Category: Immigration

Trump FEMA Claim Debunked: Agency Not Running Out Of Money Because Of Migrants

 

Former President Donald Trump has falsely claimed that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is running low on funds due to spending on migrant assistance. During a recent rally, Trump asserted that Vice President Kamala Harris had diverted billions from FEMA’s budget to house illegal migrants, echoing comments from Fox News host Jesse Watters. However, this claim has been debunked by multiple sources.

FEMA’s funding for disaster relief and migrant assistance comes from separate budget allocations. While FEMA has indeed allocated over $1 billion to aid communities supporting migrants this year, this funding is drawn from the Shelter and Services Program, distinct from the Disaster Relief Fund used for hurricane recovery efforts. This separation means that the financial challenges FEMA faces are not due to migrant-related expenditures.

On October 3, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas acknowledged that FEMA is experiencing a cash crunch for disaster relief efforts but clarified that these financial difficulties are not linked to migrant assistance. The Disaster Relief Fund is specifically reserved for managing disasters, and its funds have not been diverted for non-disaster related purposes.

The current issues with FEMA’s budget stem from a lack of additional funding from Congress. Recent stopgap funding measures did not provide the necessary resources, forcing FEMA to prioritize immediate disaster needs while halting non-emergency rebuilding projects. Democratic lawmakers have raised concerns about FEMA’s financial situation, urging Congress to reconvene and allocate more funds.

As Hurricane Helene wreaks havoc across parts of the Southeast, estimates suggest the storm could lead to damages exceeding $34 billion. The financial strain on FEMA could hinder its ability to respond effectively to ongoing disaster recovery efforts, especially with hurricane season continuing through November.

Trump’s claims about FEMA’s financial situation have been met with strong rebuttals from the Biden administration, with officials emphasizing the agency’s commitment to assisting all communities affected by disasters without bias. The administration has stressed the importance of accurate communication regarding disaster relief efforts, particularly during such critical times.

 

Trump Misrepresents Immigration Stats to Attack Harris

 

Former President Donald Trump has made misleading claims regarding immigration statistics in an effort to attack Vice President Kamala Harris. He asserted that 13,000 convicted murderers entered the U.S. during her tenure as Border Czar, implying that these individuals are now living freely in the country. However, these statistics encompass noncitizens who entered over several decades, including during Trump’s own administration. Trump’s statements misrepresent the data by suggesting it only pertains to those who have recently entered the U.S.

Furthermore, Trump’s assertion that these individuals are all freely roaming the streets is incorrect. The statistics include individuals who are currently incarcerated for their crimes. The data released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) indicates that as of July 2024, there were 425,431 convicted criminals on the non-detained docket, with 13,099 having homicide convictions. It is crucial to note that these figures are not specific to Harris’s time in office.

The Department of Homeland Security clarified that the data spans decades and includes individuals whose custody determinations were made long before the current administration. A former ICE acting director stated that it is completely false to claim that all homicide offenders on this docket entered the U.S. during Harris’s vice presidency. The non-detained docket includes individuals from various administrations, including Trump’s.

Trump’s rhetoric has been echoed by various Republican lawmakers and right-wing media outlets, which have misrepresented the statistics to criticize Harris’s immigration policies. However, it is essential to understand that the increase in the number of individuals on the non-detained docket is not solely attributable to the Biden administration, as the statistics show a consistent presence of these individuals across multiple administrations.

Moreover, the ICE non-detained docket reflects a complex legal situation where individuals cannot be deported due to their countries’ refusal to accept them back, leading to their release after serving their criminal sentences. This process is governed by a Supreme Court decision that limits indefinite detention.

In summary, Trump’s claims about immigrants and homicide are exaggerated and misleading. The statistics he references do not specifically point to recent immigration trends under Harris, and the complexities of immigration law and international relations play a significant role in the current situation. The context surrounding these statistics is crucial for understanding the realities of immigration enforcement.

 

Trump’s False Claims About Immigrants Eating Pets Spark Controversy During Debate

During a recent presidential debate, Donald Trump propagated a baseless and racially charged rumor regarding Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, claiming they were consuming pets. This statement, made in front of an audience of 67.1 million viewers, has been criticized for reinforcing harmful stereotypes. The rumor originated from fringe online communities, particularly from a neo-Nazi group known as Blood Tribe, which initially circulated the idea of pets being eaten in August. Trump’s comments were seemingly amplified by his running mate, Senator JD Vance, who has made similar claims about the influx of immigrants in the area.

