Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Immigration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Enjoyable, MJ. Did you notice the article in the Clarion-Ledger about how ICE was able to locate illegals working at the plants because many were wearing ankle bracelets that were applied when they were released from processing at the border? Many also obtained false documents nearby. If you were hiring someone who just spoke Spanish who was wearing an ankle bracelet, wouldn't it be a bit of a red flag? Of course, the Social Security contributions will never be used except for borrowing by the fed gov to pay for deficits.

    One woman told agents that a Spanish-speaking human resources employee at Koch Foods in Morton looked at two different IDs in three weeks. Ana Santizo-Tapia of Guatemala also told agents that a Koch supervisor asked if she had an ankle bracelet. Told yes, "he said it was okay, but she needed to keep it charged," according to the warrant. The supervisor "stated that he knew 'they' were poor and came to the United States to work."

    Another Koch employee said she worked at one plant in Morton for 11 months under a false name, and then got a job at the town's second Koch plant under her real name after receiving valid U.S. documents.

    Koch said in a statement Friday that the Illinois company has a "strict and thorough employment verification policy" and knows of no managers or supervisors arrested.
    (Source)

    These are the kind of jobs Americans in general do not want to do. So, we'll see if there is a flood of Mississippians whose jobs were taken away by the illegals. There is concern in Forest and the other towns that the economies and businesses will crater due to decreased commerce from lack of spending, from rents, bank deposits and loans taken out, etc. but certainly if the meat processing operations are curtailed or the businesses move because they can't find work or have to pay their American workers more.

    I found this article interesting. When ICE Comes to Town
    Last edited by Legacy; 08-11-2019, 12:04 PM.

    Comment


    • Trump administration releases new 'public charge' rule making it easier to reject immigrants (The Hill)

      The Trump administration on Monday released the final version of a controversial rule that dramatically increases the government's ability to reject green cards for people who are deemed likely to depend on government aid such as food stamps, housing assistance and Medicaid.

      The new "public charge" rule would link a subject's immigration status to their income and their use of certain public programs.
      The rule defines the term "public charge" in the Immigration and Nationality Act, which gives the Department of Homeland Security authority to deny applicants green cards, visas or entry into the U.S. if there is a risk they will become public charges.

      The public charge term has historically referred to someone who is “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence" based on their receipt of "public cash assistance."

      The new rule expands the definition to include anyone who receives food stamps, Medicaid and housing subsidies.

      Receipt of one or more of those designated public benefits for an aggregate 12 months within any three-year period by any noncitizen will be considered a negative factor in determining whether or not they become a public charge.

      The rule contains a list of other positive and negative factors, like age, which will be evaluated together to make a public charge inadmissibility determination.
      According to Fox Business News,
      that it would save taxpayers about $2.27 billion per year, or about $6.89 per U.S. citizen in taxes.

      DHS also notes that the change affect certain business as well as state and local economies and various business communities.
      It would reduce transfer payments not only from states to individuals, but also from the federal government to the states; percentages vary whether the program is food stamps or Medicaid and whether the state is a Medicaid expansion state.

      DHS recognizes that disenrollment or foregone enrollment in public benefit programs could lead to worse health outcomes, especially for pregnant or breastfeeding women, infants, or children; reduced prescription adherence; increased emergency room use and emergent care due to delayed treatment; increased prevalence of diseases; increased uncompensated care; increased rates of poverty and housing instability; and reduced productivity and educational attainment. Moreover, DHS indicates that the rule may decrease disposable income and increase poverty of certain families and children, including U.S. citizen children.

      DHS noted that “the rule might result in reduced revenues for healthcare providers participating in Medicaid, companies that manufacture medical supplies or pharmaceuticals, grocery retailers participating in SNAP, agricultural producers who grow foods that are eligible for purchase using SNAP benefits, or landlords participating in federally funded housing programs.”

      The rule change is applicable to households where there is a non-citizen immigrant even if others in the household are U.S. citizens, such U.S. born children. That may lead to disenrollment from programs those children benefit like CHIP and SNAP as well as Medicaid. The rule has been estimated to cost the federal government up to $13 Billion a year in paperwork and reviews dependent on the number of people. DHS offered a low ball estimate.

      But each U.S. citizen would see a decrease in their federal taxes of $6.89 a year. Increases in state taxes to compensate for uncompensated medical care, for example, depend on the individual state.
      Last edited by Legacy; 08-13-2019, 05:10 PM.

      Comment


      • A few immigration updates:

        Poultry company raided by ICE in Mississippi also operates in Georgia (Atlanta Journal - Constitution)
        “If we were to remove undocumented workers from the picture, our poultry industry would collapse in Georgia,” Jerry Gonzalez, executive director of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials says, “Our economy would take a serious hit, and it would be destructive to families all around this state.”Georgia’s poultry industry — it employs tens of thousands of workers across the state and generates billions of dollars in economic activity — follows state and federal employment laws, said Mike Giles, president of the Georgia Poultry Federation, a trade association.

        Documents: Owners of raided Mississippi plants ‘willfully’ used ineligible workers (al.com)

        Chicken plant workers reportedly fired after MS ICE raid
        (Clarion-Ledger)
        - 100 additional workers who had not been picked up in the ICE raids on a PH Foods Plant were fired because of Social Security discrepancies. Twenty-six employees are left at PH Food's Morton plant.
        The seven plants targeted by immigration officials were owned by four companies spread across six towns. They were Peco Foods Inc., with plants in Bay Springs, Canton and Sebastopol; Koch Foods Inc., with a plant in Morton; PH Food Inc. in Morton; MP Food Inc. in Pelahatchie and Pearl River Foods Inc. in Carthage. MP Food and PH Food are associated with A&B Inc.

