Cornyn: Schumer Offered $25
Billion For Wall Funding
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 10:01 am on January 24, 2018
me skeptical on this
claim, reported today at the Los Angeles Times in
the wake of Chuck Schumer’s attempt to reset the
DACA-immigration standoff. Schumer announced yesterday that he was pulling his
agreement to fund the border wall after losing the shutdown stunt on Monday, no
doubt hoping to be seen as playing hardball with Donald Trump immediately after
getting outplayed by him. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) later said that there had already
been some bipartisan compromise on the impasse, with Schumer supposedly
agreeing to fund the entire border-wall project:
Top Senate Democrat
Chuck Schumer has pulled back an offer of $25 billion for President Donald
Trump’s long-promised southern border wall, as lawmakers scrambled to figure
out how to push a deal to protect 700,000 or more so-called Dreamer immigrants
from deportation. …
Cornyn, the No. 2
Senate Republican, said Schumer had promised $25 billion for the wall and other
border security measures, though not all of that would have been immediate
funding. He called Schumer’s withdrawal of the offer “a step backward.”
Say what? The “gang of six” proposal
that got floated immediately before the shutdown only has a tenth of that spending for additional
immigration enforcement and only a little over half of that ($1.6 billion) was
allocated to border barrier security. Cornyn offers an important qualifier
here, noting that it wouldn’t have been “immediate funding,” echoing what Mick Mulvaney saidyesterday —
that Schumer was offering an authorizationrather than an
appropriation. Authorizations are cheap, as Schumer proved by voting to
authorize a border wall in 2006 and blocking the funding for it ever since.
But that’s still a
figure that’s an order of magnitude beyond anything Democrats offered in the
past, while a much more modest proposal was on the table with key Republicans
backing it. Are we to believe that Schumer would have increased the offer
by almost 2000% after just a few hours of the shutdown — with Graham’s much
more palatable (for Schumer) bipartisan deal in play? That would have been a yuuuuuuuuge victory for Donald
Trump and border hawks and would have given the White House enough leverage to
steamroll Graham into demanding a much bigger FY2018 down payment than $1.6
billion on that border funding.
It seems a little too
good to be true, but at least thus far Schumer’s not denying it. Why reveal it
now? Perhaps Cornyn’s doing a little parameter-resetting of his own. Both
Cornyn and Mulvany have stated that Schumer was pretty generous with
“authorizations,” and they would want to get that full figure on the table at
the start of negotiations. If that’s the offer Schumer made, then Senate
Republicans and the White House want to make sure that Democrats and their
interest groups know that’s
the starting point for future negotiations.
And with that, it’s
easy for the White House to claim as it did yesterday that the gang of six
and its anemic border-wall funding is at the “go through its pockets and look
for loose change” stage:
White House Press
Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Tuesday the immigration reform bill
presented by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), and Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) would
be “dead on arrival.”
Sanders said the
bipartisan bill, which has also received support from Sen. Jeff Flake (R.,
Ariz.), does not meet President Donald Trump’s benchmarks on border security or
reforming the larger immigration system. The White House previously criticized
the bill for providing little to improve border security and allowing chain
migration and the visa lottery system to continue, and Sanders said she wanted
to “leave no doubt” about Trump’s expectations.
“In a bipartisan
meeting at the White House two weeks ago, we outlined a path forward on four
issues: serious border security, an end to chain migration, the cancellation to
the outdated and unsafe visa lottery, and a permanent solution to DACA,”
Sanders said. “Unfortunately, the Flake-Graham-Durbin agreement does not meet
these benchmarks.”
CA ALREADY HAS NEARLY THE HIGHEST STATE TAX IN THE UNION AND A $30 BILLION YEARLY STATE WELFARE FUND FOR LA RAZA TO COVER.
California Hoping To Make Businesses Cough Up Half Of Their Tax Cuts
This story popped up a couple of days ago but we’re only just getting around to it now. The central theme of the state government in California these days is fairly obvious: #RESIST Trump. Basically, anything the President is in favor of they need to oppose and reverse if possible. But the one thing you’d expect them to keep their hands off of would be a federal tax cut, right?
Don’t be silly. Since it was a GOP idea, no matter how massively popular it’s been with the voters, the tax cuts must be opposed. But they can’t do anything about it because it’s a federal law, or so the theory goes. Never fear, citizens. The state legislature has figured out a way around that pesky little problem. Now that the corporate tax rate has been slashed, the Golden State wants to “claw back” that money by confiscating half of the savings the corporations would have realized under the new rates. (Fox News)
Calling the Trump administration’s tax reform plan a “middle-class tax increase,” two California lawmakers introduced a bill that would force large companies to fork over half of their expected saving to the state.
Assemblymen Kevin McCarthy and Phil Ting, both Democrats, introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 22, which calls for a 10 percent surcharge on companies with a net earnings over $1 million. The plan could potentially raise billions for the state’s social services programs.
“It is unconscionable to force working families to pay the price for tax breaks and loopholes benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals,” Ting said in a statement, according to The San Francisco Chronicle. “This bill will help blunt the impact of the federal tax plan on everyday Californians by protecting funding for education, affordable health care and other core priorities.”
We should probably start by pointing out that the Kevin McCarthy in this story is a different person than that other Kevin McCarthy from California who serves as the House Majority Leader. Two very different people in many, many ways.
By this point, it should be clear that all of that word salad they served up about the tax cuts and the effects they may have on California’s citizens is nonsense. As we discussed here previously, the only negative impact coming out of it will be the loss of part of the SALT deductions which can be taken by Californians earning a minimum of well over $150K. And even if they earn a quarter million the impact will be minimal. It’s further worth reminding them that the only reason their higher earners are in this boat to begin with is that California’s state taxes are astronomical. Also, giving “breaks” to corporations (read: employers) doesn’t affect California’s bottom line at all since we’re only talking about federal taxes.
The underlying reality here should be shocking to anyone who doesn’t actually live in California or New York. The federal government made a change to the tax code which would allow businesses to pay a lower rate, thereby saving them some money. The state of California wants to make sure that nobody pays lower taxes (even though the money isn’t coming out of their coffers) so they’re going to try to confiscate the savings. This is, to put it in the simplest terms possible, highway robbery, only using the legislative pen rather than a gun.
At some point, you have to ask why anyone puts up with all of this and keeps doing business in California. The mask has been fully pulled away this month and business owners should be forced to face up to the facts. Their own state government pretty much hates them and will take any opportunity possible to rip them off. There are so many more business friendly states out there where they would probably flourish.
Of course, there’s always one other option. Maybe that “New California” idea isn’t so bad after all.
MEXIFORNIA: WHERE LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND MEXICANS ABOVE THE LAW IS THE LAW!
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa….. Members of the racist, violent, fascist M.E.Ch.A. separatist movement.
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
CA ALREADY HAS NEARLY THE HIGHEST STATE TAX IN THE UNION AND A $30 BILLION YEARLY STATE WELFARE FUND FOR LA RAZA TO COVER.
California Hoping To Make Businesses Cough Up Half Of Their Tax Cuts
This story popped up a couple of days ago but we’re only just getting around to it now. The central theme of the state government in California these days is fairly obvious: #RESIST Trump. Basically, anything the President is in favor of they need to oppose and reverse if possible. But the one thing you’d expect them to keep their hands off of would be a federal tax cut, right?
Don’t be silly. Since it was a GOP idea, no matter how massively popular it’s been with the voters, the tax cuts must be opposed. But they can’t do anything about it because it’s a federal law, or so the theory goes. Never fear, citizens. The state legislature has figured out a way around that pesky little problem. Now that the corporate tax rate has been slashed, the Golden State wants to “claw back” that money by confiscating half of the savings the corporations would have realized under the new rates. (Fox News)
Calling the Trump administration’s tax reform plan a “middle-class tax increase,” two California lawmakers introduced a bill that would force large companies to fork over half of their expected saving to the state.
Assemblymen Kevin McCarthy and Phil Ting, both Democrats, introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 22, which calls for a 10 percent surcharge on companies with a net earnings over $1 million. The plan could potentially raise billions for the state’s social services programs.
“It is unconscionable to force working families to pay the price for tax breaks and loopholes benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals,” Ting said in a statement, according to The San Francisco Chronicle. “This bill will help blunt the impact of the federal tax plan on everyday Californians by protecting funding for education, affordable health care and other core priorities.”
We should probably start by pointing out that the Kevin McCarthy in this story is a different person than that other Kevin McCarthy from California who serves as the House Majority Leader. Two very different people in many, many ways.
By this point, it should be clear that all of that word salad they served up about the tax cuts and the effects they may have on California’s citizens is nonsense. As we discussed here previously, the only negative impact coming out of it will be the loss of part of the SALT deductions which can be taken by Californians earning a minimum of well over $150K. And even if they earn a quarter million the impact will be minimal. It’s further worth reminding them that the only reason their higher earners are in this boat to begin with is that California’s state taxes are astronomical. Also, giving “breaks” to corporations (read: employers) doesn’t affect California’s bottom line at all since we’re only talking about federal taxes.
The underlying reality here should be shocking to anyone who doesn’t actually live in California or New York. The federal government made a change to the tax code which would allow businesses to pay a lower rate, thereby saving them some money. The state of California wants to make sure that nobody pays lower taxes (even though the money isn’t coming out of their coffers) so they’re going to try to confiscate the savings. This is, to put it in the simplest terms possible, highway robbery, only using the legislative pen rather than a gun.
At some point, you have to ask why anyone puts up with all of this and keeps doing business in California. The mask has been fully pulled away this month and business owners should be forced to face up to the facts. Their own state government pretty much hates them and will take any opportunity possible to rip them off. There are so many more business friendly states out there where they would probably flourish.
Of course, there’s always one other option. Maybe that “New California” idea isn’t so bad after all.
MEXIFORNIA: WHERE LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND MEXICANS ABOVE THE LAW IS THE LAW!
MEXIFORNIA: WHERE LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND MEXICANS ABOVE THE LAW IS THE LAW!
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa….. Members of the racist, violent, fascist M.E.Ch.A. separatist movement.
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
XAVIER BECERRA IS A LA RAZA “The Race” SUPREMACIST FASCIST AND MEMBER OF THE MEX SEPARTIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.