Trump’s assertion was not only unfounded but also drew immediate backlash from various quarters, including his own party members. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham expressed concern, emphasizing that the focus should be on serious issues related to immigration, such as crimes committed by undocumented individuals, rather than whimsical claims about animals. This reflects a broader trend where Trump has consistently highlighted immigration issues, often framing them in a controversial manner.

The spread of the rumor on social media has been significant, with a notable increase in posts discussing the issue leading up to the debate. Research indicated that mentions of Haitians allegedly eating pets surged dramatically on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) in the days prior to Trump’s comments. Vance himself contributed to this narrative, posting about the supposed dangers posed by Haitian immigrants, which helped transition the rumor from fringe discourse to a mainstream debate topic.

Despite the sensationalism surrounding the issue, local law enforcement in Springfield reported no credible evidence supporting claims of pets being harmed. In fact, the claims about pets being abducted and eaten have been dismissed by the Springfield police, highlighting a disconnect between the online narrative and reality. Vance later acknowledged that these rumors could be false, yet continued to leverage them politically.

The incident underscores how fringe conspiracy theories can permeate high-profile political discourse, especially through the lens of social media. Trump’s use of this rumor during a prime-time debate illustrates a tactic of drawing attention to specific grievances that resonate with his base, despite their lack of factual basis. This approach is indicative of a broader strategy to mobilize support by highlighting perceived threats associated with immigration.

The debate echoed a long-standing pattern in Trump’s political career, where he has utilized inflammatory rhetoric regarding immigration, often to stoke fear and division among his supporters. Critics argue that such tactics detract from substantive discussions about immigration policy and public safety, instead prioritizing sensationalism and fear-mongering.

As the fallout continues, political analysts and commentators are left to ponder the implications of Trump’s comments and the role of misinformation in shaping public perception. This incident serves as a reminder of the potent intersection between social media, political rhetoric, and the dissemination of false information, particularly concerning immigration.

Ultimately, the Springfield rumor illustrates the challenges faced in combating misinformation and the potential consequences it holds for public discourse and policy discussions.

 

Texas Republicans rue Democrats for dismissing Mayorkas impeachment without trial

Senate Democrats swiftly dismissed the impeachment articles against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, much to the dismay of Texas Republicans and other GOP members who sought a full Senate trial. Despite efforts by Republicans to debate and consider the Constitution and the law, Democrats, holding the majority, voted to dismiss the charges brought by the House on the grounds of being unconstitutional.

Mayorkas was impeached by the House in February, on the orders of Donald Trump as revenge for his two impeachments. Mayorkas was accused by Republicans of failing to enforce border laws and lying to Congress, neither of which Republicans were able to provide evidence for, and in fact Mayorkas leading the bi-partisan border negotiations at the exact same time Trump’s lackies were pushing for impeachment shows how dishonest Republicans have always been around impeachment dating back to Bill Clinton.

Republicans introduced various procedural motions to delay the dismissal, highlighting concerns about the southern border crisis and the constitutionality of not holding a trial. The Senate Democrats’ decision was criticized by GOP members like Texas Reps. Michael McCaul and August Pfluger, who emphasized the abandonment of constitutional responsibility.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer led the effort to deem the articles of impeachment unconstitutional, leading to a swift dismissal. Mayorkas, the first cabinet secretary to be impeached in 150 years, maintained focus on advancing the Department of Homeland Security’s missions amidst the impeachment drama.

Republican Senator Ted Cruz expressed disappointment at the lack of a full trial, linking the impeachment to border policies and humanitarian crises. Cruz’s fury at Democrats for not hearing out arguments and the subsequent dismissal by Senate Democrats marked a contentious chapter in the impeachment proceedings.

 

Trump Posts “The Great Replacement” Conspiracy Popular With Neo-Nazis

Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post concerning immigration has drawn critical attention for echoing a dangerous and unfounded conspiracy theory – the “Great Replacement.” This theory, alleging a coordinated effort to replace white Americans with immigrants, has long been a cornerstone of white nationalist and far-right ideologies. Its presence in a mainstream political figure’s post demands careful analysis.

It’s becoming more and more obvious to me why the “Crazed” Democrats are allowing millions and millions of totally unvetted migrants into our once great Country. IT’S SO THEY CAN VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. They are signing them up at a rapid pace, without even knowing who the hell they are. It all makes sense now. Republicans better wake up and do something, before it is too late. Are you listening Mitch McConnell?