        The job fair held by Koch Foods reportedly attracted 100 people and wanted workers with experience. Pay would start at $10.60/hour. ICE arrested 243 people at its processing facility in Morton, Miss. My guess is that job employment numbers that result in Mississippi's overall unemployment of 5.0 include illegal workers at those plants. Jackson's unemployment rate is 4.4.
        Last edited by Legacy; 08-14-2019, 01:41 PM.

        Comment


        • Legacy, relevant to some of the links you just posted. Care to comment on the negative impacts of illegal immigration to the town of Stillmore? I pulled the below from an earlier engagement from Buster who did not want to discuss it.


          Stillmore in the 90s/2000s was a small poor town, predominantly African American in rural GA, and a remnant of the cotton days . It's largest employer was a chicken plant (Crider). They actually employed a number greater than Stillmore's population. 70+% of it's workforce was African American, and things were pretty normal (normal for a rural GA small town of AAs) until the late 90s / early 2000s. Fast forward to the middle 2000s. The workforce over the course of 5 years was transformed to 70+% Latino (majority being illegal). Wages dropped, and working conditions degraded, and dorms were constructed to house the new work force. PROFITS INCREASED. African American unemployment skyrocketed, and many of the town's original inhabitants had to abandon the town to seek employment elsewhere.

          In 2006, immigration enforcement raided Crider. Crider was found to have aided in faking green cards, employment docs, etc.. Poof, the workforce is gone. Poof, Stillmore is now a ghost town. The majority of the AA workforce that was pushed out was no longer there... The next weekend, an ad in the paper offering jobs with wages now 15 to 20% higher... Then, the ownership of Crider joined forces with shady "recruiters" who would bus in AAs. The AAs got screwed out of wages paying their % to the recruiters (who were likely kicking back to Crider), and complained about the unsafe working conditions and shitty living conditions in the dorms. Shockingly.... there was high turnover, so the recruiters and ownership started busing in Felons and Homeless. Then, they bus in legal Hmongs all the way from MN....

          In short. The timeline is
          1) town and plant functioning fine with a majority of AAs. It isn't paradise, but town residents have jobs and homes.
          2) illegal population replaces AAs at plant, and AAs abandon town
          3) illegals taken advantage of, wages decrease, working conditions degrade, profits rise
          4) Raid at Crider
          5) Stillmore is a ghost town. Plant raises wages.
          6) Plant enters into agreement with recruiters who bus in AAs from surrounding areas. New employees complain that plant and recruiters are screwing them out of wages. Complain about working and living conditions.
          7) Plant and recruiters then bus in inmates/felons, homeless, and Hmongs from MN (who won't complain)

          So tell me how the original inhabitants of Stillmore benefited from illegal immigration? It's OK though because their purchasing power increased and the gov got all that use tax..., right? But hey, their own personal recession is OK because it benefits Crider and the overall economy, right?
          The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
          Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

          Comment


          • <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trump's ICE raids at a Mississippi poultry plant is a clear symbol of his administration targeting undocumented workers who have organized against abusive conditions. <a href="https://t.co/oK398pwxPx">https://t.co/oK398pwxPx</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144471012839424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The fact that ICE has targeted the Koch Foods poultry plant in Morton, MS, is no coincidence. As recently as 2014, poultry plant workers--despite their immigration status--challenged abusive workplace conditions at the plant.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144472397004801?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">These conditions were brought to light in a lawsuit by <a href="https://twitter.com/TRLA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@trla</a> and the <a href="https://twitter.com/USEEOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@USEEOC</a>, which alleged that managers were sexually and physically assaulting workers, extorting them for money to use the bathroom and to leave work at the end of the day.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144473298788352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The lawsuit, Cazorla v. Koch Foods of Mississippi, also became a flashpoint on whether U and T visa petitions (for victims of crime) would be discoverable in litigation against employers. See: <a href="https://t.co/cgeSQ2k34p">https://t.co/cgeSQ2k34p</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144474309607424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The power of workers at the Koch Foods plant was a symbol of how undocumented people stood up to abusive employers, despite their immigration status. But now, it&#39;s a symbol of Trump&#39;s targeted &amp; retaliatory use of immigration enforcement to suppress immigrant worker organizing.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144475358183424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Here is a story on the lawsuit filed by immigrant workers at Koch Foods, settled for $3.5M last year: <a href="https://t.co/ORfcJjAuA5">https://t.co/ORfcJjAuA5</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159198100243636224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
            What did Davonte do?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by dublinirish View Post
              <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trump's ICE raids at a Mississippi poultry plant is a clear symbol of his administration targeting undocumented workers who have organized against abusive conditions. <a href="https://t.co/oK398pwxPx">https://t.co/oK398pwxPx</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144471012839424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The fact that ICE has targeted the Koch Foods poultry plant in Morton, MS, is no coincidence. As recently as 2014, poultry plant workers--despite their immigration status--challenged abusive workplace conditions at the plant.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144472397004801?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">These conditions were brought to light in a lawsuit by <a href="https://twitter.com/TRLA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@trla</a> and the <a href="https://twitter.com/USEEOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@USEEOC</a>, which alleged that managers were sexually and physically assaulting workers, extorting them for money to use the bathroom and to leave work at the end of the day.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144473298788352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The lawsuit, Cazorla v. Koch Foods of Mississippi, also became a flashpoint on whether U and T visa petitions (for victims of crime) would be discoverable in litigation against employers. See: <a href="https://t.co/cgeSQ2k34p">https://t.co/cgeSQ2k34p</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144474309607424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The power of workers at the Koch Foods plant was a symbol of how undocumented people stood up to abusive employers, despite their immigration status. But now, it's a symbol of Trump's targeted &amp; retaliatory use of immigration enforcement to suppress immigrant worker organizing.</p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159144475358183424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Here is a story on the lawsuit filed by immigrant workers at Koch Foods, settled for $3.5M last year: <a href="https://t.co/ORfcJjAuA5">https://t.co/ORfcJjAuA5</a></p>&mdash; Eunice Cho (@eunicehcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/eunicehcho/status/1159198100243636224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
              This is truly a convenient narrative. So in some stories, he's crippling Koch's business. In another, he's helping them by targeting their workforce because they're demanding better working conditions. Libs used to complain that the government was in bed with business and allowed the illegal activity for the corp $$. Now when they enforce existing law it's both hurting businesses and targeting whistleblowers. This only drives up Koch's cost, and it's not helping them from a pure labor perspective. Good lord the nonsense. Trump ran on a platform, and this is just one part of his platform. The left criticizes him when he doesn't fulfill a promise, and rips him when he does.
              The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
              Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                - 100 additional workers who had not been picked up in the ICE raids on a PH Foods Plant were fired because of Social Security discrepancies.
                IIRC, I had replied to you a while back how many of these illegals were using fake or false SSN's, along with fake ID's to get jobs.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Irish#1 View Post
                  IIRC, I had replied to you a while back how many of these illegals were using fake or false SSN's, along with fake ID's to get jobs.
                  Did you know you could vote with those types of credentials. But that stuff never happens.
                  The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                  Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                  Comment