MEChA Supports "Reconquering" California For Mexico And "Urges All Latinos To Resist Assimilation With White Americans"
"Xavier Becerra As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his online reputation and record." Katy Grimes and Megan Barth
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
January 24, 2018
"Xavier Becerra As Fox News pointed out in a 2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show, Becerra has a devout relationship with MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent Becerra’s people have been busy at work cleaning up his online reputation and record." Katy Grimes and Megan Barth
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
January 24, 2018
California's de facto secession
The state of California has been flouting U.S. federal laws for some time. First it legalized marijuana, a controlled substance under federal statutes. Then it tolerated, and encouraged, sanctuary cities within the state –...: Functionally, if not by actual open declaration, the state of California has seceded from the union.
The state of California has been flouting U.S. federal laws for some time. First it legalized marijuana, a controlled substance under federal statutes. Then it tolerated, and encouraged, sanctuary cities within the state – safe spaces against federal immigration law. As of this year, the California legislature has made the entire state a safe space for illegal immigration. Now the legislators have added a new state law creating criminal penalties for cooperating with federal immigration officials.
Isn't it time we pointed out the obvious? If the government in California doesn't see itself to be compelled to abide by federal law, and legislates in open contempt of the collective wishes of the other states, it is both unreasonable and unfair to continue letting its federal congressmen and senators participate in the process of making federal laws. If the state of California wants to nullify federal laws, the other states have a moral right (if not an explicit legal one) to nullify California's federal representation.
Functionally, if not by actual open declaration, the state of California has seceded from the union. It has broken the collective agreement on which the nation itself was founded. It apparently wants to have its cake and eat it, too, however. It wants all of the benefits of being part of the union without surrendering the right to ignore our laws as it sees fit.
As citizens of the United States, it is obvious that, in principle, we should not be bound by the influence of legislators from a foreign country – which California now is in all but name.
The state of California has been flouting U.S. federal laws for some time. First it legalized marijuana, a controlled substance under federal statutes. Then it tolerated, and encouraged, sanctuary cities within the state –...: Functionally, if not by actual open declaration, the state of California has seceded from the union.
The state of California has been flouting U.S. federal laws for some time. First it legalized marijuana, a controlled substance under federal statutes. Then it tolerated, and encouraged, sanctuary cities within the state – safe spaces against federal immigration law. As of this year, the California legislature has made the entire state a safe space for illegal immigration. Now the legislators have added a new state law creating criminal penalties for cooperating with federal immigration officials.
Isn't it time we pointed out the obvious? If the government in California doesn't see itself to be compelled to abide by federal law, and legislates in open contempt of the collective wishes of the other states, it is both unreasonable and unfair to continue letting its federal congressmen and senators participate in the process of making federal laws. If the state of California wants to nullify federal laws, the other states have a moral right (if not an explicit legal one) to nullify California's federal representation.
Functionally, if not by actual open declaration, the state of California has seceded from the union. It has broken the collective agreement on which the nation itself was founded. It apparently wants to have its cake and eat it, too, however. It wants all of the benefits of being part of the union without surrendering the right to ignore our laws as it sees fit.
As citizens of the United States, it is obvious that, in principle, we should not be bound by the influence of legislators from a foreign country – which California now is in all but name.
"MEChA Supports "Reconquering" California For Mexico
And "Urges All Latinos To Resist Assimilation
With White Americans"
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
“Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into the radical California Legislature, and fanatical Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology, Latino activism on the increase.”
"Xavier Becerra As Fox News pointed out in a
2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show,
Becerra has a devout relationship with
MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But
don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent
Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his online reputation and record."
January 19, 2018
2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show,
Becerra has a devout relationship with
MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But
don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent
Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his online reputation and record."
January 19, 2018
California AG threatens to prosecute businesses that help in immigration sweeps
California attorney general Xavier Becerra warned businesses that his office would prosecute owners who assist the federal government in immigration sweeps for illegal aliens.
Becerra was one of the driving forces behind making California a sanctuary state. His threat is the latest salvo fired in what is now a full-fledged war between the federal government and the state of California over sanctuary policies.
"It's important, given these rumors that are out there, to let people know – more specifically today, employers – that if they voluntarily start giving up information about their employees or access to their employees in ways that contradict our new California laws, they subject themselves to actions by my office," state [a]ttorney [g]eneral Xavier Becerra said at a news conference. "We will prosecute those who violate the law."
Becerra's warning comes as fears spread of mass workplace raids following reports that immigration agents plan to target Northern California communities for deportations due in part to the state's "sanctuary" law, which seeks to restrict local law enforcement agencies' ability to cooperate with immigration authorities.
The Supreme Court has ruled that state and local governments need not cooperate with the federal government in enforcing immigration policies. But the court has been silent about states actively seeking to inhibit the feds in immigration actions.
What guidelines must employers follow to avoid prosecution for helping the feds?
Authored by San Francisco Democratic [a]ssemblyman David Chiu, the bill:
▪ Requires employers to ask immigration agents for a warrant before granting access to a worksite.
▪ Prevents employers from voluntarily sharing confidential employee information without a subpoena.
▪ Requires employers to notify their workers before a federal audit of employee records.
▪ Gives the attorney general and labor commissioner exclusive authority to enforce new provisions of state labor laws.
▪ Prohibits employers from re-verifying information on employment verification forms, unless compelled to by federal law.
In effect, employers who make just about any move to assist ICE in removing illegal aliens from their workplaces are being threatened with jail.
This is positively draconian. If California doesn't want to be part of the union of states, why doesn't it take Hollywood and Silicon Valley and remove itself from our company?
Recently, "New California" declared itself independent from the urban coastal areas of the state – the first step toward becoming the 51st state. Policies like those created by the A.G. give an important boost to those efforts, although the chances of success are still small. But the declaration highlights the vast differences between attitudes toward illegal aliens in the big cities and the rest of the state.
By tying the hands of employers who might want to fully cooperate with ICE, the state government of California is thumbing its nose at the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly states:
... that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the federal government's exercise of its constitutional powers, and from assuming any functions that are exclusively entrusted to the federal government.
By any stretch of the imagination, the federal government's "constitutional powers" include immigration enforcement. But constitutional legality has very little meaning to a rogue state government bent on defying Washington's legitimate powers to say who can come into this country and who can't.
California attorney general Xavier Becerra warned businesses that his office would prosecute owners who assist the federal government in immigration sweeps for illegal aliens.
Becerra was one of the driving forces behind making California a sanctuary state. His threat is the latest salvo fired in what is now a full-fledged war between the federal government and the state of California over sanctuary policies.
"It's important, given these rumors that are out there, to let people know – more specifically today, employers – that if they voluntarily start giving up information about their employees or access to their employees in ways that contradict our new California laws, they subject themselves to actions by my office," state [a]ttorney [g]eneral Xavier Becerra said at a news conference. "We will prosecute those who violate the law."Becerra's warning comes as fears spread of mass workplace raids following reports that immigration agents plan to target Northern California communities for deportations due in part to the state's "sanctuary" law, which seeks to restrict local law enforcement agencies' ability to cooperate with immigration authorities.
The Supreme Court has ruled that state and local governments need not cooperate with the federal government in enforcing immigration policies. But the court has been silent about states actively seeking to inhibit the feds in immigration actions.
What guidelines must employers follow to avoid prosecution for helping the feds?
Authored by San Francisco Democratic [a]ssemblyman David Chiu, the bill:▪ Requires employers to ask immigration agents for a warrant before granting access to a worksite.▪ Prevents employers from voluntarily sharing confidential employee information without a subpoena.▪ Requires employers to notify their workers before a federal audit of employee records.▪ Gives the attorney general and labor commissioner exclusive authority to enforce new provisions of state labor laws.▪ Prohibits employers from re-verifying information on employment verification forms, unless compelled to by federal law.
In effect, employers who make just about any move to assist ICE in removing illegal aliens from their workplaces are being threatened with jail.
This is positively draconian. If California doesn't want to be part of the union of states, why doesn't it take Hollywood and Silicon Valley and remove itself from our company?
Recently, "New California" declared itself independent from the urban coastal areas of the state – the first step toward becoming the 51st state. Policies like those created by the A.G. give an important boost to those efforts, although the chances of success are still small. But the declaration highlights the vast differences between attitudes toward illegal aliens in the big cities and the rest of the state.
By tying the hands of employers who might want to fully cooperate with ICE, the state government of California is thumbing its nose at the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly states:
... that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the federal government's exercise of its constitutional powers, and from assuming any functions that are exclusively entrusted to the federal government.
By any stretch of the imagination, the federal government's "constitutional powers" include immigration enforcement. But constitutional legality has very little meaning to a rogue state government bent on defying Washington's legitimate powers to say who can come into this country and who can't.
WHEN RACIST ILLEGALS MURDER AMERICANS
“Black lives don’t matter,” shouts Mexican cop-killer Luis Bracamontes.
January 22, 2018
case reveals the failure of California’s ruling
Democrats to recognize the violent racism of
false-documented illegals.
After shooting Danny Oliver in the head with a 9mm handgun, Bracamontes attempted to commandeer the car of Anthony Holmes. When the African American Holmes refused, Bracamontes shot him five times. Holmes survived but Bracamontes also brandished the AR-15 rifle he used to kill Michael Davis, and he wounded another officer before being captured.
The murder of two police officers is a serious matter but the violent attack prompted no statement from California governor Jerry Brown or attorney general Kamala Harris. Both failed to lament the “gun violence” on display in the case.
In the early going Bracamontes admitted killing the cops but in his current trial in Sacramento he took it to a new level. “I wish I had killed more of the motherfuckers,” he boasted, adding, that he would “break out soon and I will kill more,” so “there’s no need for a fucking trial.”
The criminal Mexican also shouted “fuck you all,” toward the Oliver and Davis families and said “Fuck Danny Oliver! Fuck Michael Davis!” The criminal illegal also called witness Anthony Holmes a “nigger.”
Holmes testified that Bracamontes demanded “give me your car,” and when Holmes tried to flee “he just shot me in my head, in my ear,” taking other wounds in the hands. As he shot Holmes, Bracamontes wore a smirk on his face “just like he’s got right now,” Holmes testified.
As he left the witness stand Bracamontes told Holmes, “You’re lucky I didn’t kill you.” The repeatedly deported Mexican then turned his attention to African American family members and jurors, shouting “black lives don’t matter!” As it happens, Danny Oliver’s wife Susan is African American.
In similar style, black lives did not matter to Mexican nationals Saul Isidro-Aucencio and Francisco Delgado. In 2011 the pair gunned down Jamir Miller, 15, Richard Ward, 16, and Robert Corpos, 20. Isidro-Aucensio used an AK-47 to shoot Miller in the head, and in court, Jamir Miller’s mother Melissa Jellison expressed anger that the murderers of her son were in the country illegally. Judge Helena Gweon, a Berkeley alum with a JD from Harvard, told the grieving mother “This case has nothing to with illegal aliens.”