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111667694816747840

While concerns about immigration trends and their potential impact on society are legitimate topics for discussion,Trump’s post utilizes inflammatory language and unsubstantiated claims. The assertion that millions of immigrants are being deliberately “unvetted” and signed up to vote solely for partisan gain fuels xenophobia and undermines trust in democratic processes. This narrative conveniently omits the complex web of economic, social, and political factors driving immigration patterns, instead choosing to paint a picture of nefarious outsiders infiltrating American society.

Trump’s post echoes disturbing historical rhetoric with its coded language and divisive framing. Phrases like “millions and millions” and “totally unvetted” bear striking resemblance to slogans chanted by white supremacist groups like those who marched in Charlottesville. Their hateful chants targeting Jewish communities openly invoked the “Great Replacement” theory, highlighting its dangerous potential to incite real-world violence and discrimination.

Dismissing such language as mere political rhetoric carries significant risks. Normalizing these narratives, even unintentionally, emboldens extremist groups and provides validation for their hateful ideologies. It has the potential to further erode social cohesion, fuel animosity towards immigrants and minorities, and ultimately weaken the fabric of American society.

Instead of indulging in fear-mongering and unsubstantiated claims, responsible political discourse should prioritize facts and evidence-based solutions. By addressing legitimate concerns about immigration while rejecting harmful stereotypes and conspiratorial narratives, we can foster a more informed and inclusive national conversation. Let’s focus on building a stronger nation where all members feel welcome and contribute to its shared future, rather than succumbing to the shadows of hate and division.

Trump Echoes Hitler’s Immigrants Poisoning Blood of the Country

Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post, declaring illegal immigration to be “poisoning the blood of our nation,” reverberates with disturbing historical echoes. The language, while veiled, taps into a wellspring of dehumanizing and exclusionary rhetoric used throughout history to ostracize and discriminate against marginalized groups. Examining the post through this lens reveals the potential dangers of such inflammatory language and underscores the importance of responsible political discourse.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS POISONING THE BLOOD OF OUR NATION. THEY’RE COMING FROM PRISONS, FROM MENTAL INSTITUTIONS — FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD. WITHOUT BORDERS & FAIR ELECTIONS, YOU DON’T HAVE A COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111593149429973351

Firstly, the stark metaphor of “poisoning the blood” is deeply concerning. It dehumanizes immigrants, reducing them to a toxic threat infiltrating the nation’s very core. This echoes similar language used throughout history to demonize groups based on ethnicity, religion, or origin. Nazi propaganda, for instance, frequently depicted Jews as a “poisonous bacillus” infecting the Aryan body politic. Such language not only creates a stark “us vs. them” dichotomy but also lays the groundwork for justifying discrimination, hostility, and even violence against the targeted group.

Furthermore, the post’s claim that immigrants come from “prisons, mental institutions, and all over the world” further fuels harmful stereotypes. This paints a generalized picture of immigrants as criminals, deviants, and outsiders, fostering fear and distrust. It disregards the vast diversity of experiences and circumstances among immigrants, reducing them to a monolithic threat instead of recognizing them as individuals seeking a better life. Such generalizations often stem from xenophobic sentiments and lack factual basis, contributing to an atmosphere of prejudice and discrimination.

Ultimately, Trump’s post exemplifies the perils of employing divisive and dehumanizing language in political discourse. It stokes fear, fosters prejudice, and risks normalizing dangerous rhetoric with historical roots in exclusion and hate. As responsible citizens and journalists, we must critically analyze such language, expose its harmful origins, and advocate for a more inclusive and fact-based political discourse. Only then can we truly build a nation where all members, regardless of their background or origin, feel welcome and valued.

Trump Speeds Up Plans To Force Foreign Students, Others Out Of U.S.

Faced with the prospect of losing the power to make immigration policy after the November 2020 presidential election, Trump administration officials are speeding up efforts to force foreign nationals to leave the United States, including a new policy that could push out many international students. The latest policy should be seen in the context of the June 22, 2020, presidential proclamation that blocked the entry of foreign-born professionals and encouraged them to depart the country by preventing the entry of many family members. The proclamation also included a plan, if implemented, that could drive many long-time H-1B visa holders out of America.

“The Trump administration seems to be doing everything it can to stop all immigration to the United States,” said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a Cornell Law School professor and an advisor to the National Foundation for American Policy, in an interview. “Families are separated and employers can’t bring in needed workers. These latest actions are hurting, not helping, our economy.”