                  • I did not know that the chicken processing industry is Georgia's top agricultural product at $4 billion a year. Cotton is second at just over $1 billion. A pie chart that I saw showed poultry processing ("broilers") as over 39% of the total value of all Georgia's agricultural products.

                    The Chicken Industry Creates Jobs in Georgia (National Chicken Council)

                    NCC Reaches Out to President Trump Regarding Recent ICE Actions in Mississippi (National Chicken Council)
                    Last edited by Legacy; 08-14-2019, 08:58 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                      I did not know that the chicken processing industry is Georgia's top agricultural product at $4 billion a year. Cotton is second at just over $1 billion. A pie chart that I saw showed poultry processing ("broilers") as over 39% of the total value of all Georgia's agricultural products.

                      The Chicken Industry Creates Jobs in Georgia (National Chicken Council)

                      NCC Reaches Out to President Trump Regarding Recent ICE Actions in Mississippi (National Chicken Council)
                      Yes, it's huge here in GA. It used to be a huge source of jobs and income for African Americans. Like Stillmore, most AAs were pushed out, and whole towns were decimated. Now those companies pay less.... So much for driving up wages I guess...
                      Last edited by Irish YJ; 08-15-2019, 08:05 PM.
                      The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                      Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                        I did not know that the chicken processing industry is Georgia's top agricultural product at $4 billion a year. Cotton is second at just over $1 billion. A pie chart that I saw showed poultry processing ("broilers") as over 39% of the total value of all Georgia's agricultural products.

                        The Chicken Industry Creates Jobs in Georgia (National Chicken Council)

                        NCC Reaches Out to President Trump Regarding Recent ICE Actions in Mississippi (National Chicken Council)
                        That is surprising to me as well.

                        I know Arkansas is yuuuuuge with it
                        Based Mullet Kid owns

                        Comment


                        • Agriculture isn't just a Midwest thing. 15 of the top 25 agricultural states are not in the Midwest.

                          Top 25 states for agriculture
                          1. California 31,835,183 13.20%
                          2. Texas 16,498,398 6.84%
                          3. Iowa 14,652,946 6.07%
                          4. Nebraska 11,779,728 4.88%
                          5. Minnesota 9,794,912 4.06%
                          6. Illinois 9,708,304 4.02%
                          7. Kansas 9,502,727 3.94%
                          8. North Carolina 8,210,497 3.40%
                          9. Wisconsin 6,864,150 2.85%
                          10. Florida 6,843,731 2.84%
                          11. Arkansas 6,604,400 2.74%
                          12. Georgia 6,107,025 2.53%
                          13. Indiana 6,043,191 2.51%
                          14. Washington 5,868,196 2.43%
                          15. Missouri 5,818,727 2.41%
                          16. Colorado 5,501,155 2.28%
                          17. Ohio 5,459,380 2.26%
                          18. Oklahoma 5,054,570 2.10%
                          19. South Dakota 4,877,484 2.02%
                          20. Pennsylvania 4,859,336 2.01%
                          21. Idaho 4,349,253 1.80%
                          22. Michigan 4,312,320 1.79%
                          23. Kentucky 4,126,185 1.71%
                          24. Alabama 4,103,235 1.70%
                          25. North Dakota 4,090,864 1.70%
                          Last edited by Irish#1; 08-16-2019, 07:05 AM.

                          Comment


                          • 7-2
                            The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                            Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                            Comment


                            • North Dakota county may become US's 1st to bar new refugees (Bismark Tribune/AP)

                              BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — Reuben Panchol was forced to leave war-torn Sudan decades ago as a child, embarking on an odyssey that eventually brought him to the American Midwest and left him eternally grateful to the country that took him in.

                              “I am an American citizen, a North Dakotan,” said Panchol, a 38-year-old father of four. “And without North Dakota, I couldn’t have made it.”

                              Panchol hopes to share his story on Monday with members of a local commission who are set to vote on whether their county will stop accepting refugees. If they vote to bar refugees, as expected, Burleigh County — home to about 95,000 people and the capital city of Bismarck — could become the first local government to do so since President Donald Trump issued an executive order making it possible.

