Illegal Aliens Open Borders Secrets Shadow Government In Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania Cumberland County The United Methodist Home for Children, Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania Cumberland County Illegal Aliens, Illegal Aliens and Obama cash now supports the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pa., Illegal Aliens, “Earlier this week I spoke about the President's promise that he would issue an executive amnesty to 5 or 6 million people. The planned amnesty would include work permits, photo ID's, and Social Security numbers for millions of people who illegally entered the U.S., illegally overstayed their visas, or defrauded U.S. immigration authorities.

The United Methodist Home for Children, Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania Cumberland County Illegal Aliens, Illegal Aliens and Obama cash now supports the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pa., Illegal Aliens, “Earlier this week I spoke about the President's promise that he would issue an executive amnesty to 5 or 6 million people. The planned amnesty would include work permits, photo ID's, and Social Security numbers for millions of people who illegally entered the U.S., illegally overstayed their visas, or defrauded U.S. immigration authorities.

The United Methodist Home for Children Mechanicsburg Mechanicsburg PA Illegal Gangsters MS-13 and the 18th Street Gang - Barack Obama Hillary Clinton Marco Rubio Jeb Bush Illegal Aliens Hiding Behind Your Money The United Methodist Home for Children Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania, The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which is part of HHS, has placed children in every state in the U.S.,

Pennsylvania Cumberland County Pennsylvania receives protection from Barack Obama, former CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson said the Obama administration is refusing to tell Congress where the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors who crossed the U.S.-Mexican Border.  The taxpayer funded secret illegal alien programs have now caused alarms across the nation as "the children" have now entered our schools, paying nothing, taking everything.  The United Methodist Home for Children is a disgrace to the Mechanicsburg PA community as they are being paid by Obama to hide Illegal Aliens, possible criminals, drug dealers, gun runners from the public. 

The Senate Democratic Conference has supported and enabled the President's unlawful actions and blocked every effort to stop them. Not even one of our Democratic colleagues has backed the House legislation that would stop this planned executive amnesty or demanded that Senator Reid bring it up for a vote. Every Senate Democrat is therefore the President's partner in his planned lawless acts.  I also think the United Methodist Home for Children is a partner is Obama's planned illegal and lawless acts as they are being paid by taxpayer money to shelter, feed, and entertain illegal aliens.  The local schools in Mechanicsburg Pa are will be forced to absorb the costs of illegal aliens which were brought to the area by the United Methodist Home for Children. 

Tonight I would like to talk about the influence of special interests on our nation's immigration system. How did we get to the point where elected officials, activist groups which would include the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg PA, the ACLU, and global CEOs are openly working to deny American workers the immigration protections to which they are legally entitled? How did we get to the point where the Democratic Party is prepared to nullify and wipe away the immigration laws of the United States of America?  The United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pa is helping Obama and his Czars nullify the laws and wipe away middle class incomes by forcing hard working people to pay higher and higher taxes to feed the illegal aliens, being housed in Mechanicsburg Pa. 

Just yesterday Majority Leader Reid wrote in a tweet something that was shocking. He said: ‘Since House Republicans have failed to act on immigration, I know the President will. When he does, I hope he goes real big.’

The United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania helps Barack Obama not only break the moral laws of the United States but well may help terrorists hide inside the United States.  The United Methodist Home for Children Mechanicsburg PA says nothing to nobody about the cash rich adventure they've entered into with the corrupt government of Obama.  Since yesterday, various sources reported that the Middle Eastern terrorist group ISIS has sent agents to Mexico.

According to published reports, the ISIS terrorists intend to slip over the porous U.S.-Mexican border to attack targets in America. The U.S. Border Patrol and Texas law enforcement agencies have sent warnings to their officers about ISIS agents planning terror attacks across the border, in the United States.

This new deadly danger is certainly encouraged by the weak U.S. government response to the border surge this summer and by Pres. Obama's continuing threats to Amnesty 5 million illegal aliens in the coming weeks.

Imagine the additional rush on the border if Obama signs that order! Imagine how much easier it will be for terrorists to slip into the country amidst that chaos

Let this sink in for a moment. The Majority Leader of the Senate is bragging that he knows the President will circumvent Congress to issue executive amnesty to millions, and he is encouraging the President to ensure this amnesty includes as many people as possible. And the White House has acknowledged that 5 to 6 million is the number they are looking at.  When the tide turns and Obama and his Czars are out of power the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pa and their directors/leadership should be held accountable for helping Obama and friend break the law and be judged by the courts and pay back all the money used that was forced by tax laws. 

Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to reject Mr. Reid's statement? Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to say: I support the legislation passed by the House of Representatives that would secure the border and block this executive amnesty? Have they ever said they support that? Have they ever said: I will do everything in my power to see that the House legislation gets a vote in the Senate so the American people can know what is going on? No. All we hear is silence.

This body is not run by one man. We don't have a dictator in the great Senate. Every Member has a vote. And the only way Senator Reid can succeed in blocking this Senate from voting to stop the President's executive actions is for members to stop supporting him. The United Methodist Home for Children may belong in the old Soviet Union where you could accept bribes from the state to break the law, look the other way, ignore the laws, hide people from law enforcement and keep in the shadows, hurting the honest working man. 

Every Senator needs to stand up and represent their constituents, not big business, not the ACLU, not activist groups, not political interests but the American interests, the workers' interests. That is what we need to expect from them, and we don't have but a few weeks, it looks like, to get it done.

In effect, the entire Senate Democratic Congress has surrendered the jobs, wages, and livelihoods of their constituents to a group of special interests meeting in secret at the White House.  The United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pa, I guess, cannot talk about the deal with Obama?  The cash deal is a big secret?  Why are they helping these poor illegal children in the shadow?  