On July 6, 2020, the Trump administration announced that international students at U.S. universities “operating entirely online may not take a full online course load and remain in the United States,” according to the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). “The U.S. Department of State will not issue visas to students enrolled in schools and/or programs that are fully online for the fall semester nor will U.S. Customs and Border Protection permit these students to enter the United States. Active students currently in the United States enrolled in such programs must depart the country or take other measures, such as transferring to a school with in-person instruction to remain in lawful status. If not, they may face immigration consequences including, but not limited to, the initiation of removal proceedings.” (Emphasis in original.)

The announcement sent shockwaves through U.S. universities, many of which decided for health and safety reasons to offer classes exclusively online in the fall. Public universities facing state budget crises already expected to be harmed financially by the near absence of new international students, who often pay full tuition. Administration policies that may drive out existing international students as well will be a further financial blow and are likely to crush the dreams of many students, note analysts.

“By not allowing continuing international students who are studying at institutions that make the decision to continue with online classes, rather than moving to in-person or hybrid models, SEVP has made it more difficult for both these students and institutions. This is very unfortunate,” said Miriam Feldblum, executive director of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, in an interview. She recommends the administration, at minimum, to continue the current flexibility from the spring on allowing all online classes, which was extended into the summer. Feldblum would also like to see online fall semester enrollment count towards eligibility to participate in Curricular Practical Training (CPT).

The Department of Homeland Security plans to publish a new regulation on the policy as a temporary final rule, allowing it to take effect immediately, though it is expected to be challenged in court. “The policy forces schools to pick a model and stick to it, despite the fact that Covid-19 is a moving target,” said Dan Berger, a partner at Curran, Berger & Kludt, in an interview. “Depending on how the virus progresses, schools with hybrid models [in-person and online classes] may go online this fall. The administration’s message does not allow much-needed flexibility based on public health as the Covid-19 situation plays out.” 

“The policy also forces some students to leave who are here and safe, even if the country they are going to has a Covid-19 outbreak or closed borders,” said Berger. “Schools offer more than just classes. There is support here for students who have nowhere to go, even if the students are taking classes online. And forcing schools that were online to add an in-person class to meet the ‘hybrid’ definition would mean bringing students into contact with each other just for immigration purposes.”

The new Trump administration policy may force international students currently enrolled at Harvard University to leave the United States. Harvard recently announced that “all course instruction (undergraduate and graduate) for the 2020-21 academic year will be delivered online.”

“We are deeply concerned that the guidance issued today by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement imposes a blunt, one-size-fits-all approach to a complex problem, giving international students, particularly those in online programs, few options beyond leaving the country or transferring schools,” said Harvard President Larry Bacow in a statement. “This guidance undermines the thoughtful approach taken on behalf of students by so many institutions, including Harvard, to plan for continuing academic programs while balancing the health and safety challenges of the global pandemic. We must do all that we can to ensure that our students can continue their studies without fear of being forced to leave the country mid-way through the year, disrupting their academic progress and undermining the commitments – and sacrifices – that many of them have made to advance their education.” (Note: On July 8, 2020, Harvard and MIT filed a lawsuit seeking to block the upcoming rule on international students.)

In response to the question, “Does it look like Harvard will have international students on campus in the fall?” William Stock of Klasko Immigration Law Partners said, “Apparently not.”

The new policy may upend hundreds of thousands of lives, but for Trump administration officials, who fear this is their final chance to institute lasting changes to U.S. immigration policy, it is just one of many measures designed to discourage international students and others to follow their dreams to America. Attorney Dan Berger said, “The chilling effect of this new policy on international students coming to the United States will be tremendous.” That is the point.

[Forbes]

U.S. Citizens Married To Immigrants Are Blocked From Getting Stimulus Checks

The coronavirus stimulus package was meant to put emergency spending money into the economy, issuing a $1,200 check to most Americans that they can use to pay their bills in this time of hardship, and help stimulate businesses in the process. Now, though, we’re learning about all the strings that are coming attached to that hastily passed package — including the fact that U.S. citizens aren’t eligible to receive the money if they’re married and filed taxes jointly with an immigrant who doesn’t have a social security number.

The LA Times reports that there are more than a million Americans in this position across the country. This is just one more way the Trump administration has found to attack immigrants, no matter how they arrived in this country.