The murders prompted no federal, state or local politicians to call for tougher border enforcement or more cooperation with federal law enforcement. That was also the case with the July 2015 shooting of Kate Steinle by Mexican national Jose Inez Garcia Zarate, a repeatedly deported career criminal. State politicians used the case to ramp up defiance of federal law, and have since taken that to a new level.
On January 1, California officially became a sanctuary state in which false-documented illegals, even repeatedly deported violent criminals, are a protected, privileged class. Governor Jerry Brown does his utmost to return already deported criminals to California, and to help other criminals avoid deportation. Assembly speaker Anthony Rendon sees no place for barriers between California and Mexico and prefers Mexico’s PRI regime to the U.S. federal government.
Aside from senate boss Kevin de Leon, California attorney general Xavier Becerra is the loudest promoter of the sanctuary law, which he enforces with an iron hand. Becerra not only shelters false-documented illegals from deportation but now threatens businesses with $10,000 fines if they assist federal immigration authorities.
Under the “Immigrant Protection Act,” which also kicked in January 1, employers must notify workers before a federal audit of employee records and cannot voluntarily share information without a subpoena.
“We will prosecute those who violate the law,” says Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate. The state’s “top cop,” as the establishment media describe him, remains silent over the murder of police officers Danny Oliver and Michael Davis by Mexican national Luis Bracamontes.
When the cop-killer called Anthony Holmes a “nigger” and shouted at jurors that “black lives don’t matter,” that brought no comment from attorney general Becerra. Holmes, on the other hand was not going to remain silent in the face of racism. As he finished his testimony, Holmes turned to Bracamontes and told the Mexican, “Fuck you.”
Californians could be forgiven for saying the same thing to ruling-class Democrats who turn a blind eye to violent criminal racists and protect false-documented illegals from deportation. Holmes’ brave resistance to the cop killer also sets a strong example.
If police get in gun battle with a criminal illegal, they should shoot to kill. That way, as Luis Bracamontes said, “there’s no need for a fucking trial.” On the other hand, many citizens might agree, there is a need to keep racist murderers like Luis Bracamontes out of the United States of America.
January 22, 2018
case reveals the failure of California’s ruling
Democrats to recognize the violent racism of
false-documented illegals.
After shooting Danny Oliver in the head with a 9mm handgun, Bracamontes attempted to commandeer the car of Anthony Holmes. When the African American Holmes refused, Bracamontes shot him five times. Holmes survived but Bracamontes also brandished the AR-15 rifle he used to kill Michael Davis, and he wounded another officer before being captured.
The murder of two police officers is a serious matter but the violent attack prompted no statement from California governor Jerry Brown or attorney general Kamala Harris. Both failed to lament the “gun violence” on display in the case.
In the early going Bracamontes admitted killing the cops but in his current trial in Sacramento he took it to a new level. “I wish I had killed more of the motherfuckers,” he boasted, adding, that he would “break out soon and I will kill more,” so “there’s no need for a fucking trial.”
The criminal Mexican also shouted “fuck you all,” toward the Oliver and Davis families and said “Fuck Danny Oliver! Fuck Michael Davis!” The criminal illegal also called witness Anthony Holmes a “nigger.”
Holmes testified that Bracamontes demanded “give me your car,” and when Holmes tried to flee “he just shot me in my head, in my ear,” taking other wounds in the hands. As he shot Holmes, Bracamontes wore a smirk on his face “just like he’s got right now,” Holmes testified.
As he left the witness stand Bracamontes told Holmes, “You’re lucky I didn’t kill you.” The repeatedly deported Mexican then turned his attention to African American family members and jurors, shouting “black lives don’t matter!” As it happens, Danny Oliver’s wife Susan is African American.
In similar style, black lives did not matter to Mexican nationals Saul Isidro-Aucencio and Francisco Delgado. In 2011 the pair gunned down Jamir Miller, 15, Richard Ward, 16, and Robert Corpos, 20. Isidro-Aucensio used an AK-47 to shoot Miller in the head, and in court, Jamir Miller’s mother Melissa Jellison expressed anger that the murderers of her son were in the country illegally. Judge Helena Gweon, a Berkeley alum with a JD from Harvard, told the grieving mother “This case has nothing to with illegal aliens.”
The murders prompted no federal, state or local politicians to call for tougher border enforcement or more cooperation with federal law enforcement. That was also the case with the July 2015 shooting of Kate Steinle by Mexican national Jose Inez Garcia Zarate, a repeatedly deported career criminal. State politicians used the case to ramp up defiance of federal law, and have since taken that to a new level.
On January 1, California officially became a sanctuary state in which false-documented illegals, even repeatedly deported violent criminals, are a protected, privileged class. Governor Jerry Brown does his utmost to return already deported criminals to California, and to help other criminals avoid deportation. Assembly speaker Anthony Rendon sees no place for barriers between California and Mexico and prefers Mexico’s PRI regime to the U.S. federal government.
Aside from senate boss Kevin de Leon, California attorney general Xavier Becerra is the loudest promoter of the sanctuary law, which he enforces with an iron hand. Becerra not only shelters false-documented illegals from deportation but now threatens businesses with $10,000 fines if they assist federal immigration authorities.
Under the “Immigrant Protection Act,” which also kicked in January 1, employers must notify workers before a federal audit of employee records and cannot voluntarily share information without a subpoena.
“We will prosecute those who violate the law,” says Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate. The state’s “top cop,” as the establishment media describe him, remains silent over the murder of police officers Danny Oliver and Michael Davis by Mexican national Luis Bracamontes.
When the cop-killer called Anthony Holmes a “nigger” and shouted at jurors that “black lives don’t matter,” that brought no comment from attorney general Becerra. Holmes, on the other hand was not going to remain silent in the face of racism. As he finished his testimony, Holmes turned to Bracamontes and told the Mexican, “Fuck you.”
Californians could be forgiven for saying the same thing to ruling-class Democrats who turn a blind eye to violent criminal racists and protect false-documented illegals from deportation. Holmes’ brave resistance to the cop killer also sets a strong example.
If police get in gun battle with a criminal illegal, they should shoot to kill. That way, as Luis Bracamontes said, “there’s no need for a fucking trial.” On the other hand, many citizens might agree, there is a need to keep racist murderers like Luis Bracamontes out of the United States of America.
TRULY DID ANYONE THINK THAT BECERRA WOULD PROSECUTE EMPLOYERS WHO HIRE MEXICANS USING A STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER?!?!
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa….. Members of the racist, violent, fascist M.E.Ch.A. separatist movement.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa….. Members of the racist, violent, fascist M.E.Ch.A. separatist movement.
California AG: ‘We Will Prosecute’ Employers Who Cooperate with Federal Immigration Officials
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) says his office “will prosecute” employers who cooperate with federal immigration officials to deport criminal illegal aliens from the United States.
In a press conference on Thursday, the pro-open borders attorney general warned California employers of new state laws that barred businesses from providing information on illegal aliens to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency that would aid in deportations.
Becerra said, according to NTK Network:
There are new laws in place in California now in 2018 with the advent of 2018. I mentioned two of them specifically, AB 450 and SB 54. AB 450 in particular deals with the workplace in particular and how we go about treating the information about the workplace and employees at the workplace by employers.What we’re trying to make sure is that employers are aware that in 2018, there is a new law in place.
We will prosecute those who violate [California] law.
Under AB 450, employers are banned from having to reverify an employees’ immigration status that is not required by federal immigration law. Likewise, the law bans employers from “providing voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to enter nonpublic areas of a place of labor unless the agent provides a judicial warrant, except as specified.”
Under SB 54, as Breitbart News reported, California is a “sanctuary state,” which bans public officials and employers from turning over criminal illegal aliens to federal immigration officials.
The announcement by Becerra comes as ICE has reportedly planned a large-scale arrest, detainment, and deportation effort in northern California’s San Francisco Bay Area in the next month.
In a press conference on Thursday, the pro-open borders attorney general warned California employers of new state laws that barred businesses from providing information on illegal aliens to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency that would aid in deportations.
Becerra said, according to NTK Network:
There are new laws in place in California now in 2018 with the advent of 2018. I mentioned two of them specifically, AB 450 and SB 54. AB 450 in particular deals with the workplace in particular and how we go about treating the information about the workplace and employees at the workplace by employers.What we’re trying to make sure is that employers are aware that in 2018, there is a new law in place.We will prosecute those who violate [California] law.
Under AB 450, employers are banned from having to reverify an employees’ immigration status that is not required by federal immigration law. Likewise, the law bans employers from “providing voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to enter nonpublic areas of a place of labor unless the agent provides a judicial warrant, except as specified.”
Under SB 54, as Breitbart News reported, California is a “sanctuary state,” which bans public officials and employers from turning over criminal illegal aliens to federal immigration officials.
The announcement by Becerra comes as ICE has reportedly planned a large-scale arrest, detainment, and deportation effort in northern California’s San Francisco Bay Area in the next month.
AG Xavier Becerra: “CalExit” Movement can proceed
The CalExit Movement has gained momentum. With the approval of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, if the separatist movement can gather 585,000 signatures, the representatives of CalExit can put a referendum on the ballot where the state would secede from the United States.
“The initiative [titled ‘California Autonomy From Federal Government’] would form a commission to recommend avenues for California to pursue its independence and delete part of the state constitution that says it is an inseparable part of the U.S. The measure would also instruct the governor and California congressional delegation to negotiate more autonomy for the state,” according to the AP.
As reported by Western Journalism, This is the second attempt to get such an initiative on the 2018 ballot by a group that is known as Yes California or CalExit.
The first effort was withdrawn in April after the group’s founder, Louis Marinelli, emigrated to Russia, which prompted the group’s official spokesman, Marcus Ruiz Evans, to pull the initiative. He promised to resurrect it later, which he now has.
During an interview in January, Evans said Donald Trump’s election has greatly fueled his group’s cause, which dates back over two years.
“If California votes were taken away, Trump won the popular election,” said Evans. “So what kind of people elect a man like that? The answer: not Californians.”
“So we’re basically here to tell people that ‘I know that California officials are telling you that they’re going to protect you, but in fact in federalism, the federal government, overrules state law,” he added. “There is going to be a limit to what they can do.”
Evans told reporters the Supreme Court has already recognized the right of states to secede in Texas v. White (1869), though the justices actually held states do not have the right to secede unilaterally. Other states must accede to the move though the amendment process.