The United Methodist Home for Children Mechanicsburg Pa 

Illegal Alien Children is a cash cow for any organization helping Barack Obama break the law and house illegal aliens.  It is all but proven that this mass migration was planned, you must decide.  How many local fake charity type home programs are cashing in on the illegal alien flood?

They are surrendering them to executive actions that will foist on the nation what Congress has refused to pass and the American people have rejected. They are plotting at the White House to move forward with Executive action no matter what the people think and no matter what Congress—through the people's House—has decided.  

Politico reports that ‘White House officials conducted more than 20 meetings in July and August with legal experts, immigration advocates and business leaders to gather ideas on what should be included in the order.’ So who are these so-called expert advocates and business leaders? They are not the law enforcement officers; they are not our ICE officers; they are not our Border Patrol officers; they are not the American working man and woman; they are not unemployed Americans. They weren't in the room. You can be sure of that. Their opinions weren't sought.

No, White House officials are meeting with the world's most powerful corporate and immigration lobbyists and activists who think border controls are for the little people.  The administration is meeting with the elite, the cosmopolitan set, who scorn and mock the concerns of everyday Americans who are concerned about their schools, jobs, wages, communities, and hospitals. These great and powerful citizens of the world don't care much about old fashioned things like national boundaries, national sovereignty, and immigration control—let alone the constitutional separation of powers.

Well, don't you get it? They believe they are always supposed to get whatever it is they want. They are used to that. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, one report says they have spent $1.5 billion since 2007 trying to pass their desired immigration bill—$1.5 billion. They tried and tried and tried to pass the bill through Congress, but the American people said: No, no, no. So they decided to just go to the President. They decide to go to President Obama, and they insist that he implement these measures through executive fiat. And Senate Democrats have apparently said: Well, that is just a wonderful idea. We support that. Just do it. Go big. But, Mr. President, wait a little bit. Wait until after the election. We don't want the voters to hold us accountable for what you are doing. We want to pretend we in the Senate have nothing to do with it.

One of the groups that has joined the chorus of special interests demanding executive action on immigration is FWD.us, run by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He just turned 30, and I understand he is worth about $30 billion.

Mr. Zuckerberg has been very busy recently. One of his fellow billionaires, Mr. Carlos Slim—maybe the world's richest man—invited Mr. Zuckerberg down to Mexico City to give a speech. What did Mr. Zuckerberg promote in his speech? Well, this is a report of it.

I guess I will first note that young Mr. Zuckerberg maybe doesn't know there is a deep American tradition—a tradition in most developed nations—that you don't go to a foreign capital to criticize your own government. I suppose he doesn't know about that. They probably didn't teach him about that when he was at one of the elite schools he attended.

This is what he said in Mexico City: ‘We have a strange immigration policy for a nation of immigrants. And it's a policy unfit for today's world.’

Well, the ‘masters of the universe’ are very fond of open borders as long as these open borders don't extend to their gated compounds and fenced-off estates.

I have another article from late last fall that was printed in Business Insider about Mr. Zuckerberg's actions. The headline is ‘Mark Zuckerberg Just Spent More Than $30 Million Buying 4 Neighboring Houses For Privacy.’ The article says: ‘Mark Zuckerberg just made an unusual purchase. Well, four purchases. Facebook's billionaire founder bought four homes surrounding his current home near Palo Alto, Mercury News Reports. The houses cost him more than $30 million, including one 2,600 square-foot home that cost $14 million. (His own home is twice as large at 5,000 square-feet and cost half as much.) Larry Page made a similar move a few years ago so he could build a 6,000-square-foot mansion. But Zuckerberg's reason is different. He doesn't want to live in excess, he just wants a little privacy.’

That is a world the average American doesn't live in.

So Mr. Zuckerberg—who has become the top spokesman for expanding the admission of foreign workers—championed the Senate immigration bill for which all of our Democratic colleagues voted. One of the things the bill did was double the supply of low-wage foreign workers brought into the United States for companies such as Facebook.  

Many of us have heard for a long time the claim that there is a shortage of STEM and IT workers. This has been the central sales pitch used by those making demands for massive increases in foreign worker programs across-the-board—programs that bring in workers for every sector in the U.S. economy. But we know otherwise from the nation's leading academics, people who studied this issue and are professionals in it. I have a recent op-ed here from USA Today which reports that there is actually not a shortage but a surplus of Americans who have been trained in the STEM and IT fields and that this is why wages for these fields have not increased since 1999.   

If you have a shortage of workers in a field such as information technology or science and mathematics, wages go up, do they not? If wages are not up, we don't have a shortage.

So rich high-tech companies are using the H-1B visa program to keep wages down and to hire less expensive workers from abroad. Indeed, the same companies demanding more guest workers are laying off American workers in droves.

I would like to read some excerpts from that op-ed published in USA Today. The article was co-authored by five of the nation's experts on labor markets and the guest worker program. I think it tells a story that has not been refuted. We have partisans and advocates who have been claiming there is a shortage in these fields, but the experts say no. And since they have been speaking out on this issue, we have seen no real data that would dispute what they say in this article dated July 27, 2014.

Headline: ‘Bill Gates' tech worker fantasy.’ Sub-headline: ‘Silicon Valley has created an imaginary staffing shortage.’

‘Business executives and politicians endlessly complain that there is a “shortage” of qualified Americans and that the U.S. must admit more high-skilled guest workers to fill jobs in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and math. This claim is echoed by everyone from President Obama and Rupert Murdoch to Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

Yet within the past month, two odd things occurred: Census reported that only one in four STEM degree holders is in a STEM job, and Microsoft announced plans to downsize its workforce by 18,000 jobs.’

The five writers of this article—referring to themselves—go on to say:

‘None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry's assertions of labor shortages.’