According to the Times, the stimulus bill doesn’t just pass over immigrants who don’t pay taxes. Any immigrant without a social security number — even if they have a tax ID and pay U.S. taxes — can render their entire family ineligible to receive any money.

This isn’t about documented versus undocumented immigration, either. Immigrants to the U.S. receive a social security number only when they receive a work permit, which means there are a whole host of visas immigrants can use to come to the country perfectly legally (student or fiancé visas, for example) that won’t get them a work permit or a social security card. For people on non-work visas, it’s impossible to obtain a social security number until obtaining permanent resident status, which is a whole other process that takes a ton of paperwork, a ton of money, and months or even years of waiting, depending on how backed up the system was at the time they applied. The LA Times interviewed a number of people who are in the middle of the months-long process of applying for a legal green card, whose families won’t receive stimulus checks because of it.

For the Trump administration (and, let’s be real, Republican lawmakers) to deny families much-needed stimulus money for this reason is nothing but another baseless attack on people who come to live in the U.S., no matter how they do it.

For all their spouting that they have no problem with immigration as long as it’s done “the right way,” this stimulus check provision is proof that that’s not what Trump and GOP lawmakers think at all. They just hate immigrants, and now, by default, American citizens who associate with them.

In response to this, California has announced its own stimulus plan, offering grants of up to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for families, meant to help immigrants without legal status get through this crisis. But immigrants who do have legal status, but aren’t able to work in the U.S.? The government is leaving those people (and their families) out of help, and it’s heartbreaking.

[Yahoo]

Trump claims he will temporarily suspend immigration into US due to coronavirus fears

President Donald Trump said late Monday night he will sign an executive order temporarily suspending immigration to the United States as the nation battles the health and economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic.

“In light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens, I will be signing an Executive Order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States!” he tweeted.

It’s unclear what mechanism he will use to suspend immigration, how long such a suspension could last or what effect this will have on the operation of US border crossings and on those who already hold green cards.

The White House declined to provide further information on the executive order Monday evening.

The tweet comes as the administration seeks to reopen parts of the country from the coronavirus shutdown through a phased approach, but it’s also a continuation of the President’s 2016 campaign promise to slow immigration.

Trump has repeatedly touted his decision to halt travel from China and Europe as a means of blunting the spread of coronavirus in the United States.

The tweet also comes hours after Trump directed Admiral Brett Giroir, the assistant Health and Human Services secretary for health, to provide an update on border wall construction after he briefed reporters on coronavirus testing.

[CNN]

Trump Just Called DACA Recipients ‘Hardened Criminals’ Hours Before Their Supreme Court Case

Hours before the Supreme Court would hear arguments in a case to determine the legal status of nearly 700,000 immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, President Trump tweeted a message for them.

“Many of the people in DACA, no longer very young, are far from ‘angels.’ Some are very tough, hardened criminals,” wrote Trump, referring to immigrants who’ve benefited from the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA.

The missive came as protestors and activists swarmed the Supreme Court ahead of its hearing on the Obama-era law that gives certain immigrants temporary legal status and a work permit, which they can renew every two years. Recipients need to have come to the U.S. before age 16, graduated high school (or be enrolled), and passed a background check.

Trump’s Tuesday morning tweet echoes the language he frequently uses to describe immigrants. But according to a 2017 report from the libertarian think tank CATO Institute, DACA recipients have lower incarceration rates than people born in the U.S. And to be eligible for the program, applicants can’t have been convicted of a felony — or even a string of misdemeanors.

After he took office, Trump initially waffled on whether his administration would preserve the policy. In February of 2017, Trump called DACA beneficiaries “absolutely incredible kids.” But facing pressure from immigration hard-liners, Trump swiftly changed his tune. By September of that year, he announced that the Department of Homeland Security would end the program completely.

That fight has now arrived at the Supreme Court, which will decide whether it’s lawful for the Trump administration to end the program. Nearly 700,000 immigrants rely on DACA to live and work in the U.S., the vast majority of which are women under the age of 25.

Despite the fact that his own administration is pushing to dismantle the program, Trump has punted the issue to Democrats in Congress. He added in his tweet that, if the Supreme Court rules in his administration’s favor, the White House will work with Democrats on a plan to keep DACA beneficiaries in the U.S.

“President Obama said he had no legal right to sign order, but would anyway. If Supreme Court remedies with overturn, a deal will be made with Dems for them to stay!” Trump wrote.

[VICE]

1 2 3 4 … 26