He cited issues such as climate change and illegal immigration as reasons California would be better off as its own master.
The group has 20,000 followers on Twitter and over 40,000 likes on Facebook.
Evans believes California, as the 5th largest economy in the world, will be just fine on its own.
At $2.6 trillion, the Golden State’s economy dwarfs the GDP’s of its sister states.
Its closest rival is Texas with a GDP of approximately $1.6 trillion.
California also has the largest population by far of any state with 39 million (or 12 percent of the United States), with Texas, once again, in second at 28 million, followed by New York at 20 million.
CalExit organizers have 180 days to collect the required 585,000 signatures for the measure to appear on the ballot in 2018.
We are a nation of the self-governed. Those who agree with California can live there, while the rest of us can move to states like Texas, a conservative state where guns are permitted, immigration laws are tough, taxes are low, and the economy is booming.
What do you think about the CalExit movement getting approval? Leave your comment below.
The CalExit Movement has gained momentum. With the approval of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, if the separatist movement can gather 585,000 signatures, the representatives of CalExit can put a referendum on the ballot where the state would secede from the United States.
“The initiative [titled ‘California Autonomy From Federal Government’] would form a commission to recommend avenues for California to pursue its independence and delete part of the state constitution that says it is an inseparable part of the U.S. The measure would also instruct the governor and California congressional delegation to negotiate more autonomy for the state,” according to the AP.
As reported by Western Journalism, This is the second attempt to get such an initiative on the 2018 ballot by a group that is known as Yes California or CalExit.
The first effort was withdrawn in April after the group’s founder, Louis Marinelli, emigrated to Russia, which prompted the group’s official spokesman, Marcus Ruiz Evans, to pull the initiative. He promised to resurrect it later, which he now has.
During an interview in January, Evans said Donald Trump’s election has greatly fueled his group’s cause, which dates back over two years.
“If California votes were taken away, Trump won the popular election,” said Evans. “So what kind of people elect a man like that? The answer: not Californians.”
“So we’re basically here to tell people that ‘I know that California officials are telling you that they’re going to protect you, but in fact in federalism, the federal government, overrules state law,” he added. “There is going to be a limit to what they can do.”
Evans told reporters the Supreme Court has already recognized the right of states to secede in Texas v. White (1869), though the justices actually held states do not have the right to secede unilaterally. Other states must accede to the move though the amendment process.
He cited issues such as climate change and illegal immigration as reasons California would be better off as its own master.
The group has 20,000 followers on Twitter and over 40,000 likes on Facebook.
Evans believes California, as the 5th largest economy in the world, will be just fine on its own.
At $2.6 trillion, the Golden State’s economy dwarfs the GDP’s of its sister states.
Its closest rival is Texas with a GDP of approximately $1.6 trillion.
California also has the largest population by far of any state with 39 million (or 12 percent of the United States), with Texas, once again, in second at 28 million, followed by New York at 20 million.
CalExit organizers have 180 days to collect the required 585,000 signatures for the measure to appear on the ballot in 2018.
We are a nation of the self-governed. Those who agree with California can live there, while the rest of us can move to states like Texas, a conservative state where guns are permitted, immigration laws are tough, taxes are low, and the economy is booming.
What do you think about the CalExit movement getting approval? Leave your comment below.
“CalExit” Movement to Proceed
What would America look like without California? This cartoon tries to answer that:
But in all seriousness, the CalExit Movement has gained momentum. With the approval of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, if the separatist movement can gather 585,000 signatures, the representatives of CalExit can put a referendum on the ballot where the state would secede from the United States.
California, a state which has granted almost 1 million driver licenses to illegal immigrants, hates President Trump so much that they are taking this drastic move. Suddenly, the left is interested in states’ rights.
As the LA Times reports:
On Tuesday afternoon, Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra’s office released an official title and summary for the initiative, now called the “California Autonomy From Federal Government” initiative.
The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California’s governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.
The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.[…]
The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California’s governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.
The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.
The legal issues involved with allowing a state to secede would be endless, especially after how much the federal government has grown during the past 240 years.
But if California wants to leave the country to oppress Christians who don’t wish to perform services for gay marriages, ban the use of fossil fuels, and exploit cheap labor from illegal aliens, they should be free to do it. California is already on the verge of bankruptcy, and is in desperate need of a financial bailout. Getting California’s disastrous finances off of America’s balance sheet may be exactly the step needed to enforce financial discipline in the Democrat-run state.
We are a nation of the self-governed. Those who agree with California can live there, while the rest of us can move to states like Texas, a conservative state where guns are permitted, immigration laws are tough, taxes are low, and the economy is booming.
What do you think about the CalExit movement getting approval? Please leave us a comment (below) and tell us.
What would America look like without California? This cartoon tries to answer that:
But in all seriousness, the CalExit Movement has gained momentum. With the approval of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, if the separatist movement can gather 585,000 signatures, the representatives of CalExit can put a referendum on the ballot where the state would secede from the United States.
California, a state which has granted almost 1 million driver licenses to illegal immigrants, hates President Trump so much that they are taking this drastic move. Suddenly, the left is interested in states’ rights.
As the LA Times reports:
On Tuesday afternoon, Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra’s office released an official title and summary for the initiative, now called the “California Autonomy From Federal Government” initiative.The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California’s governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.[…]The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California’s governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.The initiative wouldn’t necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a “fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation” within the U.S.
The legal issues involved with allowing a state to secede would be endless, especially after how much the federal government has grown during the past 240 years.
But if California wants to leave the country to oppress Christians who don’t wish to perform services for gay marriages, ban the use of fossil fuels, and exploit cheap labor from illegal aliens, they should be free to do it. California is already on the verge of bankruptcy, and is in desperate need of a financial bailout. Getting California’s disastrous finances off of America’s balance sheet may be exactly the step needed to enforce financial discipline in the Democrat-run state.
We are a nation of the self-governed. Those who agree with California can live there, while the rest of us can move to states like Texas, a conservative state where guns are permitted, immigration laws are tough, taxes are low, and the economy is booming.
What do you think about the CalExit movement getting approval? Please leave us a comment (below) and tell us.
CHICANO MARXISTS PREPARE FOR BATTLE WITH TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
January 5, 2017 by
As Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente. M.E.CH.A
Immediately following the November election, California Governor Jerry Brown appointed U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D) to replace State Attorney General Kamala Harris, who won election to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen
by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into
the radical California Legislature, and fanatical
Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant
Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology,
Latino activism on the increase.
The goal by these extremists in California is to push the state, and eventually the country to such a crisis, a reorganization is the only cure. That is what Communists do. Modern day “Progressives” as they like to be called, like Brown and Becerra, refer to themselves as Multiculturalists and Progressives. But as history very clearly demonstrates, using Marxism as the cure to anything in society is a very dark fairytale.
The term “progressive” is simply another way of saying “socialist” or “Marxist;” But it’s as important to recognize how liberation theology factors into the radical Latino lawmakers:In Latin America, the big enemy is not Marxism, it is capitalism. And the main enemy of liberation theology, according to its founder, the Rev. Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, and many of its adherents, is the United States, wrote Michael Novak, the author of the 1984 ‘’Freedom With Justice: Catholic Social Thought and Liberal Institutions.” Novak describes liberation theology as “gaining its excitement from flirting with Marxist thought and speech.”
January 5, 2017 by
As Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán, we are a nationalist movement of Indigenous Gente that lay claim to the land that is ours by birthright. As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente. M.E.CH.A
Immediately following the November election, California Governor Jerry Brown appointed U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D) to replace State Attorney General Kamala Harris, who won election to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Many wonder why Xavier Becerra was chosen
by Brown. But all anyone has to do is peek into
the radical California Legislature, and fanatical
Gov. Jerry Brown, to see the trend of militant
Marxist, Socialist, Jesuit, Liberation Theology,
Latino activism on the increase.
The goal by these extremists in California is to push the state, and eventually the country to such a crisis, a reorganization is the only cure. That is what Communists do. Modern day “Progressives” as they like to be called, like Brown and Becerra, refer to themselves as Multiculturalists and Progressives. But as history very clearly demonstrates, using Marxism as the cure to anything in society is a very dark fairytale.
The term “progressive” is simply another way of saying “socialist” or “Marxist;” But it’s as important to recognize how liberation theology factors into the radical Latino lawmakers:In Latin America, the big enemy is not Marxism, it is capitalism. And the main enemy of liberation theology, according to its founder, the Rev. Gustavo Gutierrez of Peru, and many of its adherents, is the United States, wrote Michael Novak, the author of the 1984 ‘’Freedom With Justice: Catholic Social Thought and Liberal Institutions.” Novak describes liberation theology as “gaining its excitement from flirting with Marxist thought and speech.”
Xavier Becerra As Fox News pointed out in a
2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show,
Becerra has a devout relationship with
MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But
don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent
Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his online reputation and record.
According to a NewsMax account on Free Republic:
“I got to be the first in my family to go to college” thanks to MEChA, Becerra said.
Hannity repeatedly pressed Becerra on why he would belong to a group that preaches racial discrimination, prompting the Bustamente backer to complain, “Are you calling me a racist?”
When the Fox host pointed out that MEChA favors the return of California to Mexico, Becerra still declined to criticize the group, saying, “I got a lot of help from people in the organization who have promoted education for kids and who continue to do that. … What I know is what they do.”
MEChA is a Hispanic separatist organization (400 chapters nationwide) that encourages anti-American activities, civil disobedience, and romanticizes Mexican claims to the “lost Territories” of California and the Southwestern United States, in a Chicano country called “Aztlan.” The official national symbol of MEChA is an eagle holding a machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.
The Fabian Society and Fabian Socialism uses the teachings of John Maynard Keynes as their catechism of political economy. Like Marxism, it embraced the idea of a Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect of the public’s lives. They have installed Fabian Socialism and Keynesism as the new faith, both in the universities and in government bureaucracy. Keynes supported statism and socialism, and managed and planning economies. U.S. President Barack Obama has long advocated the use of Keynesian economic concepts—despite the fact that John Maynard Keynes was incompetent, a fraud, and accused of being a pedophile.
These groups have worked diligently behind the scenes to implement their Socialist policies into our government, labor unions and throughout academia. They have infected the working class, demanding higher and higher wages, resulting often in welfare and other government handouts once their employers are ruined. They use illegal immigrants as messengers of their ideology, demeaning patriotism, and America. They have manipulated the political process so that only those candidates well-versed in Marxism receive the attention of the corporate Media.