                              The county postponed a vote last week when more than 100 people showed up and overflowed the commission’s normal meeting space. Monday night’s meeting will be held in a middle school cafeteria to accommodate public interest that Chairman Brian Bitner said is the most intense he’s seen in more than a decade on the commission.

                              Though he declined to predict which way the commission would go, Bitner said he would vote against accepting additional refugees.

                              “The overwhelming public opinion is so clear to me, that I think if you vote for it, you’re not going to be reelected if you choose to run again,” he said.

                              Trump’s executive order this fall came as he had already proposed cutting the number of refugees next year to the lowest level since Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980. He declared that refugees should be resettled only in places where the state and local governments — counties — gave consent. Since then, many governors and counties around the country have declared that they would continue taking refugees.

                              Republican Gov. Doug Burgum said last month that North Dakota would continue accepting refugees where local jurisdictions agreed, and his spokesman said the governor saw it as a local decision. Soon after, Cass and Grand Forks counties, which are home to the state’s largest city, Fargo, and third-largest city, Grand Forks, respectively, declared they would continue taking refugees. Fargo Mayor Tim Mahoney said refugees were needed to boost the city’s economy, and that 90% were fully employed within three months of resettling in his city. (Cont)
                              Bismarck refugees share their stories, discuss misconceptions (Bismark Tribune)
                              Last edited by Legacy; 12-09-2019, 01:36 AM.

                              Comment


                              • As a f/u to the above,

                                Debate over refugee resettlement spills into Bismarck City Commission meeting (Jamestown Sun)

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                                  Cities should absolutely be able to accept, or refuse. Each, city, county, or state should be able to make their own call. I live very close to one of the most dense refuge areas in the US. The city and mayor have been very pro-refugee for a good while now. It is starting to ruffle feathers however within that small city, and neighboring cities. Crime continues to be an issue in and around certain housing developments and has started to push out.

                                  I've volunteered and donated at the main refugee center over the years and have some insight that you won't see written about in papers... I'm still in touch with the x-head of the center. In short, there are some very specific nationalities (not colors) that are responsible for 90% of the problems, and they give the whole program a bad name. The cops, Mayor, and head of the program all know it. They can't say it out loud in the press though as the PC police would crush them. If they could simply refuse groups from 2 countries, they would, and it would make a huge difference.
                                  The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                                  Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                                  Comment


                                  • Hell yeah.

                                    Way to go ND!

                                    <iframe width="702" height="395" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-wIqQKefPSc" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                    Based Mullet Kid owns

                                    Comment


                                    • In December, the House passed a bipartisan bill that allows undocumented agriculture workers to earn legal status. Rep.
                                      Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) along with 19 other Republicans and 24 Democrats introduced the Farm Workforce Modernization Act in October. It passed the House with a 260 to 165 vote.

                                      Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) along with 19 other Republicans and 24 Democrats introduced the Farm Workforce Modernization Act in October. It passed the House with a 260 to 165 vote on Wednesday.

                                      “Let me tell you what this bill does,” Simpson said on the House floor Wednesday. “It legalizes the current workforce, so long as you get right with the law and have a clean criminal record and can demonstrate the same work experiences … you must have to qualify.”
                                      The bill does three main things. It allows undocumented ag workers to earn legal status, improves the H-2A visa program and requires E-Verify in agriculture.

                                      To earn legal status, applicants have to show they’ve had at least 180 days of agricultural employment over the previous two years. Those who qualify and are accepted by the Department of Homeland Security would receive a five-year renewable agriculture visa. The visas could be renewed by working at least 100 days in agriculture each year.

                                      If they want to apply for permanent residency, they must pay a $1,000 fine and if they have worked in agriculture in the United States for at least 10 years prior to the bill being enacted they must work an additional four years before they can apply for permanent residency. Or, if they have worked less than 10 years before the bill was enacted they must work an additional eight years before being eligible to apply.

                                      The H-2A visa program allows U.S. ag employers to bring foreign workers into the country to fill employment needs. The Workforce Modernization Act would make streamline and simplify the process for employers as well as limit wage fluctuations and reduce housing costs employers have to pay to house the foreign workers.

                                      The E-Verify system is a United States Department of Homeland Security program that allows businesses to determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the U.S. The bill requires employers to use E-Verify.

                                      “Idaho farmers and ranchers feed the world and their greatest needs are a legal workforce and free trade, and this week we made tremendous progress on both issues,” Simpson said. “Passage of (the Workforce Modernization Act) is a giant step in the right direction for our ag industry and their need for a legal workforce through addressing unpredictable wages while expanding the H-2A Visa program to allow for the year-round workers Idaho dairies need. It will also eliminate onerous red tape from the federal government by streamlining the H2A process.”
                                      Through modifications of the Department of Labor’s H-2A visa program, the act would make a total of 40,000 additional employer-sponsored green cards available. A maximum of 20,000 three-year visas would also be available for year-round agricultural jobs, of which 10,000 would be reserved for dairy workers.

                                      An Idaho dairy farmer thanked Simpson for sponsoring the bill in the Idaho Statesman
                                      Farm Workforce Modernization Act is smart legislation

                                      I am an Idahoan. I grew up on a dairy and have worked in the dairy industry nearly my entire life. I support the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. It is good conservative legislation that supports legal immigration and really takes a look at the reform we as Americans have been demanding.

                                      A few weeks ago, the United States House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed House Resolution 5038, also known as the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. This bipartisan legislation was negotiated between Democrats and Republicans over a seven-month period. It is well thought-out and takes a good hard look at what the state’s economy and our industry need. Without this act, Idaho’s dairy industry simply won’t be able to survive.