The article was written by Ron Hira, Paula Stephan, Hal Salzman, Michael Teitelbaum, who has recently written a book on this subject, and Norm Matloff. These are labor economic experts who have studied these issues for years. Many of them have testified before Congress. They say:

‘None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry's assertions of labor shortages.’

What a statement that is.

They go on to write—they all signed this article together—that:

‘If a shortage did exist, wages would be rising as companies try to attract scarce workers. Instead, legislation that expanded visas for IT personnel during the 1990s has kept average wages flat over the past 16 years. Indeed, guest workers have become the predominant source of new hires in these fields.’

The ‘predominate source of new hires’ in information technology fields is coming through guest worker programs from abroad.

They go on to say:

‘Those supporting even greater expansion seem to have forgotten about the hundreds and thousands of American high-tech workers who are being shortchanged—by wages stuck at 1998 levels, by diminished career prospects and by repeated rounds of layoffs.’

They go on to say:

‘There is an ample supply of American workers who are willing and qualified to fill high-skill jobs in this country. The only real disagreement is whether the supply is two or three times larger than the demand.’

There is no doubt we have a surplus of IT workers. The question is whether the supply is two or three times as big as the number of job openings.

They go on to say:

‘Unfortunately, companies are exploiting the large existing flow of guest workers to deny American workers access to STEM careers and middle-class security that should come with them. Imagine, then, how many more Americans would be frozen out of the middle class if politicians and tech moguls succeeded in doubling or tripling the flow of guest workers into STEM occupations.’

That is exactly what the bill before this Senate—the bill the House of Representatives rejected—would have done. It would have doubled the number of guest workers coming into America just to take jobs—coming in for the very purpose of taking a job that we need Americans to be taking.

The article goes on:

‘Another major, yet often overlooked, provision in the pending legislation’—that is the bill President Obama is pushing for, the Gang of Eight bill—‘would grant automatic green cards to any foreign student who earns a graduate degree in a STEM field, based on assertions that foreign graduates of U.S. universities are routinely being forced to leave. Such claims are incompatible with the evidence that such graduates have many paths to stay and work, and indeed the “stay rates” for visiting international students are very high and have shown no sign of decline. The most recent study finds that 92 percent of Chinese Ph.D. students stay in America to work after graduation.’

So there is this myth that we have thousands and thousands of students graduating from schools and being sent home. That is not accurate, according to the experts who study the data.

The article continues:

‘The tech industry's promotion of expanded temporary visas (such as the H-1B) and green cards is driven by a desire for cheap, young and immobile labor. It is well documented that loopholes enable firms to legally pay H-1Bs below their market value and to continue the widespread age discrimination acknowledged by many in the tech industry.’

I talked to a gentleman whom I knew a little bit who worked at a computer company. He is well into his forties, maybe close to 50. I asked him what kind of security there is. He said, well, in the tech industry these companies go and fall. I said, what happens if you were to lose your job? He said, at my age, it would be very difficult.

The USA Today op-ed concludes by saying:

   

‘IT industry leaders have spent lavishly on lobbying to promote their STEM shortage claims among legislators. The only problem is that the evidence contradicts their self-interested claims.’

So I would pose a question to Mr. Zuckerberg.  I read in the news that Facebook is now worth more than $200 billion. Is that not enough money to hire American workers for a change? Your company now employs roughly 7,000 people. Let's say you want to expand your workforce 10 percent, or hire another 700 workers. Are you claiming you can't find 700 Americans who would take these jobs if you paid a good wage and decent benefits?

Let me just say one more thing: Facebook has 7,000 workers. Microsoft just laid off 18,000. Why doesn't Mr. Zuckerberg call his friend Mr. Gates and say: Look, I have to hire a few hundred people; do you have any resumes you can send over here? Maybe I will not have to take somebody from a foreign country for a job an unemployed U.S. citizen might take.

There is this myth that we have surging employment in the high-tech industry. According to a recent Reuters report, ‘U.S. employers announced 50,000 layoffs in August of 2013, up 34 percent from the previous month, then up 57 percent through August 2012.’

As Byron York reported, Hewlett-Packard, a high-tech company, ‘laid off 29,000 employees in 2012’—29,000. ‘In August of 2013, Cisco announced plans to lay off 4,000 workers in addition to the 8,000 cut in the last 2 years’, and Cisco was right in the White House this summer with a group of other companies demanding more workers from abroad. Cisco was signing a letter with a bunch of other companies; ‘United Technologies has announced 3,000 layoffs this year’; ‘American Express cut 5,400 jobs’; ‘Procter and Gamble announced 5,700 jobs cut in 2012’; ‘T-Mobile announced plans to lay off 2,250 employees in 2012.’  

There is no shortage of workers.

But FWD.us and other immigration lobbyists are working with the White House to extract executive orders from the President that provide them with the same financial benefits that were included in the Senate bill that was rejected by the House of Representatives. One proposal would increase by as much as 800,000 the number of foreign workers admitted for the explicit purpose of taking jobs in the United States.

A recent Associated Press article, entitled ‘Obama Weighs Broader Move on Legal Immigration’ reports that ‘President Barack Obama is considering key changes in the nation's immigration system requested by tech, industry and powerful interest groups’—not by the American people was he being requested to do this, not by the national interest, but by ‘powerful interest groups’ that are referred to here.

It goes on to say:

‘After recent White House meetings, top officials have compiled specific recommendations from business groups and other advocates.’

‘Other advocates.’ Who are they? We know the ACLU has been there. We know La Raza has been meeting there on a regular basis. It goes on. The article says:

‘One of the more popular requests is a change in the way green cards are counted that would essentially free up some 800,000 additional visas the first year, advocates say…Other requests would extend work permits to the spouses of all temporary H-1B skilled workers who have not been able to work.’