Source: Canada Free Press
2003 interview on the Sean Hannitty Show,
Becerra has a devout relationship with
MEChA, as well as The Fabian Society. But
don’t go looking for the clip; it is apparent
Becerra’s people have been busy at work
cleaning up his online reputation and record.
According to a NewsMax account on Free Republic:
“I got to be the first in my family to go to college” thanks to MEChA, Becerra said.Hannity repeatedly pressed Becerra on why he would belong to a group that preaches racial discrimination, prompting the Bustamente backer to complain, “Are you calling me a racist?”When the Fox host pointed out that MEChA favors the return of California to Mexico, Becerra still declined to criticize the group, saying, “I got a lot of help from people in the organization who have promoted education for kids and who continue to do that. … What I know is what they do.”
MEChA is a Hispanic separatist organization (400 chapters nationwide) that encourages anti-American activities, civil disobedience, and romanticizes Mexican claims to the “lost Territories” of California and the Southwestern United States, in a Chicano country called “Aztlan.” The official national symbol of MEChA is an eagle holding a machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.
The Fabian Society and Fabian Socialism uses the teachings of John Maynard Keynes as their catechism of political economy. Like Marxism, it embraced the idea of a Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect of the public’s lives. They have installed Fabian Socialism and Keynesism as the new faith, both in the universities and in government bureaucracy. Keynes supported statism and socialism, and managed and planning economies. U.S. President Barack Obama has long advocated the use of Keynesian economic concepts—despite the fact that John Maynard Keynes was incompetent, a fraud, and accused of being a pedophile.
These groups have worked diligently behind the scenes to implement their Socialist policies into our government, labor unions and throughout academia. They have infected the working class, demanding higher and higher wages, resulting often in welfare and other government handouts once their employers are ruined. They use illegal immigrants as messengers of their ideology, demeaning patriotism, and America. They have manipulated the political process so that only those candidates well-versed in Marxism receive the attention of the corporate Media.
Source: Canada Free Press
Xavier Becerra Brings A Record Of Residency Issues, Extremist Connections, Drug Dealer Advocacy, And Backstabbing
TOP TAKEAWAYS
- Rep. Xavier Becerra was under consideration to be Clinton's running mate, but despite Becerra even pouring her water, Clinton could not even pronounce his name correctly.
- Becerra lives in a +$1 million house in Maryland and owns several properties despite his district being filled with the working poor.
- Becerra's wife Carolina Reyes was a leader in the "radical Latino student organization" MECHA.
- Becerra lobbied for the commutation of a convicted drug traffickers' sentence.
- Becerra's mayoral campaign sent out "incendiary" calls impersonating an elected official attacking his former friend Antonio Villaraigosa.
- Rep. Xavier Becerra was under consideration to be Clinton's running mate, but despite Becerra even pouring her water, Clinton could not even pronounce his name correctly.
- Becerra lives in a +$1 million house in Maryland and owns several properties despite his district being filled with the working poor.
- Becerra's wife Carolina Reyes was a leader in the "radical Latino student organization" MECHA.
- Becerra lobbied for the commutation of a convicted drug traffickers' sentence.
- Becerra's mayoral campaign sent out "incendiary" calls impersonating an elected official attacking his former friend Antonio Villaraigosa.
CLINTON CONSIDERED BECERRA TO BE HER RUNNING MATE BUT COULDN'T EVEN PRONOUNCE HIS NAME CORRECTLY
BECERRA LIVES IN A +$1 MILLION HOUSE IN MARYLAND AND OWNS SEVERAL PROPERTIES DESPITE HIS DISTRICT BEING FILLED WITH THE WORKING POOR
- According To His 2014 Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Incurred A $500,000 To $1,000,000 Mortgage From Sun Trust In 2009 To Finance The Purchase Of His Home.(Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To His 2014 Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Incurred A $500,000 To $1,000,000 Mortgage From Sun Trust In 2009 To Finance The Purchase Of His Home.(Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
Becerra Also Owns Three Properties From Which He Earns Rental Income
- According To Zillow, Becerra's Property At 1005 Mooney Drive Is Worth $514,934.(Zillow, Accessed 6/16/16)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To Zillow, Becerra's Property At 1633 Hill Drive Is Worth $957,455 And Was Last Rented Out At $3,750 Per Month. (Zillow, Accessed 6/16/16)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Listed The Value Of The Apartment At $100,000 To $250,000. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To Zillow, Becerra's Property At 1005 Mooney Drive Is Worth $514,934.(Zillow, Accessed 6/16/16)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To Zillow, Becerra's Property At 1633 Hill Drive Is Worth $957,455 And Was Last Rented Out At $3,750 Per Month. (Zillow, Accessed 6/16/16)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Listed The Value Of The Apartment At $100,000 To $250,000. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
- According To His Personal Financial Disclosure, Becerra Earned $15,001 To $50,000 In Rental Income From The Property In 2014. (Xavier Becerra, Personal Financial Disclosure, 6/15/15)
Becerra's District Has The Nation's
4th Largest Concentration Of The
Working Poor
BECERRA'S WIFE CAROLINA REYES WAS A LEADER IN THE "RADICAL LATINO STUDENT ORGANIZATION" MECHA
Becerra's Wife Carolina Reyes Was A Leader Of "The Chicano Activist Organization MEChA." "When his girlfriend--now wife--Carolina Reyes was downstairs in the lounge of the Casa Zapata dorm leading meetings of the Chicano activist organization MEChA, Becerra was more likely to be upstairs studying. Friends encouraged him to take a greater leadership role on campus, but Becerra was intent on getting into law school. (He did, graduating from Stanford Law in 1984.)" (Matea Gold, "Congressman Tests His Winning Streak," Los Angeles Times, 3/12/01)
Becerra's Wife Carolina Reyes Was A Leader Of "The Chicano Activist Organization MEChA." "When his girlfriend--now wife--Carolina Reyes was downstairs in the lounge of the Casa Zapata dorm leading meetings of the Chicano activist organization MEChA, Becerra was more likely to be upstairs studying. Friends encouraged him to take a greater leadership role on campus, but Becerra was intent on getting into law school. (He did, graduating from Stanford Law in 1984.)" (Matea Gold, "Congressman Tests His Winning Streak," Los Angeles Times, 3/12/01)
MEChA Supports "Reconquering" California For Mexico And "Urges All Latinos To Resist Assimilation With White Americans"
BECERRA ADVOCATED ON BEHALF OF A DRUG DEALER
Becerra Lobbied For The Commutation Of A Convicted Drug Traffickers' Sentence
BECERRA'S MAYORAL CAMPAIGN SENT OUT "INCENDIARY" CALLS IMPERSONATING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL ATTACKING HIS FORMER FRIEND ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA
· The Calls Impersonated Supervisor Gloria Molina Urging Voters To Oppose Villaraigosa For His Alleged Opposition To Increased Penalties For Rapists And Child Molesters. "At a news conference today, Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley is expected to announce that prosecutors found that no crime was committed in the prerecorded calls, in which a woman posing as county Supervisor Gloria Molina alleged that former Assembly Speaker Villaraigosa opposed legislation increasing penalties for rapists and child molesters. 'Please, on April 10, say no to Antonio Villaraigosa,' the message concluded. 'The safety of women and children in our community depends on it.'" (Nicholas Riccardi and Greg Krikorian, "D.A. Traces Bogus Calls To Firm Tied To Becerra," Los Angeles Times, 5/23/01)
· The Calls Impersonated Supervisor Gloria Molina Urging Voters To Oppose Villaraigosa For His Alleged Opposition To Increased Penalties For Rapists And Child Molesters. "At a news conference today, Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley is expected to announce that prosecutors found that no crime was committed in the prerecorded calls, in which a woman posing as county Supervisor Gloria Molina alleged that former Assembly Speaker Villaraigosa opposed legislation increasing penalties for rapists and child molesters. 'Please, on April 10, say no to Antonio Villaraigosa,' the message concluded. 'The safety of women and children in our community depends on it.'" (Nicholas Riccardi and Greg Krikorian, "D.A. Traces Bogus Calls To Firm Tied To Becerra," Los Angeles Times, 5/23/01)
Becerra's Campaign Not Only Spread The Bogus Calls Deleted Them After They Prompted An Investigation
· Cooley: "Being Responsible Means Asking The Tough Questions And Getting The Straight Answers, Not Just Buying The First Nice Answer You Get And Averting Your Eyes." "'The responsibility was to come forward right away, not weeks later to report that he heard 'rumors,' Cooley said. 'Being responsible means asking the tough questions and getting the straight answers, not just buying the first nice answer you get and averting your eyes.'" (Matea Gold and Greg Krikorian, "Becerra Knew of Hit Calls Long Ago, Two Say," Los Angeles Times , 5/25/01)
· Cooley: "Being Responsible Means Asking The Tough Questions And Getting The Straight Answers, Not Just Buying The First Nice Answer You Get And Averting Your Eyes." "'The responsibility was to come forward right away, not weeks later to report that he heard 'rumors,' Cooley said. 'Being responsible means asking the tough questions and getting the straight answers, not just buying the first nice answer you get and averting your eyes.'" (Matea Gold and Greg Krikorian, "Becerra Knew of Hit Calls Long Ago, Two Say," Los Angeles Times , 5/25/01)
The Los Angeles Times Slammed Becerra For His Underhanded Campaign Tactics
NARCOMEX REALLY DOESN'T WANT CALIFORNIA BACK AS IF IT BECAME A COLONY OF MEXICO WHO WOULD PAY THE TENS OF BILLIONS IN WELFARE AND BEAR THE BURDEN OF HOUSING MEXICO'S CRIMINAL CLASSES THAT HAVE BEEN EXPORTED OVER THE BORDERS?
In just the month of October 2017 CBP Border Patrol San Diego border sector reportedapprehension of individuals from Bangladesh (12), Brazil (1), Camaroon (3), Chad (1), China (16), El Salvador (76), Eritrea (7), Gambia (4), Guatemala (178), Honduras (54), India (101), Iran (1), Mexico (1,877), Nepal (31), Nicaragua (1), Pakistan (13), Peru (1), Somalia (1), and “Unknown” (1) — a total of 2,379 individuals. These numbers are similar to volumes seen in this sector for October since 2012. MICHELLE MOONS
THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS OPERATING IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS
Overall, in the 2017 Fiscal Year, officials revealed that a record-breaking 455,000 pounds plus of drugs had already been seized. In 2016, that number amounted to 443,000 pounds. The 2017 haul is worth an estimated $6.1 billion – BREITBART – JEFF SESSION’S DRUG BUST ON SAN DIEGO
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2017/09/20/ag-sessions-touts-record-breaking-drug-seizure-san-diego/’
NARCOMEX REALLY DOESN'T WANT CALIFORNIA BACK AS IF IT BECAME A COLONY OF MEXICO WHO WOULD PAY THE TENS OF BILLIONS IN WELFARE AND BEAR THE BURDEN OF HOUSING MEXICO'S CRIMINAL CLASSES THAT HAVE BEEN EXPORTED OVER THE BORDERS?