                                      I would like to thank U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, for being active in the bill’s negotiations and a co-sponsor Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, for voting yes. They both looked at the issue and they looked at the act and saw that this will preserve agriculture’s experienced workforce by allowing our existing farmworkers to earn legal status, without creating amnesty. This is the right approach to immigration issues and guaranteeing a legal workforce to ensure an abundant, safe and affordable food supply....
                                      Mike Simpson, R-ID, who grew up on a family farm, explains why he sponsored the bill in a statement:

                                      Excerpt:
                                      The lack of a stable workforce to meet the growing demand for Idaho’s products, and a flawed process to grow our workforce, has created a labor crisis for Idaho’s agriculture community. That is why I recently joined a Congressional bipartisan coalition to assist Idaho’s agriculture community – a community that accounts for 20 percent of our state’s economy. For months I have been meeting with farmers and farmworkers in Idaho and across the country. Finding a solution has not been an easy process in the Democrat controlled House, but the American people are sick of seeing inaction from D.C. on this issue. If we want to fix this problem, it must be bipartisan to have a lasting impact. Fortunately for our farmers, and their families, Idaho had a seat at the table to help create this solution.

                                      President Trump called for merit-based immigration reform while avoiding amnesty. This bill accomplishes both. For guest workers to obtain permanent legal status, and the ability to work, they must pay a thousand-dollar penalty and commit to future work in agriculture labor. And there is no special treatment or pathway.

                                      The Farm Workforce Modernization Act (FWMA) accomplishes this by using pieces of President Trump’s rule on modernizing H-2A, implements strong conservative measures such as e-verify, while allowing for a process to ensure farmers have the workforce they need to keep putting food on the table. Fundamentally, FWMA incorporates Idaho solutions to solve a national problem.
                                      Feel free to engage on this topic.
                                      Last edited by Legacy; 02-10-2020, 05:02 PM.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                                        In December, the House passed a bipartisan bill that allows undocumented agriculture workers to earn legal status. Rep.


                                        Through modifications of the Department of Labor’s H-2A visa program, the act would make a total of 40,000 additional employer-sponsored green cards available. A maximum of 20,000 three-year visas would also be available for year-round agricultural jobs, of which 10,000 would be reserved for dairy workers.

                                        An Idaho dairy farmer thanked Simpson for sponsoring the bill in the Idaho Statesman
                                        Farm Workforce Modernization Act is smart legislation



                                        Mike Simpson, R-ID, who grew up on a family farm, explains why he sponsored the bill in a statement:

                                        Excerpt:


                                        Feel free to engage on this topic.
                                        If I were in Congress or the president I would support this bill if it included two (or similar) provisions:

                                        1. Make it a felony to not have some type of federal documentation to be in this country legally and if not and apprehended the individual would be subject to immediate deportation.
                                        2. Any state, city or other local that declares itself to be a "sanctuary" state, city, or other local would immediately lose all funding for any and all federal programs.

                                        Include these two provisions and it would be a great bill.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by MJ12666 View Post
                                          If I were in Congress or the president I would support this bill if it included two (or similar) provisions:

                                          1. Make it a felony to not have some type of federal documentation to be in this country legally and if not and apprehended the individual would be subject to immediate deportation.
                                          2. Any state, city or other local that declares itself to be a "sanctuary" state, city, or other local would immediately lose all funding for any and all federal programs.

                                          Include these two provisions and it would be a great bill.
                                          I would be selective about deportation, prioritizing those who committed the misdemeanor offense of crossing the border illegally. That's just because there's no priorities and includes all, you're clogging up the courts, which is what's happening. Even illegals have some due process rights. Those with felonies are a different matter.

                                          Counts as of last November, the Obama administration deported 1.18 million people in his first three years, the number of deportations has been a little under 800,000 so far under Trump. If you want to increase deportations without having to pass bills, prioritize and have those with no violations and with jobs and good standing in the community report annually. Far less costly and, if they do not show up, you get a deportation order. You can deport them later anyway.

                                          Let #2 work it's way through the judicial system rather than try to change the laws with a provision in a single bill. The federal government demanding cities and states cooperate or they lose funding seems too much like Big Brother.

                                          If you are the dairy farmer in Idaho or his representatives even if you agree with your provisions, it's more important to you that these changes get enacted.

                                          Interesting article. Far more immigration cases are being prosecuted criminally under Trump administration
                                          Last edited by Legacy; 02-12-2020, 05:21 PM.

                                          Comment


                                          • Originally posted by MJ12666 View Post
                                            If I were in Congress or the president I would support this bill if it included two (or similar) provisions:

                                            1. Make it a felony to not have some type of federal documentation to be in this country legally and if not and apprehended the individual would be subject to immediate deportation.
                                            2. Any state, city or other local that declares itself to be a "sanctuary" state, city, or other local would immediately lose all funding for any and all federal programs.

                                            Include these two provisions and it would be a great bill.
                                            Bolded is the big one for me,... how dafaq are we even at a point where this is a common thing?? Blows the mind....
                                            This sig will not change until The Browns win the Super Bowl... So get real used to it.

                                            Comment


                                            • Originally posted by Legacy View Post
                                              I would be selective about deportation, prioritizing those who committed the misdemeanor offense of crossing the border illegally. That's just because there's no priorities and includes all, you're clogging up the courts, which is what's happening. Even illegals have some due process rights. Those with felonies are a different matter.

