
            relations so they are not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
            Senator Edgar Cowan said, “It is perfectly clear that the mere fact that
            a man is born in the country has not heretofore entitled him to the
            right to exercise political power.”[2]

            Senator Lyman Trumbull said:

            “The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States and
            subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens. That means, “subject
            to the complete jurisdiction thereof.”[3] (emphasis added)

            He further elaborated, “What do we mean by subject to the
            jurisdiction of the United States? Not owing allegiance to anybody
            else.”

            There was still more discussion of the language by Senator Reverdy Johnson. He said:

            “Now, all that this amendment provides is, that all persons born in
            the United States and not subject to some foreign Power for that, no
            doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter
            before us, shall be considered as citizens of the United States.”[4]

            Supreme Court on Birthright Citizenship for illegal immigrants:

            While some have discussed birthright citizenship as if it is settled
            law that any person born in the U.S. is a citizen, the Supreme Court has
            never ruled as such. In the famous 2004 Supreme Court case, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,
            Taliban fighter Yaser Esam Hamdi was discovered to have been born in
            the United States to parents that were subjects of the Kingdom of Saudi
            Arabia. Even though he was born in the United States, the Court never
            called him a citizen and the Court made no declaration in that case that
            anyone born on American soil was automatically a citizen.

            In the Slaughter-House Cases of 1873, the Supreme Court
            said, “[t]he phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to
            exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens
            or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”

            Next, in 1884, the Supreme Court addressed a claim of citizenship in Elk v. Wilkins.
            The Court held that John Elk did not meet the jurisdiction requirement
            of the 14th Amendment because he was a member of an Indian tribe at
            birth. The Court said that even though Elk was born in the U.S. he did
            not meet the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” requirement because
            that required that he “not merely be subject in some respect or degree
            to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to
            their political jurisdiction.”

            Proponents of birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants point to the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case.
            However, that case dealt with a man that was born to parents that were
            legally and permanently domiciled in the United States at the time of
            his birth. In that case, there was more expansive language used on
            birthright citizenship, but it was neither the holding of the case nor
            does it operate as binding precedent on the Court or as the law of the
            land.

            Congressional power to change the policy:

            Under the Constitution and reiterated by the Supreme Court, Congress
            has plenary power over immigration and naturalization. We see this in
            Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and Section 5 of the 14th
            Amendment explicitly grants Congress the power to enforce the
            Citizenship Clause.

            So not only does Congress have the power of naturalization in Article
            I, but the 14th Amendment provides Congress the power to enforce the
            Citizenship Clause. Together, these two provisions make it clear there
            is no need to amend the Constitution to change the current faulty
            birthright citizenship policy.

            Congress has the power and duty to say who can be a citizen of the
            United States. The legislative branch has a responsibility to uphold the
            Constitution, and on the issue of birthright citizenship it is clear
            the plain meaning of the Citizenship Clause as originally understood is
            being violated. The Congress can and should make the legislative fix
            necessary to correct this problem.

            Conclusion:

            It is undisputed that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause
            requires that one is both born in the United States and subject to the
            jurisdiction of the United States. Further, no fair reading of the
            legislative history of the drafting of that Clause leads to any
            conclusion other than it required those granted citizenship have
            complete allegiance to the United States.

            Logic dictates that illegal immigrants in defiance of the
            jurisdiction of the United States and citizens of foreign powers are not
            subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as required by the
            14th Amendment. And the Supreme Court has never held the opposite to be
            true. Congress, therefore, with its plenary power over immigration and
            empowerment to enforce the Citizenship Clause can restore the correct
            birthright citizenship policy through legislation. And indeed, if we are
            to have a rational immigration policy controlled by government as
            opposed to one controlled by every person who illegally enters, Congress
            must return to the original meaning of the 14th Amendment.

            I authored H.R. 140, The Birthright Citizenship Act in the House for many years in order to restore the 14th Amendment and the Rule of Law.