In just the month of October 2017 CBP Border Patrol San Diego border sector reportedapprehension of individuals from Bangladesh (12), Brazil (1), Camaroon (3), Chad (1), China (16), El Salvador (76), Eritrea (7), Gambia (4), Guatemala (178), Honduras (54), India (101), Iran (1), Mexico (1,877), Nepal (31), Nicaragua (1), Pakistan (13), Peru (1), Somalia (1), and “Unknown” (1) — a total of 2,379 individuals. These numbers are similar to volumes seen in this sector for October since 2012. MICHELLE MOONS
In just the month of October 2017 CBP Border Patrol San Diego border sector reportedapprehension of individuals from Bangladesh (12), Brazil (1), Camaroon (3), Chad (1), China (16), El Salvador (76), Eritrea (7), Gambia (4), Guatemala (178), Honduras (54), India (101), Iran (1), Mexico (1,877), Nepal (31), Nicaragua (1), Pakistan (13), Peru (1), Somalia (1), and “Unknown” (1) — a total of 2,379 individuals. These numbers are similar to volumes seen in this sector for October since 2012. MICHELLE MOONS
THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS OPERATING IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS
Overall, in the 2017 Fiscal Year, officials revealed that a record-breaking 455,000 pounds plus of drugs had already been seized. In 2016, that number amounted to 443,000 pounds. The 2017 haul is worth an estimated $6.1 billion – BREITBART – JEFF SESSION’S DRUG BUST ON SAN DIEGO
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2017/09/20/ag-sessions-touts-record-breaking-drug-seizure-san-diego/’
CalExit: California Attorney General Allows Secession Effort To Move Forward
If the separatist movement is able to gather the required 585,000 signatures, the Sacramento Bee reports that Attorney General Xavier Becerra has granted representatives from CalExit the authorization to put a referendum about California seceding from the United States on the 2018 ballot. While the measure is unlikely to go anywhere and has already failed once, the good news is that through their hatred of President Trump, and everything he and his supporters stand for, the Left is finally grappling with the importance of states' rights.
More from the Los Angeles Times:
The proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California's governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.
BLOG: EXPANDING LA RAZA SUPREMACY IN MEXIFORNIA
The initiative wouldn't necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a "fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation" within the U.S.
This is usually where I mock Democrats for wanting to secede from the union again in order to again preserve what they have always seen as their right to cheap non-white labor (in this case all the exploited illegals from Mexico that save elite Californians a fortune in manual labor costs). But maybe it is time to look at the issue seriously.
Why shouldn’t a free people have the God-given right to self-determination, the right to form their own sovereign government? By what right, either in 1861 or 2017, are a free people forced by the threat of government violence to remain attached to a government they see as immoral and oppressive?
While the legal details of allowing a state to secede from the United States would be endless, especially after some 240-odd years under an increasingly powerful and onerous federal government, all sarcasm aside, I can see no moral reason against secession. If the people of California wish to govern themselves, wish to oppress Christians who do not participate in gay weddings, wish to exploit Mexican illegals, wish to outlaw fossil fuels, wish to form an army exclusively made up of transgenders, that is their right.
Those Californians who disagree will be more than welcome in Wyoming.
No one has ever expressed my thoughts on this issue better than this:
Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better — This is a most valuable, — a most sacred right — a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world...
In a speech about the Mexican War, Congressman Abraham Lincoln said those words in 1848, just 13 years before he would wage war against his own countrymen to suppress that right. Granted, the South started the shooting war with the attack on Fort Sumter. But would there have been Civil War had Lincoln been truly open to the idea of allowing his own people the right to "shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better"?
Despite what the idiots at HBO believe, slavery would not have survived much longer in the Confederacy either way. A minute longer would have been an abomination, which is why Lincoln's cause of liberation was of course a righteous one. But that doesn't change the basic principle involved, and this is a principle of human rights.
People often say that if our Founding Fathers had ever conceived of the notion of a state wanting to exit the union, they would have offered a mechanism for secession in the Constitution.
Myself, I believe the exact opposite is true. Like abortion and same sex marriage, our Founding Fathers never offered any explicit rulings on these issue because at the time such things were inconceivable. What I mean is that it was not inconceivable to our Founders that a state would want to leave the union. Rather it was inconceivable that a state would not be allowed to secede and self-govern if they so desired.
Would our country not be better off under such an experiment? Without the oppressive federal government forcing a single form of governance and even a culture across all 50 states, could we not learn something if individual states were allowed to become the true laboratories of democracy, allowed to experiment freely with true self-governance, allowed to produce tangible, real world results we could all benefit from?
In just a decade, imagine what we could learn from, say, a sovereign California and Texas? Two polar opposites on almost every core issue: guns, religious freedom, energy, immigration, taxes, the environment.
Loathing for Trump has finally removed the hot-button issue of slavery and race from the crucially important issue of states' rights.
This is a very good thing, a seismic change in our culture, in our way of thinking.
If the separatist movement is able to gather the required 585,000 signatures, the Sacramento Bee reports that Attorney General Xavier Becerra has granted representatives from CalExit the authorization to put a referendum about California seceding from the United States on the 2018 ballot. While the measure is unlikely to go anywhere and has already failed once, the good news is that through their hatred of President Trump, and everything he and his supporters stand for, the Left is finally grappling with the importance of states' rights.
More from the Los Angeles Times:
BLOG: EXPANDING LA RAZA SUPREMACY IN MEXIFORNIAThe proposal, scaled back from an initially more aggressive version, would direct California's governor to negotiate more autonomy from the federal government, including potentially putting forward a ballot measure to declare independence.
The initiative wouldn't necessarily result in California exiting the country, but could allow the state to be a "fully functioning sovereign and autonomous nation" within the U.S.
This is usually where I mock Democrats for wanting to secede from the union again in order to again preserve what they have always seen as their right to cheap non-white labor (in this case all the exploited illegals from Mexico that save elite Californians a fortune in manual labor costs). But maybe it is time to look at the issue seriously.
Why shouldn’t a free people have the God-given right to self-determination, the right to form their own sovereign government? By what right, either in 1861 or 2017, are a free people forced by the threat of government violence to remain attached to a government they see as immoral and oppressive?
While the legal details of allowing a state to secede from the United States would be endless, especially after some 240-odd years under an increasingly powerful and onerous federal government, all sarcasm aside, I can see no moral reason against secession. If the people of California wish to govern themselves, wish to oppress Christians who do not participate in gay weddings, wish to exploit Mexican illegals, wish to outlaw fossil fuels, wish to form an army exclusively made up of transgenders, that is their right.
Those Californians who disagree will be more than welcome in Wyoming.
No one has ever expressed my thoughts on this issue better than this:
Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better — This is a most valuable, — a most sacred right — a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world...
In a speech about the Mexican War, Congressman Abraham Lincoln said those words in 1848, just 13 years before he would wage war against his own countrymen to suppress that right. Granted, the South started the shooting war with the attack on Fort Sumter. But would there have been Civil War had Lincoln been truly open to the idea of allowing his own people the right to "shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better"?
Despite what the idiots at HBO believe, slavery would not have survived much longer in the Confederacy either way. A minute longer would have been an abomination, which is why Lincoln's cause of liberation was of course a righteous one. But that doesn't change the basic principle involved, and this is a principle of human rights.
People often say that if our Founding Fathers had ever conceived of the notion of a state wanting to exit the union, they would have offered a mechanism for secession in the Constitution.
Myself, I believe the exact opposite is true. Like abortion and same sex marriage, our Founding Fathers never offered any explicit rulings on these issue because at the time such things were inconceivable. What I mean is that it was not inconceivable to our Founders that a state would want to leave the union. Rather it was inconceivable that a state would not be allowed to secede and self-govern if they so desired.
Would our country not be better off under such an experiment? Without the oppressive federal government forcing a single form of governance and even a culture across all 50 states, could we not learn something if individual states were allowed to become the true laboratories of democracy, allowed to experiment freely with true self-governance, allowed to produce tangible, real world results we could all benefit from?
In just a decade, imagine what we could learn from, say, a sovereign California and Texas? Two polar opposites on almost every core issue: guns, religious freedom, energy, immigration, taxes, the environment.
Loathing for Trump has finally removed the hot-button issue of slavery and race from the crucially important issue of states' rights.
This is a very good thing, a seismic change in our culture, in our way of thinking.
MAKING CALIFORNIA MEXICO AGAIN
“No barriers between California and Mexico” for leftist Democrats.
January 18, 2018
28
After the November 2016 election, California governor Jerry Brown, a three-time presidential loser, denounced the victorious Donald Trump and pledged that the Golden State would go its own way, perhaps even launching its own satellites. Brown’s attorney general Xavier Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, also defies the federal government.
BLOG: XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.
Senate boss Kevin de León, which is not the name on his birth certificate and voter rolls, authored the state’s sanctuary legislation that has made false-documented illegals, even criminals, a privileged, protected class. In early January, after the legislation kicked in, California’s Assembly speaker Anthony Rendon took things to a new level.
“There is no sensible place for barriers between California and Mexico,” said Rendon, heading south with fellow Democrats on a four-day mission to Mexico. “This trip will send a message that California resists isolation and is willing to step up and work with Mexico if the federal administration abdicates that responsibility.”
So contrary to the “Calexit” crowd, which seeks independence, Rendon wants to hook up the state with Mexico. In that cause, he touts the “historically linked governments” of Mexico City and Sacramento. The statement was not a departure from the vision of speaker Rendon, who earned a PhD in political science at UC Riverside.
On November 9, 2017, one day after the election of Donald Trump, Rendon and de Leon said in a statement: “Today, we woke up feeling like strangers in a foreign land, because yesterday Americans expressed their views on a pluralistic and democratic society that are clearly inconsistent with the values of the people of California.”
BLOG: CA IS NOT A REFUGE FOR LEGALS. JUST ASK KATE STEINLE WHO WAS MURDERED BY AN ILLEGAL WHO HAD BEEN DEPORTED 5XS AND JUMPED THE BORDER TO SAN FRANCISCO BECAUSE IT WAS A "SANCTUARY CITY".