But how about the fact that a single mom might like that job? An unemployed single mom or a single mom who has a job prospect that would pay $3 more than the job she is now working while trying to raise a family? Or an unemployed father? Maybe they would like those jobs first.

So these actions fall on the heels of previous executive action in which the President already acted unilaterally earlier this year to grant companies an additional 100,000 guest workers. He has already done that. In just the first year of this order, it adds 100,000 guest workers by providing work authorizations to the foreign spouses of temporary guest workers. It would increase the supply of guest workers by approximately 30,000 each year thereafter—this at a time when we have 58 million working-age Americans who are not working. Since 2009 the number of adults has increased by 13 million, while the number of people actually working has decreased by 7 million.

Median household income has dropped $2,300 since 2009. According to the National Employment Law Project, wages are down across all occupations.

A CBS report titled ‘Why American workers feel increasingly poor’ writes of their study:

‘Real median hourly wages have declined across low, middle and high income levels from 2009 to 2013, the study found. No matter if workers were in the lowest bracket ($8.84 to $10.85 an hour) or the highest ($31.40 to $86.34) median hourly wages declined when you take into account the impact of inflation.’

It goes on:

‘Across all occupations, real median hourly wages slipped 3.4 percent since 2009. While even better-paid workers saw median hourly earnings erode, the worst hit segments were at the bottom’—the people who got hurt the most were at the bottom—‘with declines in their wages of more than 4 percent.’

We have business CEOs, lobbyists, activists, immigration groups, and clever politicians who demand that we have to have even more workers brought into America even when we have a decline in wages and a decline in jobs. But what does the President do? His administration issues an executive order to provide foreign spouses—the citizens of other countries, not American citizens—with 100,000 jobs in the United States, precious jobs that many Americans would love to have. How many American spouses struggling to support their families would benefit from one of those jobs? How many single moms would benefit from a chance to earn a better paycheck?  

Our Senate Democratic friends talk about paycheck fairness repeatedly. Yet they are supporting policies that take jobs and wages directly from American women by the millions.

Immigration policy is supposed to serve the national interest and the people of the United States, not the interests of a few activist CEOs and the politicians who are catering to them. We have had 40 years of mass immigration combined with falling wages, a shrinking workplace, and exploding welfare rolls. We know that, don't we, friends and colleagues? It is time for a shift in emphasis. It is time to get our own people back to work, and our communities out of poverty, and our schools back on their feet.

Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas—probably the leading academic in this entire area and has been for many years—estimates that our current immigration rate results in an annual loss of more than $400 billion in wages for Americans competing with immigrant labor. Between 2000 and today the government issued nearly 30 million visas to temporary foreign workers and permanent immigrants, largely lower-skilled and lower-wage.

A recent Reuters poll showed that Americans wish to see record immigration reduced, not increased (as the Gang of Eight bill would have done), by a huge 3-to-1 margin.

Another poll from pollster Kellyanne Conway recently showed that 80 percent of Americans think companies should hire from among the existing unemployed rather than bringing in new workers from abroad to fill these jobs. Yet Senate Democrats have unanimously supported legislation to double the annual supply of labor brought into the United States.  These workers would be brought in to take jobs in ever field, occupation and industry in America.

So what about the good, decent and patriotic citizens of our country who fight our wars, who obey our laws, who follow our rules, and want a better future for their children? Should their needs not come first?

As the National Review explained, ‘we are a nation with an economy—not an economy with a nation.’ We cannot put the parochial demands of a few powerful CEOs ahead of an entire nation's hopes, dreams, and aspirations.

The basic social contract is that citizens agree to follow the law, pay their taxes, devote their love and loyalty to their country, and in exchange the nation commits to preserve and protect and serve their interests, safeguard their freedom, and return to them in kind their first allegiance and loyalty.

The job of elected officials is to answer to the people who sent them to Washington—not to scorn them, not to demean them, not to mock them, and not to sell their jobs and dreams to the highest bidder.

Barack Obama Scott Perry, Sheryl Delozier Robert Casey Jr Patrick Toomey Lou Barletta

The United Methodist Home for Children, Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania.  Question; How much money in cash grants are you going to receive per illegal alien child you feed, transport and shelter.  It seems the going cash rate, per illegal alien, per month, is $7,000 per month.  The United Methodist Home for Children needs to disclose the taxpayer money they plan to rack in keeping up with the poor illegal alien children.  At $7,000 per month 10 little rascals equal $70,000 per month.  

If the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg Pennsylvania gets lucky and nets twenty little rascals they could maybe get $140,000 in cash from the taxpayers monthly. 

 If this is even close, the United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg PA is a money making racket, which is perfect considering the illegal alien children have a mix of MS-13 gang members.  

The United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg PA needs to disclose the cash income for each illegal alien child they keep within Cumberland County and we can all discover why they are Federal Tax Exempt?  

The United Methodist Home for Children in Mechanicsburg PA should also allow the community the ages of the little rascals and their gender to make sure they do or don't require other free taxpayer funded community services. We also look forward to Mayor Ritter making some comments concerning illegal aliens forced into the borough by Barack Obama and his thugs within the DHS, CBP and other agencies. 

The Customs and Border Protection agency is divided into the Office of Field Operations (OFO) and the Office of Border Patrol (OBP). The OFO numbers reflect anyone either turning themselves in at official U.S. points of entry, or anyone caught while being smuggled at the points of entry. The OBP numbers reflect anyone being caught or turning themselves in to Border Patrol agents between the points of entry, or anyone caught at interior checkpoints by Border Patrol agents. The “OFO Inadmissible” designation to any individual from a nation other than Mexico or Canada means that U.S. authorities took the individuals into custody. Whether they were deported or given a Notice to Appear is unknown. It is important to note these numbers do not include data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unavailable ICE data are in addition to these numbers.