                                              Counts as of last November, the Obama administration deported 1.18 million people in his first three years, the number of deportations has been a little under 800,000 so far under Trump. If you want to increase deportations without having to pass bills, prioritize and have those with no violations and with jobs and good standing in the community report annually. Far less costly and, if they do not show up, you get a deportation order. You can deport them later anyway.

                                              Let #2 work it's way through the judicial system rather than try to change the laws with a provision in a single bill. The federal government demanding cities and states cooperate or they lose funding seems too much like Big Brother.

                                              If you are the dairy farmer in Idaho or his representatives even if you agree with your provisions, it's more important to you that these changes get enacted.

                                              Interesting article. Far more immigration cases are being prosecuted criminally under Trump administration
                                              So the federal government asking/demanding that people/states support federal law is big brother like? LOL. The laws already on the books are being ignored, and are not at odds with the judicial system. The judicial system is not supposed to be making laws... good lord.

                                              As far as deportations, are concerned, below is a comparison from a left leaning source (Trump is shaded). Also, the big problem is THEY DON'T REPORT.... And looks like Trump has deported a higher % of criminals (orange)

                                              Trump isn't matching Obama deportation numbers
                                              https://www.axios.com/immigration-ic...5cf72f4b1.html
                                              The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                                              Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                                              Comment


                                              • MJ,

                                                IMO such provisions may also run into Marbury v Madison "that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws, statutes, and some government actions that violate the Constitution of the United States."

                                                Deportation for convictions of "aggravated felonies' has been previously defined. SCOTUS has recently decided on a matter related. (see below)
                                                Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, any alien who is convicted of an “aggravated felony” in the United States is subject to deportation, regardless of their ties to the country. Congress defined “aggravated felony” by a long list of specific offenses and offense types (at 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(43)), one of which is “a crime of violence” punishable by imprisonment for at least one year.

                                                Congress defined “crime of violence” elsewhere, in 18 U. S. C. §16, in part by stating that it includes any felony “that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
                                                To redefine illegal entry without any "crime of violence" as a felony would violate the provisions of the Act.

                                                From: Gorsuch Defends the Rule of Law in Immigration Case

                                                Looking to history, Gorsuch cited early American court cases and turned to the Federalist Papers for the principle that “[w]ithout an assurance that the laws supply fair notice, so much else of the Constitution risks becoming only a ‘parchment barrie[r]’ against arbitrary power.”
                                                Practically, I don't see that it's worth delaying the bill for years as these kind of objections work their way through the judicial system.
                                                Last edited by Legacy; 02-12-2020, 10:19 PM.

                                                Comment


                                                • Joe Biden, grilled on Obama-era record of putting children in 'cages,' argues 'we kept them safe'
                                                  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe...kept-them-safe

                                                  Former Vice President Joe Biden was grilled Friday about the Obama administration’s record of detaining migrant children in what some lawmakers and activists have described as “cages” -- with the 2020 hopeful claiming the government did it to keep them “safe.”

                                                  Biden, who served as VP for both of then-President Barack Obama’s terms, has cited his experience as a reason he should be the Democratic nominee. But with the Democratic Party shifting to the left on matters related to immigration in recent years, he has faced increased scrutiny about the administration’s policies from those claiming they were cruel.

                                                  In an interview Friday posted on Facebook, Univision journalist Jorge Ramos took issue with a claim that Biden made in September in a debate in Houston that the Obama administration never put migrant children in cages -- in contrast to the Trump administration.

                                                  "What Latinos should look at is comparing this president to the president we have is outrageous," Biden said in September. "We didn't lock people in cages. We didn't separate families. We didn't do all of those things."

                                                  “You actually did,” Ramos said Friday, showing him a picture of an 8-year-old boy in McAllen, Texas, in 2014.

                                                  “What happened was all the unaccompanied children were coming across the border,” Biden said. “We tried to get them out, we kept them safe, and get them out of the detention center... run by Homeland Security and get them into communities as quickly as we can.”

                                                  The “cages” are detention centers in which there were also chain-link enclosures. The practice was carried out by both the Obama and Trump administrations, and Biden is correct that in both instances minors were held, in part, for their own safety. An Associated Press fact check last year noted that migrants were housed in the facilities and separated by both age and sex. Those facilities were built and used by the Obama administration, and the Trump administration used the same facilities.

                                                  But left-wing lawmakers and pro-immigration activists have accused both administrations, particularly the Trump administration, of “putting kids in cages."

                                                  The Trump administration ramped up the practice, in part because it was faced with a significant increase in family units at the border, and also drew controversy with its “zero-tolerance policy” that saw increased separations of minors from their parents and accompanying adults. Amid intense public criticism, the administration walked back the policy in 2018.

                                                  Biden, who has tried to tap into that criticism while running for the presidency, disagreed with Ramos’ assessment and instead claimed there were significant differences between the Democratic approach and the Trump administration’s approach.

                                                  "Many people would say they were cages," Ramos said.

                                                  “You know you’re not telling the truth here about the comparison of the two things,” Biden replied. “Look how quickly we got them out and got them back to families, look at how … we sought the relatives here, we sought to get them into safe communities. We sought to get them out of the control of Homeland Security to get them safe.”

                                                  “But they came unaccompanied, unaccompanied,” he said, before saying he was responsible for $750 million in assistance to Central American countries to make it so people didn’t feel the need to migrate in the first place.

                                                  The exchange is a sign of the difficulty that candidates who hold a more moderate position on illegal immigration and other matters related to immigration could face. On Friday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., backed away from a 2007 vote she made in which she voted to make English the national language of the U.S.