California “is – and must always be – a refuge of justice and opportunity for people of all walks, talks, ages and aspirations – regardless of how you look, where you live, what language you speak, or who you love.” After several paragraphs of anti-Trump boilerplate comes the key line:
BLOG: 49 MORE MEXIFORNIAS TO GO!
"Illinois is a state full of illegal aliens. One in seven Illinoisans are immigrants, with 450,000 official illegals. One point two million jobs are taken by illegals in Illinois. This is one of the most heavily invaded states in the Union. Timothy Birdnow
“California was not a part of this nation when its history began, but we are clearly now the keeper of its future.”
Speaker Rendon doubtless knows that Maine, Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Louisiana and more than two dozen other states were “not part of this nation when its history began.” The focus on California reflects the belief, common among ruling-class Democrats, that California is part of Mexico.
For the record, California became part of the United States 170 years ago in 1848, a full 13 years before the Civil War, when the Ottoman Empire, Austrian Empire, and Prussia were major players on the global stage and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies still existed. Speaker Rendon and senate boss de Leon seek to turn back the clock to 1846, before Mexico lost the war.
That is why Rendon and de Leon say “we are proud to be Californians,” not Americans, because they don’t see the Golden State as part of the USA. That is why Rendon proclaims “there is no sensible place for barriers between California and Mexico.”
In this view, Mexicans who violate U.S. immigration law are only entering their own country and not illegal in any sense. They are therefore entitled to education, medical care, drivers’ licenses, welfare, and in-state college tuition. False-documented illegals also vote in federal, state and local elections, the imported electorate of California’s ruling class Democrats. California secretary of state Alex Padilla conveniently refuses to reveal voter information and will not cooperate with federal probes of voter fraud.
Meanwhile, millennials and such might not be aware of the back story here. Speaker Rendon was born in 1968, year of the Olympic Games in Mexico City. In the run-up to the games, Mexican students held demonstrations demanding more democracy. On October 2, 1968, Mexican troops gunned down hundreds of students in Tlatelolco Square, and Mexico’s Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) regime has been covering it up ever since, with collaboration from Vincente Fox of Mexico’s PAN party.
In 2014, students at a Mexican teacher college commandeered busses to attend demonstrations commemorating the Tlatelolco massacre. Mexican police attacked the students, killing six and dragging off more than 40 others. The PRI government claimed they had been taken by a drug gang and incinerated in a garbage dump. As in 1968, Mexicans decline to accept the official story.
The PRI atrocities proved no obstacle to Rendon, who appears to believe he represents the entire state. Californians might note that the speaker did not propose a 2018 ballot initiative allowing the people to vote on whether to “step up and work with Mexico” instead of their own American federal government.
When Californians voted to make English the state’s official language (Proposition 63, 1986); denied benefits for false-documented immigrants (Proposition 187, 1994); ended racial preferences in college admissions (Proposition 209, 1996) and stopped bilingual education (Proposition 227, 1998), Mexican flags suddenly appeared by the thousands.
Now, with the ruling Democrats essentially a division of the PRI, Californians feel like strangers in a foreign land. This is what happens when rule by one political party replaces the rule of law.
“No barriers between California and Mexico” for leftist Democrats.
January 18, 2018
28
After the November 2016 election, California governor Jerry Brown, a three-time presidential loser, denounced the victorious Donald Trump and pledged that the Golden State would go its own way, perhaps even launching its own satellites. Brown’s attorney general Xavier Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, also defies the federal government.
BLOG: XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.
BLOG: XAVIER BECERRA IS A MEMBER OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT OF M.E.Ch.A.
Senate boss Kevin de León, which is not the name on his birth certificate and voter rolls, authored the state’s sanctuary legislation that has made false-documented illegals, even criminals, a privileged, protected class. In early January, after the legislation kicked in, California’s Assembly speaker Anthony Rendon took things to a new level.
“There is no sensible place for barriers between California and Mexico,” said Rendon, heading south with fellow Democrats on a four-day mission to Mexico. “This trip will send a message that California resists isolation and is willing to step up and work with Mexico if the federal administration abdicates that responsibility.”
So contrary to the “Calexit” crowd, which seeks independence, Rendon wants to hook up the state with Mexico. In that cause, he touts the “historically linked governments” of Mexico City and Sacramento. The statement was not a departure from the vision of speaker Rendon, who earned a PhD in political science at UC Riverside.
On November 9, 2017, one day after the election of Donald Trump, Rendon and de Leon said in a statement: “Today, we woke up feeling like strangers in a foreign land, because yesterday Americans expressed their views on a pluralistic and democratic society that are clearly inconsistent with the values of the people of California.”
BLOG: CA IS NOT A REFUGE FOR LEGALS. JUST ASK KATE STEINLE WHO WAS MURDERED BY AN ILLEGAL WHO HAD BEEN DEPORTED 5XS AND JUMPED THE BORDER TO SAN FRANCISCO BECAUSE IT WAS A "SANCTUARY CITY".
California “is – and must always be – a refuge of justice and opportunity for people of all walks, talks, ages and aspirations – regardless of how you look, where you live, what language you speak, or who you love.” After several paragraphs of anti-Trump boilerplate comes the key line:
BLOG: 49 MORE MEXIFORNIAS TO GO!
BLOG: CA IS NOT A REFUGE FOR LEGALS. JUST ASK KATE STEINLE WHO WAS MURDERED BY AN ILLEGAL WHO HAD BEEN DEPORTED 5XS AND JUMPED THE BORDER TO SAN FRANCISCO BECAUSE IT WAS A "SANCTUARY CITY".
California “is – and must always be – a refuge of justice and opportunity for people of all walks, talks, ages and aspirations – regardless of how you look, where you live, what language you speak, or who you love.” After several paragraphs of anti-Trump boilerplate comes the key line:
BLOG: 49 MORE MEXIFORNIAS TO GO!
"Illinois is a state full of illegal aliens. One in seven Illinoisans are immigrants, with 450,000 official illegals. One point two million jobs are taken by illegals in Illinois. This is one of the most heavily invaded states in the Union. Timothy Birdnow
“California was not a part of this nation when its history began, but we are clearly now the keeper of its future.”
Speaker Rendon doubtless knows that Maine, Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Louisiana and more than two dozen other states were “not part of this nation when its history began.” The focus on California reflects the belief, common among ruling-class Democrats, that California is part of Mexico.
For the record, California became part of the United States 170 years ago in 1848, a full 13 years before the Civil War, when the Ottoman Empire, Austrian Empire, and Prussia were major players on the global stage and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies still existed. Speaker Rendon and senate boss de Leon seek to turn back the clock to 1846, before Mexico lost the war.
That is why Rendon and de Leon say “we are proud to be Californians,” not Americans, because they don’t see the Golden State as part of the USA. That is why Rendon proclaims “there is no sensible place for barriers between California and Mexico.”
In this view, Mexicans who violate U.S. immigration law are only entering their own country and not illegal in any sense. They are therefore entitled to education, medical care, drivers’ licenses, welfare, and in-state college tuition. False-documented illegals also vote in federal, state and local elections, the imported electorate of California’s ruling class Democrats. California secretary of state Alex Padilla conveniently refuses to reveal voter information and will not cooperate with federal probes of voter fraud.
Meanwhile, millennials and such might not be aware of the back story here. Speaker Rendon was born in 1968, year of the Olympic Games in Mexico City. In the run-up to the games, Mexican students held demonstrations demanding more democracy. On October 2, 1968, Mexican troops gunned down hundreds of students in Tlatelolco Square, and Mexico’s Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) regime has been covering it up ever since, with collaboration from Vincente Fox of Mexico’s PAN party.
In 2014, students at a Mexican teacher college commandeered busses to attend demonstrations commemorating the Tlatelolco massacre. Mexican police attacked the students, killing six and dragging off more than 40 others. The PRI government claimed they had been taken by a drug gang and incinerated in a garbage dump. As in 1968, Mexicans decline to accept the official story.
The PRI atrocities proved no obstacle to Rendon, who appears to believe he represents the entire state. Californians might note that the speaker did not propose a 2018 ballot initiative allowing the people to vote on whether to “step up and work with Mexico” instead of their own American federal government.
When Californians voted to make English the state’s official language (Proposition 63, 1986); denied benefits for false-documented immigrants (Proposition 187, 1994); ended racial preferences in college admissions (Proposition 209, 1996) and stopped bilingual education (Proposition 227, 1998), Mexican flags suddenly appeared by the thousands.
Now, with the ruling Democrats essentially a division of the PRI, Californians feel like strangers in a foreign land. This is what happens when rule by one political party replaces the rule of law.
California, Poverty Capital
Why are so many people poor in the Golden State?
KERRY JACKSON
https://www.city-journal.org/html/california-poverty-capital-15659.html?utm_source=City+Journal+Update&utm_campaign=3bb6b8d9f2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6c08930f2b-3bb6b8d9f2-109360857
California—not Mississippi, New Mexico, or West Virginia—has the highest poverty rate in the United States. According to the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure—which accounts for the cost of housing, food, utilities, and clothing, and which includes non-cash government assistance as a form of income—nearly one out of four Californians is poor. Given robust job growth in the state and the prosperity generated by several industries, especially the supercharged tech sector, the question arises as to why California has so many poor people, especially when the state’s per-capita GDP increased roughly twice as much as the U.S. average over the five years ending in 2016 (12.5 percent, compared with 6.27 percent).
It’s not as if California policymakers have neglected to wage war on poverty. Sacramento and local governments have spent massive amounts in the cause, for decades now. Myriad state and municipal benefit programs overlap with one another; in some cases, individuals with incomes 200 percent above the poverty line receive benefits, according to the California Policy Center. California state and local governments spent nearly $958 billion from 1992 through 2015 on public welfare programs, including cash-assistance payments, vendor payments, and “other public welfare,” according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Unfortunately, California, with 12 percent of the American population, is home today to roughly one in three of the nation’s welfare recipients. The generous spending, then, has not only failed to decrease poverty; it actually seems to have made it worse.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, some states—principally Wisconsin, Michigan, and Virginia—initiated welfare reform, as did the federal government under President Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress. The common thread of the reformed welfare programs was strong work requirements placed on aid recipients. These overhauls were widely recognized as a big success, as welfare rolls plummeted and millions of former aid recipients entered the workforce. The state and local bureaucracies that implement California’s antipoverty programs, however, have resisted pro-work reforms. In fact, California recipients of state aid receive a disproportionately large share of it in no-strings-attached cash disbursements. It’s as if welfare reform passed California by, leaving a dependency trap in place. Immigrants are falling into it: 55 percent of immigrant families in the state get some kind of means-tested benefits, compared with just 30 percent of natives, according to City Journal contributing editor Kay S. Hymowitz.