The report reveals the apprehension numbers ranging from 2010 through July 2014. It shows that most of the human smuggling from Syria and Albania into the U.S. comes through Central America. The report also indicates the routes individuals from North Africa and the Middle East take into the European Union, either to illegally migrate there or as a possible stop in their journey to the United States. The data are broken down further into the specific U.S. border sectors where the apprehensions and contact occurred.

Among the significant revelations are that individuals from nations currently suffering from the world’s largest Ebola outbreak have been caught attempting to sneak across the porous U.S. border into the interior of the United States. At least 71 individuals from the three nations affected by the current Ebola outbreak have either turned themselves in or been caught attempting to illegally enter the U.S. by U.S. authorities between January 2014 and July 2014.

As of July 20, 2014, 1,443 individuals from China were caught sneaking across the porous U.S. border this year alone, with another 1,803 individuals either turning themselves in to U.S. authorities at official ports of entry, or being caught attempting to illegally enter at the ports of entry. This comes amid a massive crackdown by Chinese authorities of Islamic terrorists in the Communist nation.

Twenty-eight individuals from Pakistan were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 211 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Thirteen Egyptians were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 168 either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Four individuals from Yemen were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014 alone, with another 34 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught attempting to sneak through official ports of entry. Yemen is not the only nation with individuals who pose terror risks to the U.S. that the report indicates travel from. The failed nation of Somalia, known as a hotbed of Islamic terror activity, was also referenced in the report. Four individuals from Somalia were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014. Another 290 either turned themselves in or were caught attempting to sneak in at official ports of entry

These are the companies, where you spend your money and they want more illegal aliens, cheap labor means more profits.  

The Cheesecake Factory, Inc. CVS Caremark Corporation Hallmark Cards, Inc. McDonald's Corporation The Wendy's Company The Walt Disney Company The Coca-Cola Company Johnson & Johnson American Express Company 21st Century Fox Darden Restaurants, Inc (Olive Garden, Red Lobster, and others) Liberty Mutual Group, Inc. Allstate Insurance Company Western Union Northwestern Mutual American Airlines Inc. Motorola Solutions, Inc. The Procter  Gamble Company (wide range of well-known home and beauty brands) Newell Rubbermaid Inc. AT&T Inc. T-Mobile USA, Inc. Caterpillar Inc. The ADT Corporation Pfizer Inc. Hewlett-Packard Company HP United Parcel Service, Inc. UPS General Electric Company GE Verizon Communications Inc.  Pay your phone bill (one dollar short) Marriott International, Inc.  Stay somewhere else Hilton Worldwide  Find another room Hyatt Hotels Corporation  Say no to Hyatt McCormick & Company, Inc.  Salt and Pepper Cisco Systems, Inc.  A billionaire doesn't need you anymore, let him sail off Quest Diagnostics Incorporated Eaton E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company BNSF Railway Company Shell Oil Company General Mills, Inc. (many well-known food brands) Ingram Industries Inc. Kronos Incorporated Ingersoll Rand Company General Parts Inc. Merck & Co., Inc. United Technologies Corporation Harris Corporation Illinois Tool Works Inc. Sears Holdings Corporation  There is a reason that Sears and K-Mart is going broke USG Corporation Archer Daniels Midland Company  Destroy people that control your food Johnson Controls, Inc.  Lots of people make their stuff Ally Financial Inc. US Foods Univar, Inc. Kiewit Corporation Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.  Great company really bad leadership W.W. Grainger, Inc.  Too bad, no more money. Avery Dennison Corporation Humana Inc. Novelis, Inc. The Williams Companies, Inc. Avaya Inc. Computer Sciences Corporation Honeywell International Inc. International Paper Company  All they do is cut down trees, cut your cash flow to them Dover Corporation Danaher Corporation TRW Automotive Analog Devices, Inc. Ecolab, Inc. Avnet, Inc. White Lodging Corporation Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. Simon Property Group Daikin McQuay Americas Continental Grain Company MSC Industrial Direct Co., Inc. Hospira, Inc. Cigna Corporation The ServiceMaster Company Automatic Data Processing, Inc. Bloomin' Brands Inc. Fiserv, Inc. Carolinas HealthCare System SRA International Emerson Rockwell Automation, Inc. Parker Hannifin Corporationm Saint-Gobain Corporation General Dynamics Corporation A. O. Smith Corporation Praxair, Inc. HCA Inc. Eastman Chemical Company ManpowerGroup Fifth Third Bank Pitney Bowes Inc. Express Scripts, Inc. Cardinal Health, Inc. Aleris International, Inc. DTE Energy Company U.S. Steel Corporation Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation Cargill, Incorporated Assurant, Inc. XL Global Services, Inc Texas Instruments Incorporated ATK WESCO International

BACKGROUND:

7/3/2014: National Journal, Obama's Immigration Independence Day

“Obama made it clear he would press his executive powers to the limit. He gave quiet credence to recommendations from La Raza and other immigration groups that between 5 million to 6 million adult illegal immigrants could be spared deportation under a similar form of deferred adjudication he ordered for the so-called Dreamers in June 2012…

Obama has now ordered the Homeland Security and Justice departments to find executive authorities that could enlarge that non-prosecutorial umbrella by a factor of 10. Senior officials also tell me Obama wants to see what he can do with executive power to provide temporary legal status to undocumented adults.”

7/16/2014: The Huffington Post, Obama Tells Lawmakers He Won't Cave On Deportation Review

“… The president assured members of his own party Wednesday that he won't back down from his plans to ease deportations… Obama said he was ‘moving rapidly,’ though he didn't estimate how many undocumented immigrants may be affected or an exact time frame, said Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.). The president has asked that the secretary of homeland security finish a review of deportation policy by the end of the summer.