                                                  “I think that when you look at a state like this state, and a country like ours that is so diverse, you don't want to have that provision in law because then it would be very difficult to have, say, government documents and other things translated into other languages,” she said Friday in Nevada. “So that is not a position I take. I did vote that way, but way back then, along with many other people.”
                                                  The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                                                  Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                                                  Comment


                                                  • Obama was the Deporter-in-Chief both in total number of deportations and deportation of those convicted of crimes. Based on Homeland Security reports:



                                                    Source: Key findings about U.S. immigrants (Pew, June 2019)



                                                    How many immigrants have been deported recently?
                                                    Around 295,000 immigrants were deported from the U.S. in fiscal 2017, down since 2016. Overall, the Obama administration deported about 3 million immigrants between 2009 and 2016, a significantly higher number than the 2 million immigrants deported by the Bush administration between 2001 and 2008. In 2017, the Trump administration deported 295,000 immigrants, the lowest total since 2006.

                                                    Immigrants convicted of a crime made up the minority of deportations in 2017, the most recent year for which statistics by criminal status are available. Of the 295,000 immigrants deported in 2017, some 41% had criminal convictions and 59% were not convicted of a crime. From 2001 to 2017, a majority (60%) of immigrants deported have not been convicted of a crime.
                                                    The ratio of non-criminal and criminal categories over the wide period of 2001-17 to 2017 alone under Trump are the same.

                                                    One factor in the category of "criminal aliens" is Trump's executive order directing the Department of Homeland Security to prioritize the removal of immigrants in the country illegally.

                                                    Among those classified as "deportable aliens" are those who are:
                                                    - Charged with any criminal offense, even if the charge has not been resolved;
                                                    - Committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense
                                                    - Engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation related to any official matter or application before a governmental agency;
                                                    - Abused programs related to receipt of public benefits;
                                                    - Subject to final order of removal; and,
                                                    - Pose a risk to public safety or national security, based on the judgment of an immigration officer.

                                                    In addition to:
                                                    - Described in specific sections of immigration laws: such as individuals convicted of crimes "involving moral turpitude" (murder, for instance), engage in terrorist activities, are convicted on weapon charges;
                                                    - Convicted of any criminal offense;

                                                    Individuals who entered the country illegally -- without committing another crime -- are included in the order's call for removing immigrants who committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.

                                                    The order set wide parameters on the categories of people who would become a priority, ranging from individuals engaged in terrorist activities to people charged with crimes but not yet convicted. Despite that widening of the definition of deportations of criminal offenses, deportations of those convicted of criminal offenses (vs the expanded criminal deportations under Trump) peaked in 2011-13.

                                                    In November 2016, after winning the presidential election, Trump claimed there could be as many as 2 or 3 million immigrants in the country illegally who were also criminals, which he based on assumptions, stemming from a Department of Homeland Security report covering fiscal years 2011-13. That report said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement estimated there were 1.9 million "removable criminal aliens" in the United States at the time. The 1.9 million total included immigrants here legally and illegally.

                                                    That doesn't mean that claims of deporting more illegals classified as criminals cannot be used as political fodder or justification for emergency declarations to take money appropriated for the Department of Defense to build a Wall. Nor does it mean that those who entered the country illegally should not be deported. Still, total deportations under Trump have been down - more than 30% from its peaks - under Trump.
                                                    Last edited by Legacy; 02-18-2020, 12:17 PM.

                                                    Comment


                                                    • Another instance of someone who had been deported previously and back illegally.
                                                      This is some sick shit.

                                                      Missouri girl, 11, gives birth in bathtub, police say; 3 relatives charged
                                                      https://www.foxnews.com/us/missouri-...ged-police-say
                                                      The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down
                                                      Of the big lake they called Gitche Gumee

                                                      Comment


                                                      • Matthew Walther wrote a short piece soon after the revelation that ICE has been forcing some women into hysterectomies.
                                                        Lord have mercy on us.
                                                        https://theweek.com/articles/937468/...-women-america

                                                        It is a business, complete with an address and posted hours of operation like any other. It even has reviews ("They do not answer phone calls for emergencies. Family member in there and we haven't heard from her, the money we placed in her account has not reached her") on Google Maps, averaging around two stars. But it does not sell products or offer services to customers; it locks them up.

                                                        I wish I could say that I was even remotely surprised by reports that emerged on Monday of horrifying abuses at a privately run Immigration and Customs Enforcement "detention center" in Georgia. According to whistleblowers, women at the facility are being given hysterectomies at astonishing rates. One person who has come forward compared the facility to an "experimental concentration camp." There are dark reports of a gynecologist who seems to be performing these procedures for no reason — or rather for some unspeakably twisted and private purpose of his own: "We've questioned among ourselves like goodness he's taking everybody's stuff out... That's his specialty, he's the uterus collector. I know that's ugly... is he collecting these things or something... Everybody he sees, he's taking all their uteruses out or he's taken their tubes out. What in the world." These surgeries are alleged to have taken place largely without the consent of the women upon whom they were performed, many of whom cannot speak English and say that they were not told why the procedures were being done. Monolingual nurses at the facility allegedly relied upon Google Translate in some cases.

                                                        There are many reasons why these reports, which ICE has dismissed as "anonymous, unproven allegations, made without any fact-checkable specifics," are worth taking seriously. The first is simply that they will not be shocking to anyone who has experienced the reality of how poor women — perhaps especially those who cannot speak English — are treated by the medical establishment in this country. Just before Labor Day my wife, a certified birth assistant, spoke to the sister of a young Hispanic woman who was giving birth for the first time at a hospital in Indiana. Due to absurd COVID-19 restrictions, the woman, who had reached the end of a routine healthy pregnancy, was prevented from bringing her sister or a third party to advocate on her behalf. For no discernible medical reason her water was forcibly broken and she was told that she would have to undergo an "emergency" caesarean section. After she refused the latter, she was given a heavy dose of pitocin. The cycle of unnecessary but (for the hospital anyway) convenient and lucrative interventions ended with a unilateral oophorectomy.