            [1] The Congressional Globe, May 30, 1866. Debate on the Senate Floor. Remarks of Senator Howard. Available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11.

            [2] The Congressional Globe, May 30, 1866. Debate on Senate Floor. Remarks of Senator Cowan. Available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11.

            [3] The Congressional Globe, May 30, 1866. Debate on Senate Floor. Remarks of Senator Trumbull. Available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=14.

            [4] The Congressional Globe, May 30, 1866. Debate on Senate Floor. Remarks of Senator Johnson. Available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=14.

            Issues:

            Immigration

            Media

            Press Releases

            Columns

            Photos

            Videos

          8. bobnstuff says:

            If you are going to cut and paste things please go back and fix them so they are not such a pain to read. Also please give credit to the writer as authors deserve to be recognized for their work.

          9. Tiger says:

            Already did gave you the article just copied from it. Don’t get your panties in a wad. The truth was in this article and that is what should have come across. It did not mean anyone dropped from a foreign womb was a citizen. If I have a child in France or any other country that child is still an American not French.

          10. bobnstuff says:

            All of North America and almost all of South America have birthright citizenship, that includes both Mexico and Canada.

            https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/issues/birthright-citizenship/nations-granting-birthright-citizenship.html

          11. Tiger says:

            NO they have duel citizenship and when the child is 18 they can choose I know my son born in Okinawa and had duel citizenship, different thing all together.

          12. bobnstuff says:

            Is it really a different thing? If your son can claim citizenship because he was born in Okinawa is it all that different then someone claiming citizenship because they are born in the US?

          13. Tiger says:

            Yes until they are 18 and make the decision they are not given benefits nor are they treated like citizens. Anyone dropped on U.S. soil is not a citizen, showed you that they are what their parents are.

          14. bobnstuff says:

            America has always treated non citizens pretty much the same as citizens. We give them most of the same rights and we expect them to pay the same taxes to live here. Benefits have never been based on being a citizen although illegals get very few of the benefits because they are not in the system. You can get Social Security if you have paid into it and have a social security card even if you are not an American citizen. This isn’t new but has pretty much always been the case.

          15. Tiger says:

            No everything you are saying is against our laws. You sound like O and his lawyers that the judge set straight. You have gotten so used to all these years of abuse of our laws and lies you believe them. When our immigration laws put back into play going to be some real surprises for people like you.

          16. bobnstuff says:

            What the real surprise will be is when people find out what the law really is and how weak they are. I have look up the laws and have had some first hand dealing with immigration and they are not what most people seem to believe they are. Back before the Republican took the senate there was a pretty good bill to fix many of the problems passed but the leaders of the house stopped it before they even looked at it, they were afraid that it would pass and give Obama a victory. I read the bill and it was just about everything the republicans had been asking for. Any of our last three republican presidents would have signed it.

          17. Tiger says:

            The Libs ruled all. The Republicans were under O’s thumb. Nothing they passed got any further than the Senate and it was a one way street for eight years. Now the highway to success is open and the Bills will be speeding down it.

            NO our immigration laws are not weak. I have read them also. When listening to the hearings I heard there are many laws on our books that allow Trump to do everything he plans, including the “Alien Threat”.

          18. Tiger says:

            Time to enjoy something Bob the good ole days. Have a good Sunday.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRfuTTd09vo

          19. Tiger says:

            Here is the pamphlet and also pamphlets have been found at the border with instructions for what to say to get in.

            http://www.truthandaction.org/shocking-leaflet-u-s-department-agriculture-encourages-illegal-immigrants-get-food-stamps/2/

          20. bobnstuff says:

            How’s your Spanish? Go read what the Spanish part says. They seem to make it hard to read but it clearly say Legal immigrants, not illegal ones. We have extended many thing to legal immigrants over the years.

          21. Tiger says:

            Look I will pull up the other pamphlet that has the yougov.com on it for them to apply.