7/17/2014: Real Clear Politics, Obama Said to Assure Hispanic Caucus on Deportations

“President Obama reassured members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Wednesday that he will flex his executive muscle later this year to be ‘as great and big and bold as he can be’…”

7/17/2014: Daily Caller, Dem Lawmaker: Obama Has Promised To ‘Act Shortly’ By Granting Amnesty To Many Illegals

“Democratic lawmaker Tony Cardenas revealed that President Barack Obama promised the Congressional Hispanic Caucus on Wednesday he will ‘act shortly’ to bypass Congress and grant some form of amnesty to many illegal immigrants…

Cardenas added that the president promised to also expedite the hearings of the tens of thousands of illegal immigrant children stranded on the southern border, and would work to eventually provide them ‘some temporary or permanent status here in the United States.’

‘So those are the two main things that the president committed to,’ the lawmaker concluded.”

7/19/2014: National Journal, The Immigration Conflagration

“Regardless of how Congress handles his request for more border resources, President Obama is moving toward a historic—and explosive—executive order that will provide legal status to a significant number of the estimated 11.7 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. One senior White House official says that while ‘what's happening at the border will provide atmospherics for the [president's] decision,’ it won't stop him from acting on the undocumented—probably before the midterm elections.”

7/20/2014: Breitbart, Luis Gutierrez To La Raza: Obama Assured Steps To ‘Stop The Deportation Of Our People’

“Speaking at the National Council of La Raza conference in Los Angeles, Gutierrez said that Obama assured him during a White House meeting with Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus last week that he would be as ‘generous and broad’ as he can…

A Masters of the Universe drawing hangs in a frame above the desk in the Capitol Hill office of Alabama senator Jeff Sessions. It stands out among dozens of pictures of his three children and seven grandchildren. The protagonist of the comic-book series, He-Man, is depicted mounted atop his heroic lion, Battle Cat. His muscles are bulging; his sword is thrust into the air. Battle Cat’s mouth is open, his fangs exposed. They are a formidable pair.

A small gold plaque sits below the drawing in the same frame. Etched on it are a portion of the remarks Sessions delivered on the Senate floor in June 2007, two days before the comprehensive immigration-reform bill championed by President George W. Bush and several prominent Republicans was defeated in the Senate. Sessions led the opposition to that bill, and his efforts were among the reasons for its unexpected collapse. “No one small group of people have a right to meet in secret with special-interest groups and write an immigration bill and ram it down the throat of this Senate,” he told his colleagues. “I oppose it. It is not right.”

The artwork was a gift from Cindy Hayden, Sessions’s former chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee, after the 2007 bill was defeated. Sessions called the “small group” that had hashed out the legislation — the politicians, political strategists, and special-interest groups — the “masters of the universe.”

It’s one of his favorite political put-downs. He refers to the CEOs and corporate interests that support amnesty for illegal immigrants as the “masters of the universe in glass towers and suites.” Politicians like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who have repeatedly tried to push a path to citizenship through Congress, are the “Washington masters of the universe.” Economists, too, are masters of the universe, and former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke was the “master master.”

Sessions, 67, is a low-profile guy. Though he is not well known nationally, he has for years now been the instrumental force in quashing repeated attempts to pass comprehensive immigration reform. He has a gentle, almost grandfatherly quality, but he doesn’t shy away from combat. He derided the 2007 bill as “no illegal alien left behind”; in a single press conference, he blasted it as a “colossal error,” an “absolute scandal,” and a “fiscal disaster.” He declared: “Good fences make good neighbors.” All of this prompted the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank to call him the “Lou Dobbs of the Senate.”

By the time Sessions was done, on the eve of the Senate vote, calls from the bill’s opponents had shut down the Capitol switchboard. “People were sending bricks through the mail and saying, ‘Use this to build a wall,’ that sort of thing,” he says.

When he was elected to the Senate in 1996, Sessions had no special interest in immigration but, as a career prosecutor, he says the 2007 bill, which would have granted amnesty to the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States, “just went against my understanding of what law in America was about.”

Sessions grew up in the rural town of Hybart, Ala., where his family ran a country store and, he has said, he learned “the value of hard work and being honest.” He was a Republican even when the South was strongly Democratic. At Huntingdon College in the late 1960s, he was involved with the GOP, and in his senior year he became chairman of the campus chapter of the Young Republicans.

Even before he came to Washington he had spent much of his career in public service, first as a U.S. attorney in Mobile and then as state attorney general. In 1986, when Sessions was 39, President Reagan nominated him to the federal district court in Alabama.

Sessions has always been willing to take on unpopular fights. As U.S. attorney, he prosecuted a group of African-American civil-rights activists for voter fraud, and his nomination prompted charges of racism from local and national officials. Colleagues at the Department of Justice accused him of racism, too, and the late Democratic senator Ted Kennedy warned that he would be a “throwback to a shameful era.” A black colleague and even a local black journalist testified on his behalf. Ultimately, his nomination was defeated. In an unusual turn of events, Senator Howell Heflin, a conservative Democrat who was expected to support his fellow Alabamian, bucked tradition and cast the deciding vote against him.

Sessions ran for the Senate in 1996 after serving two years as state attorney general and got some revenge: He won the seat held by the retiring Heflin. His victory was important for the GOP, too, as part of Alabama’s political realignment and that of the South more broadly. In 1994, Republicans had won the governorship and several other statewide offices. The 1996 elections tested the permanence of those victories, and Sessions’s triumph helped to consolidate the GOP’s gains.

Sessions says that proponents of comprehensive immigration reform, which would address many of the thorny immigration issues facing the country in a single bill rather than in smaller pieces, began redoubling their efforts on June 8, 2007, the day after a Bush-backed bill to bring it about was defeated. To the rest of us, it wasn’t until the day after Mitt Romney’s defeat in the 2012 presidential election that a new immigration bill began to look not just realistic but inevitable. Three days after the election, former George W. Bush aide Mark McKinnon opined, “The best thing about Republicans’ losing is that it will likely force them to cut an immigration deal.” An NBC News headline declared, “GOP resistance to immigration reform could be a casualty of 2012 election.” The Washington Post explained that “the GOP needs to do immigration reform — now.” The Republican National Committee, in its postmortem election report, came to the same conclusion.

A year and a half later, the landscape looks much different. House majority leader Eric Cantor is widely considered a casualty of the immigration issue. And, with Central American children flooding over the southern border, comprehensive immigration reform is, for the time being, all but dead.

More than any other national figure, Sessions is responsible for that turn of events. As the Senate debated the proposal of a group of eight senators — known as the “Gang of Eight” — for comprehensive reform last year, and then as the House toyed with passing it in various incarnations throughout the spring, Sessions’s office served as Ground Zero for the opposition. His staff circulated scholarly studies on Capitol Hill, sent dozens of policy memos to sway ambivalent lawmakers, and relentlessly hassled reporters about the perceived biases in their coverage.

Sessions himself met privately with Republicans in both houses of Congress to persuade them of his views. He also broadcast them in public, taking the Senate floor more than any other lawmaker last year. He spoke for a total of 39 hours, more even than did his colleagues Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, who made national headlines for staging hours-long filibusters. “Without Sessions, I see that amnesty probably would’ve been rammed through,” says radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham, who undertook her own crusade to scuttle the legislation.

Sessions opposes not only providing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants — many Republicans are against that — but also raising the level of legal immigration. The Gang of Eight’s bill would have markedly increased it, and Sessions was one of the few voices on Capitol Hill arguing that even legal immigration hurts Americans, particularly when the economy is weak and unemployment high.

He has cast himself as a Beltway champion of the middle class, and his message of economic populism is part of a broader attempt to revitalize it. For Sessions, the issue of immigration illustrates better than anything else the divide between the ruling class — the “masters of the universe” — and working-class Americans, with the vast majority of CEOs and business owners favoring reform that, as he sees it, would deal a blow to America’s poor and middle-class workers. He has time and again cited Congressional Budget Office findings that increased immigration lowers wages overall but particularly for the poor. And, though many Republicans have called for allowing high-skilled immigrants into the U.S., particularly in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math, Sessions has repeatedly drawn attention to statistics suggesting we have more than enough.

So when, less than two months after Romney’s loss, Florida senator and Republican rising star Marco Rubio made it clear he would take the lead in negotiating an immigration-reform proposal with Democrats and the Obama administration, Sessions prepared for battle. Rubio had nearly all of the major financial forces in the GOP behind him; Sessions had history on his side.

He compares the efforts of the pro-reform crowd to a highly orchestrated presidential campaign: “They had exceedingly capable political consultants, they had pollsters to ask the right questions to get the best possible polling numbers, they had TV advertisements, they had rock-star Republicans supporting it, and they felt the train couldn’t be stopped,” he says.

According to the Sunlight Foundation, business and political groups spent more than $1.5 billion between 2008 and 2012 on pro-reform lobbying. Norm Coleman’s American Action Network aired ads on Fox News urging viewers to call Rubio to “thank him for keeping his promise, and fighting to secure the border.” Americans for a Conservative Direction, led by former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour, ran ads calling on viewers to “stand with Marco Rubio to end de facto amnesty.” Americans for Prosperity, a nonprofit group funded by the Koch brothers’ donor network, moved its 2013 conference from Washington, D.C., to Orlando, Fla., and featured Rubio as the keynote speaker. It was the rare issue, says Ingraham, on which the Left and the Right were “completely in cahoots with one another.”

As the legislation took shape, Sessions tried to slow it down in part by drawing attention to the swiftness with which some lawmakers were trying to move it through the Senate. Lawmakers had had two and a half weeks to read the 844-page bill when Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy scheduled it for a markup. “The only thing I don’t think we want is delay just for delay’s sake,” New York senator Chuck Schumer, one of the bill’s sponsors, said at a committee hearing in late April 2013. Schumer’s strategy, says a Sessions aide, was “to move faster than the truth can travel.”

At the same committee hearing, Sessions gave Schumer a reason for delay. He pointed to an article in the Christian Science Monitor noting that even those involved in crafting the legislation didn’t know exactly how many new immigrants it would allow into the country. He went on to read from the text of the bill to illustrate why it was difficult for some to parse. “The discretionary authority under clause one i may not be used to waive” — he paused, right hand in the air — “roman numeral one, sub-paragraph b, c, d 2, i, e, g, h, or i of section 212 a-2, then, roman numeral two, section 212 a-3, then, roman numeral three, sub-paragraph a, c, d, e of section 212 a-10.” His staff, he told his colleagues, had been working for days “trying to decipher this gobbledygook.” Flashing a smile, he looked at Schumer and said that he’d do his best to be ready to vote on the legislation. “But count me as a, a bit of a protest.”

As the bill moved through the Senate, Sessions used details like these to embarrass its supporters. His efforts were aimed not at them but at the few senators who hadn’t yet made up their minds and, even more important, at the dozens of undecided Republicans in the House of Representatives, which would ultimately decide the bill’s fate. Sessions likes to refer to “true facts,” and he says he felt a “duty to try to educate people on what I thought were the true facts.”

Senator David Vitter was a key ally, and together they plotted legislative strategy. The Louisiana Republican, Sessions says, is “extremely effective in understanding Senate procedures,” and he raised questions about the Gang of Eight’s commitment to securing the border when he forced the Senate to vote on, and reject, an amendment to the bill that would have prohibited legalization before the implementation of a biometric border-check-in system. In April, the duo exasperated Democrats again when Vitter wrote, and Sessions raised on the Senate floor, an amendment to a resolution honoring the late Latino union organizer Cesar Chavez: Vitter noted Chavez’s support for a “secure Southern border” and “enforcement of our immigration laws.” That put New Jersey’s Robert Menendez, who had introduced the resolution, in an awkward position as he objected to the amendment.