Self-interest in the social-services community may be at work here. If California’s poverty rate should ever be substantially reduced by getting the typical welfare client back into the workforce, many bureaucrats could lose their jobs. As economist William A. Niskanen explained back in 1971, public agencies seek to maximize their budgets, through which they acquire increased power, status, comfort, and job security. In order to keep growing its budget, and hence its power, a welfare bureaucracy has an incentive to expand its “customer” base—to ensure that the welfare rolls remain full and, ideally, growing. With 883,000 full-time-equivalent state and local employees in 2014, according to Governing, California has an enormous bureaucracy—a unionized, public-sector workforce that exercises tremendous power through voting and lobbying. Many work in social services.
Further contributing to the poverty problem is California’s housing crisis. Californians spent more than one-third of their incomes on housing in 2014, the third-highest rate in the country. A shortage of housing has driven prices ever higher, far above income increases. And that shortage is a direct outgrowth of misguided policies. “Counties and local governments have imposed restrictive land-use regulations that drove up the price of land and dwellings,” explains analyst Wendell Cox. “Middle income households have been forced to accept lower standards of living while the less fortunate have been driven into poverty by the high cost of housing.” The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), passed in 1971, is one example; it can add $1 million to the cost of completing a housing development, says Todd Williams, an Oakland attorney who chairs the Wendel Rosen Black & Dean land-use group. CEQA costs have been known to shut down entire home-building projects. CEQA reform would help increase housing supply, but there’s no real movement to change the law.
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon-dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor. On some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50 percent higher than the national average. Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics, author of a 2015 Manhattan Institute study, “Less Carbon, Higher Prices,” found that “in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ‘energy poverty’—defined as energy expenditures exceeding 10 percent of household income. In certain California counties, the rate of energy poverty was as high as 15 percent of all households.” A Pacific Research Institute study by Wayne Winegarden found that the rate could exceed 17 percent of median income in some areas. “The impacts on the poorest households are not only the largest,” states Winegarden. “They are clearly unaffordable.”
Looking to help poor and low-income residents, California lawmakers recently passed a measure raising the minimum wage from $10 an hour to $15 an hour by 2022—but a higher minimum wage will do nothing for the 60 percent of Californians who live in poverty and don’t have jobs, and studies suggest that it will likely cause many who do have jobs to lose them. A Harvard study found evidence that “higher minimum wages increase overall exit rates for restaurants” in the Bay Area, where more than a dozen cities and counties, including San Francisco, have changed their minimum-wage ordinances in the last five years. “Estimates suggest that a one-dollar increase in the minimum wage leads to a 14 percent increase in the likelihood of exit for a 3.5-star restaurant (which is the median rating),” the report says. These restaurants are a significant source of employment for low-skilled and entry-level workers.
Apparently content with futile poverty policies, Sacramento lawmakers can turn their attention to what historian Victor Davis Hanson aptly describes as a fixation on “remaking the world.” The political class wants to build a costly and needless high-speed rail system; talks of secession from a United States presided over by Donald Trump; hired former attorney general Eric Holder to “resist” Trump’s agenda; enacted the first state-level cap-and-trade regime; established California as a “sanctuary state” for illegal immigrants; banned plastic bags, threatening the jobs of thousands of workers involved in their manufacture; and is consumed by its dedication to “California values.” All this only reinforces the rest of America’s perception of an out-of-touch Left Coast, to the disservice of millions of Californians whose values are more traditional, including many of the state’s poor residents.
California’s de facto status as a one-party state lies at the heart of its poverty problem. With a permanent majority in the state senate and the assembly, a prolonged dominance in the executive branch, and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political price. The state’s poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove California to its golden years.
ILLEGALS & WELFARE
WE CAN’T TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN, AND YET WE LET MEXICO BUILD THEIR BILLION DOLLAR WELFARE STATE ON OUR BACKS!!!
70% OF ILLEGALS GET WELFARE!
“According to the Centers for Immigration Studies, April '11, at least 70% of Mexican illegal alien families receive some type of welfare in the US!!! cis.org”
Why are so many people poor in the Golden State?
KERRY JACKSON
https://www.city-journal.org/html/california-poverty-capital-15659.html?utm_source=City+Journal+Update&utm_campaign=3bb6b8d9f2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6c08930f2b-3bb6b8d9f2-109360857
KERRY JACKSON
https://www.city-journal.org/html/california-poverty-capital-15659.html?utm_source=City+Journal+Update&utm_campaign=3bb6b8d9f2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6c08930f2b-3bb6b8d9f2-109360857
California—not Mississippi, New Mexico, or West Virginia—has the highest poverty rate in the United States. According to the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure—which accounts for the cost of housing, food, utilities, and clothing, and which includes non-cash government assistance as a form of income—nearly one out of four Californians is poor. Given robust job growth in the state and the prosperity generated by several industries, especially the supercharged tech sector, the question arises as to why California has so many poor people, especially when the state’s per-capita GDP increased roughly twice as much as the U.S. average over the five years ending in 2016 (12.5 percent, compared with 6.27 percent).
It’s not as if California policymakers have neglected to wage war on poverty. Sacramento and local governments have spent massive amounts in the cause, for decades now. Myriad state and municipal benefit programs overlap with one another; in some cases, individuals with incomes 200 percent above the poverty line receive benefits, according to the California Policy Center. California state and local governments spent nearly $958 billion from 1992 through 2015 on public welfare programs, including cash-assistance payments, vendor payments, and “other public welfare,” according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Unfortunately, California, with 12 percent of the American population, is home today to roughly one in three of the nation’s welfare recipients. The generous spending, then, has not only failed to decrease poverty; it actually seems to have made it worse.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, some states—principally Wisconsin, Michigan, and Virginia—initiated welfare reform, as did the federal government under President Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress. The common thread of the reformed welfare programs was strong work requirements placed on aid recipients. These overhauls were widely recognized as a big success, as welfare rolls plummeted and millions of former aid recipients entered the workforce. The state and local bureaucracies that implement California’s antipoverty programs, however, have resisted pro-work reforms. In fact, California recipients of state aid receive a disproportionately large share of it in no-strings-attached cash disbursements. It’s as if welfare reform passed California by, leaving a dependency trap in place. Immigrants are falling into it: 55 percent of immigrant families in the state get some kind of means-tested benefits, compared with just 30 percent of natives, according to City Journal contributing editor Kay S. Hymowitz.
Self-interest in the social-services community may be at work here. If California’s poverty rate should ever be substantially reduced by getting the typical welfare client back into the workforce, many bureaucrats could lose their jobs. As economist William A. Niskanen explained back in 1971, public agencies seek to maximize their budgets, through which they acquire increased power, status, comfort, and job security. In order to keep growing its budget, and hence its power, a welfare bureaucracy has an incentive to expand its “customer” base—to ensure that the welfare rolls remain full and, ideally, growing. With 883,000 full-time-equivalent state and local employees in 2014, according to Governing, California has an enormous bureaucracy—a unionized, public-sector workforce that exercises tremendous power through voting and lobbying. Many work in social services.
Further contributing to the poverty problem is California’s housing crisis. Californians spent more than one-third of their incomes on housing in 2014, the third-highest rate in the country. A shortage of housing has driven prices ever higher, far above income increases. And that shortage is a direct outgrowth of misguided policies. “Counties and local governments have imposed restrictive land-use regulations that drove up the price of land and dwellings,” explains analyst Wendell Cox. “Middle income households have been forced to accept lower standards of living while the less fortunate have been driven into poverty by the high cost of housing.” The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), passed in 1971, is one example; it can add $1 million to the cost of completing a housing development, says Todd Williams, an Oakland attorney who chairs the Wendel Rosen Black & Dean land-use group. CEQA costs have been known to shut down entire home-building projects. CEQA reform would help increase housing supply, but there’s no real movement to change the law.
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon-dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor. On some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50 percent higher than the national average. Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics, author of a 2015 Manhattan Institute study, “Less Carbon, Higher Prices,” found that “in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ‘energy poverty’—defined as energy expenditures exceeding 10 percent of household income. In certain California counties, the rate of energy poverty was as high as 15 percent of all households.” A Pacific Research Institute study by Wayne Winegarden found that the rate could exceed 17 percent of median income in some areas. “The impacts on the poorest households are not only the largest,” states Winegarden. “They are clearly unaffordable.”
Looking to help poor and low-income residents, California lawmakers recently passed a measure raising the minimum wage from $10 an hour to $15 an hour by 2022—but a higher minimum wage will do nothing for the 60 percent of Californians who live in poverty and don’t have jobs, and studies suggest that it will likely cause many who do have jobs to lose them. A Harvard study found evidence that “higher minimum wages increase overall exit rates for restaurants” in the Bay Area, where more than a dozen cities and counties, including San Francisco, have changed their minimum-wage ordinances in the last five years. “Estimates suggest that a one-dollar increase in the minimum wage leads to a 14 percent increase in the likelihood of exit for a 3.5-star restaurant (which is the median rating),” the report says. These restaurants are a significant source of employment for low-skilled and entry-level workers.
Apparently content with futile poverty policies, Sacramento lawmakers can turn their attention to what historian Victor Davis Hanson aptly describes as a fixation on “remaking the world.” The political class wants to build a costly and needless high-speed rail system; talks of secession from a United States presided over by Donald Trump; hired former attorney general Eric Holder to “resist” Trump’s agenda; enacted the first state-level cap-and-trade regime; established California as a “sanctuary state” for illegal immigrants; banned plastic bags, threatening the jobs of thousands of workers involved in their manufacture; and is consumed by its dedication to “California values.” All this only reinforces the rest of America’s perception of an out-of-touch Left Coast, to the disservice of millions of Californians whose values are more traditional, including many of the state’s poor residents.
California’s de facto status as a one-party state lies at the heart of its poverty problem. With a permanent majority in the state senate and the assembly, a prolonged dominance in the executive branch, and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political price. The state’s poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove California to its golden years.
ILLEGALS & WELFARE
WE CAN’T TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN, AND YET WE LET MEXICO BUILD THEIR BILLION DOLLAR WELFARE STATE ON OUR BACKS!!!
70% OF ILLEGALS GET WELFARE!
“According to the Centers for Immigration Studies, April '11, at least 70% of Mexican illegal alien families receive some type of welfare in the US!!! cis.org”