          22. Tiger says:

            From the article.

            “The United States government makes available public benefits for people
            who need help with food, healthcare, and day-to-day expenses. To
            qualify for each of these benefits, you have to meet certain income,
            resource and/or health requirements.

            Some immigrants qualify for major public benefits programs. Depending on your status, you could qualify for healthcare, food stamps, cash assistance, low-cost housing, energy assistance, and child care assistance.

            It is important to know that U.S. citizen children of immigrant parents
            have the same rights to public benefits as all other citizens –
            regardless of the immigration status of their parents. For example,
            undocumented parents may apply for public benefits for their U.S.
            citizen children. When applying, be clear that you are applying only for
            your children, and not for yourself. You should not have to reveal your
            own immigration status if you are applying for benefits only for your
            children and not yourself. If you feel you must mention something about
            your immigration status, it is best to state simply that you do not have
            an immigration status which qualifies you to obtain benefits. You
            should not ever feel you have to reveal that you are undocumented. Never
            show the welfare office proof that you are residing unlawfully in the
            country, such as an order of deportation against you.

            If you apply for benefits for your children but are denied based on

            your failure to provide information regarding your own immigration
            status or social security number, call Community Legal Services at
            215-227-6485.”

            Again encouraging the illegals who dropped the child on our soil not to say they are undocumented or Illegal. Enough is enough. These people need to get out of our country our people need this help and this money not them. What about Illegal do you not want to understand?

          23. bobnstuff says:

            This is a good discussion and I don’t want you to think I’m not involved but if I don’t get some work done my wife will not be happy with me. I will come back later. I am enjoying the back and forth.

          24. Tiger says:

            Hey Bob me also. I need to take a walk and do some things. Later my friend.

          25. Tiger says:

            O gives them more aid than our own people. My old neighbor has had her food stamps downed by 100 dollars over the last year alone and told that too many applicants. She is over 70, worked all her life, has small SS and lives within her means.

            https://conservativedailypost.com/obama-just-did-this-illegal-immigrants-now-getting-more-aid-than-veterans/

          26. bobnstuff says:

            Food Stamps are run by the state not the Feds even though the Fed pays for it. Illegals have nothing to do with her cuts in food stamps, the funds were cut so the states had to change there rules. Most illegals get next to no benefits since you need a social security card for most things. Any programs they do get are from the states and the Feds have nothing to do with it.

          27. Tiger says:

            I know that but I am telling you nobody but American citizens are to get them, bottom line. Yes it did we had an influx of illegals I work with my Congressman Bob something you might want to consider. One of our counties down the road from me had 800 unexpected children at the beginning of the school year and we have a shortage of teachers due to it.

            By the way my Governor is the one who said after Pulse that O drops refugees here, doesn’t tell us who they are, where they are from or how many there are. He does this across this country and then he does give them benefits. Look it up. Geeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzeeeeeeeeeeeeee no wonder we had eight years of that pinheaded Muslim O.

      2. Tiger says:

        From the article.Young illegals tell Border Patrol: We’re coming because we heard about a “new” U.S. law that lets minors stay

        “WaPo had this story a few days ago but Byron York
        has a smart post today about its deeper significance, as an expose of
        the White House’s latest lie about illegal immigration. Why are illegals
        from Central America, many of them kids, now streaming across the
        southwest border at a rate of 35,000 per month?
        Ask an Obama spin doctor like Josh Earnest that question and he’ll tell
        you there’s a simple explanation: Violence. They’re fleeing into Mexico
        to get away from gang wars, then continuing north to the United States.