                                                        Situations like the one I have just described are distressingly common, if unfortunately underreported, in this country. They are the result of two factors: the treatment of pregnancy and delivery as some kind of assembly line process in American hospitals, and the unworkable public-private hybrid that is our health-care system. Even women with ostensibly decent private insurance routinely find themselves misled into accepting scheduled inductions, epidurals, and C-sections that are wholly unnecessary and would be unthinkable in most European countries, where midwifery is the norm for healthy pregnancies. These interventions make complications in future pregnancies vastly more likely.

                                                        I do not think it is an accident that women like those alleged to have had their uteruses removed in Georgia are treated this way. Undergirding the assembly-line attitude toward pregnancy is the widely held but rarely articulated view that poor women, especially those who are racial minorities, are subhuman, that this country and the world do not need more of their children, that their pregnancies are the unfortunate and wholly unnecessary result of the failure of their mothers to render themselves infertile, which is now apparently the default condition of the female sex.

                                                        When I say "rarely articulated" I do not mean never. This vision was laid out with horrifying clarity some years ago in a report by the Congressional Budget Office on the consequences of eliminating federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Forgive the bureaucratese:
                                                        To the extent that there would be reductions in access to care under the legislation, they would affect services that help women avert pregnancies. The people most likely to experience reduced access to care would probably reside in areas without other health care clinics or medical practitioners who serve low-income populations. CBO projects that about 15 percent of those people would lose access to care.

                                                        The government would incur some costs for Medicaid beneficiaries currently served by affected entities because the costs of about 45 percent of all births are paid for by the Medicaid program. CBO estimates that the additional births stemming from the reduced access under the legislation would add to federal spending for Medicaid. In addition, some of those children would themselves qualify for Medicaid and possibly for other federal programs.


                                                        This is what they call saying the quiet part out loud. Here the very possibility that poor women might become pregnant becomes a danger that they or others working on their behalf must "avert"; their children are inhumanly dismissed as "additional births," as if they were tumors or bulbs, and damnably expensive too. In case the fundamentally anti-human logic were not obvious enough from the report itself, a write-up in the Washington Post provided a helpful gloss on the hideous consequences of defunding Planned Parenthood under the headline "Defunding Planned Parenthood would lead to thousands more births, CBO says": "Anti-abortion advocates zeroed in on the expectation that more babies would be born, which struck them as reason to celebrate."

                                                        How should it strike us, the arrival of new human lives? We know what the answer seems to have been at Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia.

                                                        Comment


                                                        • There have been outbreaks in ICE detention facilities throughout the U.S. In addition to deportations before judicial disposition, ICE has been transferring and releasing detainees, who are non-violent. They have ankelebracelets. I am hearing that ICE may be dropping Covid positive detainees at homeless shelters, who have then had Covid outbreaks in their facilities.

                                                          The average U.S. immigrant detainee population last year was 50,000, but it has since plunged to about 19,800, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

                                                          While some positive detainees are quarantined, they still may still share some space with others, spreading the virus. Transfers to detention facilities from jails have stopped. ICE is attempting to decrease populations in the facilities. If someone test negative, they can be deported, but an elevated temp which are taken before boarding prevents their deportation. Those may be the ones that are being dropped off. In one facility, seventy-five percent of detainees tested positive.

                                                          Covid is also spreading among juvenile facilitlies.

                                                          Immigration detention centers are emptying out as the U.S. cites coronavirus for removals (Dallas Morning News)

                                                          COVID-19 in Juvenile Facilities (Sentencing Project)

                                                          DHS Inspector General's Report on Covid in Detention Facilities

                                                          Ankle bracelets cost $18 per day to monitor while detention costs on average $134 per day. Clearly, the close quarters and shared items increase the transmission. With the lower cost and current release of so many back to communities of non-violent detainees raises the question of whether they needed to detain so many rather than the current population decreases under these conditions.
                                                          Last edited by Legacy; 10-20-2020, 03:35 AM.

                                                          Comment


                                                          • (Acting) Deputy Director Ken Cuccinelli signed an agreement with the union that represents Immigration and Customs Enforcement that would give effectively give ICE veto power over any policy changes by the Biden Admin. The existence of this agreement was revealed in a whistleblower complaint that says that Cuccinelli acted illegally and accusing Cuccinelli of “gross mismanagement, gross waste of government funds and abuse of authority” in entering into this agreement.

                                                            Cuccinelli had been in this "Acting" position without Congressional approval longer than the 270 days by law. He served in a dual role - also as "Acting" official - as Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, circumventing the Federal Vacancies Reform Act. Prior to that he was Principal Deputy Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, an office that was established under Trump, and which has been abolished under Biden.

                                                            In order to allow changes in leadership, Trump had to change the Dept's line of succession. The GAO ruled that former Acting Secretary Kevin McAleenan did not have authority to change the department's line of succession. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that neither DHS Acting Director Wolfe nor Acting Deputy Director Cuccinelli were in their positions legally and that they abused the power of their offices.

                                                            Abuse of Power, Mismanagement in Deal with ICE Union, Alleges Whistleblower (whistlerblower news)

                                                            Just another example of the Trump Administration disdain for the laws of this country.
                                                            Last edited by Legacy; 02-05-2021, 07:03 PM.

                                                            Comment

                                                            Adsense

                                                            Collapse
                                                            Working...
                                                            X