The Gang of Eight’s bill passed 68 to 32. Its supporters had hoped for 70 yea votes. “It was wounded when it got to the House, wasn’t any doubt about that,” Sessions says.

The events that unfolded over the next few months didn’t help it. On July 2, the Obama administration quietly announced in a blog post that it would delay for a year the implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate. With that, Vitter says, skepticism among Republicans that the president could be trusted to enforce the proposed immigration legislation “went on steroids.” When House members returned from  their July 4 recess, says one Republican congressman, “anybody who opposed amnesty-first-type legislation could simply say, ‘Look, if he’s not going to enforce a core part of his namesake legislation, what makes you think he’s going to enforce anything that we pass?’”

Nonetheless, July was filled with talk about whether House leaders would use a conference committee to resolve their disputes with the Senate over the bill. On her radio show, Laura Ingraham sought to prevent them from doing so. Her interviews with GOP House members, regardless of the topic, ended with the same question: “Will you go to conference on immigration, yes or no?” She also made a presidential endorsement. “Jeff Sessions, we need Jeff Sessions for president,” she said. “Really, is there anyone out there who is better than Jeff Sessions on any of these issues?”

When lawmakers left Washington for their annual August recess, Sessions sent House Republicans home with a memo. Dated July 29, 2013, and addressed to “Republican colleagues,” it sought to refute the political and economic arguments in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. Republicans lost the 2012 election not because Mitt Romney won too few Hispanic votes, he said, but because the GOP “hemorrhaged support from middle- and low-income Americans.” While many Republicans had argued that an influx of immigration would aid American businesses, Sessions asked, “What about the needs of workers?” He urged them to embrace a “humble and honest populism.”

The argument took. Among House members, the political argument was particularly effective. After the 2012 election, says one Republican congressman, “it was almost just accepted that you’d do the amnesty and then you’d do better amongst Latino voters.” Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush did relatively well among Hispanics: Reagan won 37 percent of the Hispanic vote in 1984, and Bush won 40 percent in 2004. Though both supported amnesty, neither campaigned on the issue. In the first election after Reagan signed the 1986 immigration bill, which legalized over 2 million people, George H. W. Bush earned just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote. John McCain, who had for years championed comprehensive immigration reform, did little better.

Eventually even Republican supporters began to concede there would be no political payoff. In a closed-door meeting, says the congressman, “Paul Ryan eventually said immigration reform won’t help us win more votes, but ‘this is something we need to do.’”

By the new year, House leaders had decided to scrap the Senate bill entirely. But opponents of amnesty like to refer to comprehensive immigration reform as a “zombie issue” — one that time and again springs back to life — and the House leadership decided to sell their colleagues on a set of immigration principles, including a path to citizenship, unveiled shortly before their January retreat at a golf resort in Cambridge, Md.

On January 28, the day before they decamped from D.C., Sessions sent a 30-page memo to House Republicans. He said that the principles unveiled by House leaders resembled in every important way what he referred to as the “Senate Democrat / White House plan.” Complete with a table of contents that catalogued the “myths” propagated by the bill’s supporters, Sessions argued in footnote-full and chart-filled detail against the claims put forward by House leaders. The memo also included a “chartbook” on the adverse economic impact of mass immigration.

“Lots of members rebelled against the principles,” says a House member who was in on several private discussions. The congressman says that when they were discussed in a closed-door meeting of the Republican conference back in Washington, Boehner addressed the room and said, “Look, I got the message.”

In early February, both Boehner and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said they couldn’t see an immigration deal happening, but the issue popped up again in April when the Wall Street Journal reported that Boehner had told donors at a Las Vegas fundraiser he was “hell-bent” on passing an immigration bill in 2014. The speaker finally threw his hands up at the end of the month. “Every time the president ignores the law like the 38 times he has on Obamacare,” he said, “our members look up and go, ‘Wait a minute.’”

Sessions characterizes Eric Cantor’s primary defeat in June and the humanitarian crisis unfolding on the southern border as “exclamation points” on his efforts over the past year. The latter has proved disastrous for the Obama administration and for those who supported the Gang of Eight bill, offering a national illustration of the catastrophic impact  of lax immigration laws. “A few years ago,” says a Republican congressman who opposes amnesty, “people like me could predict what was going to happen. Now we don’t have to predict, we just point.”

Congress has yet to come up with any viable legislation to stem the tide of illegal immigrants and young children pouring over the border. The House last week passed passed a symbolic bill that increases funding to deploy National Guard troops to the border and closes the loophole in a 2008 law, making it easier to deport the unaccompanied minors entering the country. The Democratic Senate blocked the bill and jetted off on vacation.

The result of Sessions’s efforts is that the president is now left with just one option to accomplish his goal: implementing an executive order that would grant amnesty to between 6 and 9 million illegal immigrants. It won’t be couched in the feel-good language of the Gang of Eight bill, and it will come with enormous political costs.

The denouement, if you can call it that, offers an important political lesson: Intensity matters. It is said more often of the fight over gun control, but it is true of all political battles. Opponents of amnesty, Sessions chief among them, proved more passionate and energetic than their adversaries. For over a year, Sessions and his staff owned the immigration issue every day. Though supporters of the legislation, both in 2007 and 2013, peddled a narrative of inevitability, Sessions helped nurture and give expression to the skepticism of many Republican voters whose voices weren’t represented by the CEOs and lobbyists who helped craft the bill.

And he won, both times. That might not make him a master of the universe, but it makes him one of the most important assets that the Right has.