        Ask the illegals themselves, though, and you get a different answer:

        Recent days have been filled with anecdotal reports, from
        local news outlets in Central America to major American newspapers,
        citing immigrants who say they came because they believe U.S. law has
        been changed to allow them to stay. And now comes word that Border
        Patrol agents in the most heavily-trafficked area of the surge, the Rio
        Grande Valley sector of Texas, recently questioned 230 illegal
        immigrants about why they came. The results showed overwhelmingly that
        the immigrants, including those classified as UACs, or unaccompanied
        children, were motivated by the belief that they would be allowed to
        stay in the United States — and not by conditions in their homelands.
        From a report written by the agents, quoting from the interviews:

        “The main reason the subjects chose this particular time to migrate to the United States was to take advantage of the
        ‘new’ U.S. ‘law’ that grants a ‘free pass’ or permit (referred to as
        “permisos”) being issued by the U.S. government to female adult OTMs
        traveling with minors and to UACs. (Comments: The ‘permisos’
        are the Notice to Appear documents issued to undocumented aliens, when
        they are released on their own recognizance pending a hearing before an
        immigration judge.) The information is apparently common knowledge in
        Central America and is spread by word of mouth, and international and
        local media. A high percentage of the subjects interviewed stated their
        family members in the U.S. urged them to travel immediately, because the
        United States government was only issuing immigration ‘permisos’ until
        the end of June 2014…The issue of ‘permisos’ was the main reason
        provided by 95% of the interviewed subjects.”

        There is no “new law” — yet — that grants illegals the right to stay
        provided they make it across the border by June 30th. Where that idea
        came from is unclear, but it’s probably related to DHS’s two-year extension
        earlier this month of DACA, the executive amnesty for DREAMers that
        Obama ordered in 2012 as an election gimmick aimed at Latino voters. If
        you applied for two years of deportation relief under DACA at the time,
        you just got another two years’ reprieve courtesy of Barack Obama’s DHS.
        That doesn’t mean you get two years if you cross the border now, but go
        figure that some foreign media might misunderstand given the
        administration’s cheerleading for amnesty. Case in point:”

        1. bobnstuff says:

          Did your read this article? It said that they don’t know where the idea that the law was changed can from and the the Vice President personal went down there to try and stop the rumors. The story didn’t come from our government but from those making money by transporting these people to our country.

          There was no gimmick involve here on the part of the president but instead a way to try to control a problem with the limited funds given. Obama doesn’t have the funds to cover everything that ICE needs to do so all he can do is try to get rid of the bad ones and stop scaring the ones he can do nothing about. What he has done is built a list of names and address’s of all those illegals so we now know who they are and where they are. By bringing them out of the shadows we at least get a little control. In case you haven’t heard Trump is now saying pretty much the same thing.

          1. Tiger says:

            Sorry I can look up articles where indeed the presidents of these countries said that O’s people told them this. Biden even went to Mexico and told the then Mexican president how his people could cross the border and how to get benefits.

            O has done nothing but open the borders and you need to listen to those Congressional Hearings. He broke every single immigration law we have. He continues to do so. His Dreamers business is still in the courts and not allowed to move forward. His lawyers told straight out these people can’t have benefits nor DL and it is going to get ugly.

            No O dropped the register, he allowed over 80,000 criminal illegals to come back into America that came out in the investigations also. O took money from SS, from all government programs and from even research to pay for illegals and refugees, where you been? Where does he get the 1 billion a year for each group? Where did he get precious metals, gold, silver and cash to give to the Iranians for those prisoners awhile back? You need to check some things out.

            O scrubbed 800 Muslims records that Homeland Security had on a Watch List but like Trump said, our agencies know who these people are and where they are and they are out of here. Trump is not saying any such thing. He has doubled down on everything.

  • rayser711 says:

    Friggin Obama…..What a jerk….He really does hate America !

  • Ramon1710 . says:

    Send them all back to Kenya to live with him. Consider it his “fair share”

  • setemfree says:

    Time for this to stop. Perhaps if we let the countries they are coming from know they are being ground into hamburger and used to feed the hungry that we can cut down on the illegals. Lets feed the hungry, unlimited amount of free food, just pick them up, wash and grind. the other white meat. Picture shows, not to much fat, we may have to mix in a little pig, so it isn’t so dry..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative