EXCLUSIVE: 19K Migrants Apprehended on Southwest Border in 2022, Says Source

 

19K Migrants Apprehended on Southwest Border in 2022, Says Source

86

Photo: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

RANDY CLARK

9 Jan 2022

EAGLE PASS, Texas — A trusted source within Customs and Border Protection tells Breitbart Texas the migrant surge in Eagle Pass is continuing into the new year with 4,000 arrests in the Del Rio Sector. During the first eight days of the new year, agents along the entire southwest border apprehended more than 19,000 migrants.

The source says daily apprehensions are on still the rise as large groups in excess of 100 migrants are crossing the Rio Grande into Texas on a daily basis. The source provided a photo of the latest group of more than 100 mostly Venezuelans crossing the border south of the city.

According to the source, the Del Rio Sector, of which Eagle Pass is a part, is experiencing a higher rate of migrant arrests since January 1 than the Rio Grande Valley Sector. The increase in traffic, according to the source, has the agency stretched thin in the area. “The latest surge in traffic has put Del Rio Sector at the head of the pack this year, we have apprehended more than 4,000 migrants in just six days” the source added.

The source says the Rio Grande Valley Sector usually leads all other Border Patrol sectors in southwest border apprehensions. At least for now, the source says, the Del Rio Sector has a slight lead in apprehensions during the first six days of 2022. According to the source, more than 19,000 migrants have been apprehended since the new year began — more than 4,000 in Del Rio alone.

The large groups are not a new phenomenon to the area. The frequency of the crossings, however, is increasing according to the source. In December, Border Patrol agents in Eagle Pass arrested more than 150 mostly Nicaraguan migrants in one single group.

The source added that the resources needed to apprehend, transport, and process the migrants are having an impact on employee morale and is also impeding the agency from providing an adequate level of border security in the area.

“Getting enough busses out to bring everyone in is not easy, agents are frustrated knowing that once a large group is processed and moving out, another one is on the way in” the source explained.

The strain on personnel and resources needed to process the migrants who are surrendering in large groups caused the agency to reduce routine patrols in many areas along the border. The reduction in regular patrols led to an increase in the number of migrants managing to evade capture.

As reported by Breitbart Texas, an estimated 428,000 migrants managed to elude apprehension in 2021. Agents previously told Breitbart the numbers of got aways are likely much higher because of the constant flow of migrants being apprehended and the reduced field patrols.

The source says in most cases, migrants choosing to surrender are released into the United States to pursue their asylum claims once processing is completed.

https://www.breitbart.com/border/2022/01/09/exclusive-19k-migrants-apprehended-on-southwest-border-in-2022-says-source/

SCOTUS Balks at Biden Vax Mandate

 

SCOTUS Balks at Biden Vax Mandate

The nation is waiting to see if the Supreme Court will clamp down on Biden’s executive overreach.

The U.S. Supreme Court took up objections to Joe Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate on Friday and it quickly became apparent that, much like the nation at large, the justices were clearly divided in their assessment of Biden’s authority to enact such sweeping action. For nearly four hours, the justices questioned the state and those objecting to the mandate.

Chief Justice John Roberts noted, “This is something the federal government has never done before.” Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested that government officials appeared to have overstepped their authority. “Congress has had a year to act on the question of vaccine mandates,” Gorsuch said. “It appears that the federal government is going agency by agency as a workaround.” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that the mandate was too broad in its application. Justice Samuel Alito noted that the rule is “fundamentally different from anything OSHA has done before” because it “affects employees all the time,” not just at work.

Yet it was also clear that the legality and constitutionality of Biden’s mandate was not the primary concern for the left wing of the Court, which preferred to focus on how scary COVID is. Justice Sonia Sotomayor erroneously claimed, “We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators.” The reality is that even during this Omicron surge, hospitalizations are 50% below 2021’s peak number. Sotomayor further falsely asserted, “We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition and many on ventilators.” The truth? Since the beginning of the pandemic, there have been a total of 80,200 children 17 and under hospitalized with COVID — the term with being an important modifier, as CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky noted in correcting Sotomayor. The justice’s false claim was so grossly misinformed that even The Washington Post “fact-checker” gave her its worst rating of four Pinocchios.

Sotomayor wasn’t alone in peddling COVID misinformation. Justice Elena Kagan insisted that the mandate is necessary to make sure people are “not transmitting the disease.” Vaccinated people can, in fact, catch and transmit COVID.

But the biggest doozy of wildly inaccurate pandemic hyperbole may have come from Justice Stephen Breyer, who claimed that there were “750 million new COVID cases yesterday or close to that.” Seeing as the entire population of the U.S. is roughly 330 million, America must have just reached herd immunity — twice over.

It is egregious misinformation and downright misstated nonsense like this that underscores why the panic surrounding COVID has allowed even normally sensible people to behave like frightened lemmings.

Worse than this misinformation, though, was the left-wing justices’ disregard for constitutional separation of powers. Sotomayor wondered, “I’m not sure I understand the distinction why the states would have the power” to impose such a mandate “but the federal government wouldn’t.” Perhaps she’s never heard of the 10th Amendment.

The question of the legality of Biden’s vaccine mandate was answered by the president himself and his administration months before they decided to go against their own understanding of the constitutional limits to executive power. As political pundit Liz Wheeler astutely observes: “It doesn’t matter whether the vaxx is a wise choice (or not). Or whether it’s effective (or not). Or how deadly Covid is (or not). The ONLY thing SCOTUS should be answering is whether OSHA has authority to issue an ETS requiring private employers to force employees to get vaxxed.”

The Biden administration has argued that it has the authority to wield the Occupational Health and Safety Administration as a bludgeon for the vaccine mandate, though, as Roberts observed, that’s an unprecedented use of the agency’s emergency standards rule. Only 10 times in 50 years has OSHA engaged such powers and always in accordance with workplace toxins. In other words, the actions were always temporary and narrow in scope, not some rule directly impacting the health and livelihoods of 80 million working Americans. Now, OSHA is treating workers like workplace toxins.

Scientifically, the inconvenient fact for mandate proponents is the reality that the pandemic is no longer an emergency. While the coronavirus vaccines have proven effective at reducing the severity of illness, they do not make individuals immune from catching or spreading the virus. Moreover, a wide range of treatment options have been developed and implemented since the beginning of the pandemic. The notion that the vaccine is the only thing that can tackle the novel virus is demonstrably false. Furthermore, what of the very real and scientific reality of natural immunity? The mandate fails to take into account the science that natural immunity does exist and may, especially regarding the Omicron variant, offer better protection than the novel mRNA vaccines.

Of greatest concern to the Court should be protecting individual Liberty against the instinct of those in power to abuse their authority and to defend that abuse by claiming to be acting to “save lives.” If it really were lives these governmental authorities were interested in saving, they’d think less highly of their own preferences and be encouraging as many medical options to the American public as possible. Diversity of thought, ideas, and opinions is what will guide the country to better dealing with a rare pandemic, not a narrow-minded, top-down, one-size-fits-all “solution” that has already proven wholly inadequate at stopping the virus.

The Court could issue an initial ruling any day now, though a fuller ruling would likely come later.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/85408-scotus-balks-at-biden-vax-mandate-2022-01-10

‘The Butt of Jokes’: Democrat-Allied Experts Turn on Joe Biden’s Coronavirus Response

 

Shut Down the Virus 

‘The Butt of Jokes’

Democrat-allied experts have begun to turn on the Biden administration’s shaky coronavirus response, dubbing it a “credibility crisis” and “the butt of jokes.”

While then-candidate Biden promised over ten times in 2020 to shut the virus down, the omicron variant has reportedly continued to set records, threatening Biden’s credibility.

“The administration in general has lost the confidence of people who would be their natural supporters,” Biden administration advisory board member Celine Gounder told Axios, speaking about the rise of omicron and the ensuing infighting between the White House and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Former CDC Director Tom Frieden also told Axios the Biden administration’s wavering health guidelines and shifting messaging tactics is the “butt of jokes.”

“It’s never good to be the butt of jokes,” the expert said.

George Washington University professor and CNN commentator Leana Wen also acknowledged “the CDC is facing a real crisis of trust” and pointed to Biden’s CDC Director Rochelle Walensky for poor crisis communication skills.

“The primary problem is the policy and how insular Walensky has been in setting it,” Wen said. “She and the others are great communicators but no one can communicate a bad policy.”

Biden’s CDC director apparently has acknowledged she needs help communicating the ever-shifting health guidelines to the nation and has hired a “prominent Democratic media consultant Mandy Grunwald to improve her communication skills,” CNN reported.

The experts’ opinions on Biden’s effort to shut down the virus come as Biden’s CDC has continually altered health guidelines over the course of the year.

In May, the CDC said it was safe to not wear masks indoors but later reversed the opinion months later.

In February, the CDC advised that schools could reopen without fully vaccinated teachers. But the White House said that guidance given by Walensky was only in her “personal capacity.”

In December, the CDC revised quarantine guidelines from five days to five without rapid testing to ensure infections were no longer present. Walensky later changed her mind and advised people should be tested for coronavirus after five days, if they can find a test.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/10/the-butt-of-jokes-democrat-allied-experts-turn-on-joe-bidens-coronavirus-response/

 

Biden has not turned out to be the friend the EU hoped for

Brussels thought Donald Trump’s exit meant they were getting an ally in Washington, but, during his first year in the White House, Biden has proved to be far from the EU's best friend.

Paul Nuttall

Paul A. Nuttall is a historian, author and a former politician. He was a Member of the European Parliament between 2009 and 2019 and was a prominent campaigner for Brexit.

 US President Joe Biden met within EU -USA Summit in Brussels, Belgium on June 15, 2021. 

When Joe Biden became president of the United States, Brussels breathed a huge sigh of relief. Gone was the unpredictable and openly Eurosceptic Donald Trump, and in was a man they could deal with. The Eurocrats must have thought there could be a return of normality and cordial relations, based on an ideological meeting of minds and trust. It has, however, turned out to be anything but.  

It is fair to say that the European Union had a fractious relationship with the Trump administration. There were battles over trade, finance, and pretty much everything else. Moreover, the president was an open supporter of Brexit, which no doubt infuriated the Eurocrats. 

With Biden, however, they must have thought that they could put all this behind them. Brussels now had a man they could deal with in the White House: One who was instinctively in favour of international bodies like the EU and, unlike his unruly predecessor, prepared to put the interests of the international community above the interests of the US.  

In some ways, they have not been disappointed. Biden immediately reversed Trump’s decision to ditch the Paris climate accord, and he has also backed the EU in its battle with the UK over the Northern Ireland protocol. However, if the Eurocrats thought that the ascension of Biden to the presidency meant a return to the cozy relations that existed before 2016, then they have been sorely mistaken.  

Biden really began to show his contempt for the EU with his withdrawal from Afghanistan. Indeed, he did not even bother to inform Brussels in advance of his decision to withdraw American troops, even though EU member states like Germany, Poland, and Italy had boots on the ground in the country.

But it is not only the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it is the consequences that will follow.  European leaders know that Biden’s calamitous scuttle from Kabul will result in waves of migrants making their way to the EU. To protect themselves from the oncoming crisis, walls have begun to appear across the continent, and for that, the EU has Biden to thank.  

The US-EU relationship took a further downturn with the announcement that Australia would be scrapping its deal with France to build diesel-powered submarines, and would, instead, be turning to the US and the UK.  

The AUKUS deal, as it has become known, was a huge blow to the prestige of France, which stands to lose $37 billion due to the cancelled contract. At the time, France’s foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said, “this brutal, unilateral and unpredictable decision reminds me a lot of what Mr Trump used to do. I am angry and bitter. This isn’t done between allies. It’s really a stab in the back.” Although Biden later attempted to claim ignorance, trust had been broken and the damage had already been done.

With such an unstable partner, the EU has been looking to forge an independent role in the sphere of defense. Last week, for example, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell visited the Ukrainian-Russian border. Whilst there, he demanded that the EU be part of any discussions between the US and Russia. Borrell said, “we are no longer in the Yalta times,” a reference to World War II summit where “the big three” – the Soviet Union, UK, and US – agreed where their spheres of influence lay.

Nevertheless, with talks taking place this week in Geneva between the US and Russia regarding the situation in Ukraine, the EU is not at the top table. The message is clear: The EU is not considered worthy to sit with the superpowers while they make important strategic decisions.

The exclusion of the EU will not go unnoticed in Brussels, and it adds weight to the argument that the bloc requires a more unified foreign and defense policy, which is something Borrell has called for in the past.    

It is also no coincidence that French President Emmanuel Macron last week called for an EU-wide “Strategic Compass” in this area. Macron, whose country now holds the rotating presidency of the European Council, argued, “it will allow us to have a common European position at NATO and to act together in a more coordinated way.”

Macron’s drive for military autonomy, which will be the precursor of his ultimate ambition of the EU having its own fully fledged “army,” has the backing of the Brussels Eurocrats. The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, also said that “I believe it is high time for defense in Europe to move up a gear.”

The renewed impetus for the bolstering of the EU’s defenses and the drive towards military independence is the fact that the US is increasingly seen as an unreliable partner. This has been one of the many unintended consequences of Biden’s botched first year in the Oval Office.

If Brussels thought Biden’s entry into the White House would herald a new golden era of EU-US relations, then they will have been massively disappointed with his first year in office. When it comes to foreign and defense policy, the US president has treated the EU with (some would say deserved) contempt. Nevertheless, powerful voices within the EU are now looking for the bloc to chart a more independent course, and wriggle free of American influence.   

 

Why Dems' Use of Civil War-Era Amendment Against Trump Over Capitol Riot Spells Danger to Democracy

15:15 GMT 07.01.2022 (Updated: 15:52 GMT 07.01.2022)

Democratic lawmakers, constitutional scholars, and advocacy groups are quietly seeking ways to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to bar ex-President Donald Trump from holding office again over his alleged role in the Capitol breach, according to The Hill. Will they succeed in disrupting Trump's potential re-election bid?

The Hill reported on 6 January, citing Democratic representatives, legal experts, and non-profit group Free Speech For People, that the idea of banning Donald Trump and his political allies from running for government office under the 14th Amendment has been gaining steam.

According to The Hill's interlocutors, if the Democratic-led January 6 House panel finds that the Capitol breach was an "insurrection" with Trump playing a central role in it, it would immediately trigger the amendment. The 14th Amendment, which was ratified after the Civil War (1861-65), prohibits any person who has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against the government from running for federal or state office, unless Congress by a two-thirds vote specifically removes this inability.

'Dangerous Precedent'

"The original meaning of the Constitutional term 'insurrection' in the 14th Amendment that would bar someone from future federal office had to do with participation in a Civil War that caused the nation the loss of more than 700,000 lives", says Stephen B. Presser, leading American legal historian and professor of law at Northwestern University. "To liken that to the January 6 disturbance in which a group of unarmed civilians were, in effect, permitted to roam unchecked through a federal building is, in my opinion, the height of folly and dangerousness".

The aforementioned effort by the Dems and left-leaning advocacy groups is nothing but an attempt to "apply raw political power for partisan purposes", according to Presser. The professor warns that it would not only set a "terrible precedent" by empowering any party holding a majority in Congress to arbitrarily bar candidates of another party, but would also "tie up the political process in months if not years of litigation, at the federal and state court level".

The latest development makes it clear that the Democrats are afraid Donald Trump will win the 2024 presidential election if he throws his hat into the ring, according to Dr Nicholas Waddy, political analyst and associate professor of history at SUNY Alfred.

"In 2016, Democrats were gleeful that the GOP chose to embrace Trump, because they expected that he would go down in flames in the general election", Waddy recalls. "In both 2016 and 2020, however, Trump's electoral performance greatly exceeded Democrats' expectations, and the expectations of pollsters and media talking heads".

Thus, last year's Emerson College poll indicated that Trump would have outperformed Biden if the elections were held in November 2021. Furthermore, the incumbent's approval rating has been steadily plummeting over the last several months, over the COVID pandemic, the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, soaring inflation, and Biden's incapability to push ahead with his signature initiatives, including the Build Back Better Act.

Will the Dems' Latest Effort Succeed?

It would be particularly hard and risky for the Democrats to brand the Capitol protest as an "insurrection", the observers believe.

"In the view of many Americans, the events of January 6 were a legitimate public demonstration of dissatisfaction with extraordinarily dubious changes to election procedures in 2020 as a result of an unprecedented pandemic, and the Democrats' determination 'not to let a crisis go to waste', through which they encouraged mail-in voting, extended deadlines, and other measures that favored their candidate and created the potential if not the actuality of massive fraud", says Presser.

The academic warns that any attempts to punish Trump and his supporters over the 6 January DC events and treat them as "insurrectionists" could further divide the country and "create an increased risk of future acrimony and extreme civil strife".

For his part, Waddy believes that it's highly unlikely that the Dems would succeed in finding Trump having engaged in "insurrection" and therefore be ineligible to seek federal office:

First, Trump encouraged his supporters to protest "peacefully" and lawfully on 6 January; he never encouraged them to break the law.

Second, the House January 6th Committee has produced no revelations of even minor significance so far, while the FBI and the Justice Department have found no evidence of a planned effort to overthrow the government on 6 January. In addition to that, no one whatsoever has been charged with "insurrection".

The aforementioned factors and clearly partisan nature of the House panel's inquiry reduce the credibility of any effort to exclude Trump or anyone else from eligibility to seek federal office, according to Waddy.

Dems Preparing Groundwork to Fight GOP in 2022 & 2024

"Democrats' primary motivation for pursuing a narrative of 'insurrection' against Trump, and more broadly against the GOP as a whole, is clear", says Waddy.

According to the academic, the Dems are seeking to disqualify not only Trump, but also other MAGA GOP contenders in future elections through various means: "either rhetorically and morally, by delegitimising them as 'insurrectionists', 'traitors', 'terrorists', etc., or legally and constitutionally, or removing Trump and Republicans from the ballot, or creatively negating the results of any election that Republicans win".

Waddy draws attention to the fact that Democrats are vigorously pursuing the line that current Republican efforts to promote election integrity and implement ID election laws "are, in fact, anti-democratic efforts to prevent minorities from voting".

"Thus, Democrats are preparing the groundwork to reject the results of the elections of 2022 and 2024, should they turn out badly for them", the political analyst believes. "The consistent theme here is simple: any election that isn't won by Democrats is invalid, and any seeker of office who isn't a Democrat is presumptively illegitimate and un-American. Needless to say, such attitudes and claims are inimical to democracy itself".

https://sputniknews.com/20220107/why-dems-use-of-civil-war-era-amendment-against-trump-over-capitol-riot-spells-danger-to-democracy-1092095909.html

 

RICE IS NICE!

What’s cooking today: Broccoli & lemon risotto with pancetta

Lemon lends a refreshing finish to risotto. This recipe uses no cream, as I was seeking a cleaner, lighter dish.eyondWords

This easy week-night supper can be prepared within half an hour. Put the water on to boil first, for blanching the broccoli. For the stock, I used 2 Ina Paarman vegetable stock sachets dissolved in 750ml boiled water (but you can use three if you’d prefer a stronger stock), to which I added the chopped (blanched) broccoli and the lemon juice.

Ingredients

1 medium head of broccoli

1 onion, chopped

1 celery stick, sliced thinly

2 garlic cloves, chopped thinly

500 g arborio rice

Olive oil

750 ml to 1 litre vegetable stock (or more or less depending on when your rice becomes al dente)

200 ml dry white wine

Juice and grated zest of 2 lemons

Grated Parmesan

Salt and black or white pepper to taste

Method

Blanch the broccoli florets in rapidly boiling water for 2 minutes, then refresh under cold running water and leave to drain in a colander.

Have the stock to hand in a jug. Keep a ladle handy.

Sauté the onion and garlic in a little olive oil until soft. It should not be caramelised. Add the sliced celery and continue cooking, while stirring, for three minutes or so.

Now add plenty more olive oil, about 3 Tbsp, and pour in the arborio rice. Stir well so that every grain of rice is coated with olive oil. If it does not seem to be enough, add more oil.

Add the white wine and cook, stirring, until almost entirely evaporated.

Chop most of the broccoli into tiny bits, but leave a handful of the little florets whole. Add the broccoli (but not the whole florets) to the stock. Add the lemon juice and zest to the stock.

Start adding the stock a ladleful at a time, stirring now and then, slowly and gently, just to prevent it from sticking at the bottom of the pot. Repeat until half of the stock has been incorporated.

Continue adding the stock (with the broccoli in it), as above, until it has all or mostly been used up. But there’s no law that says you must use all the stock; 800 ml or so might well be enough; the risotto is ready when the rice is perfectly al dente; it must not become a mush with no definition. So trust your palate and al dente talents.

Now stir in the grated Parmesan, and season to taste with salt and white or black pepper. Stir in the remaining broccoli florets and grate more Parmesan over as you serve. Buon appetito. DM/TGIFood 

Tony Jackman

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-01-10-whats-cooking-today-broccoli-lemon-risotto-with-pancetta/

 

Tourist marvel defaced by vandals

Sicily’s iconic Scala dei Turchi cliffs have been plastered with red dye

FILE PHOTO: Sicily’s iconic Scala dei Turchi cliffs. ©  Global Look Press / Alexander Poeschel

An investigation has been launched by the Italian police after a popular Sicilian tourist site – the white cliffs of Scala dei Turchi – has been defaced by unknown vandals who covered it with red dye.

Scala dei Turchi – or the ‘Turkish steps’ – is one of the most popular attractions in Sicily, visited by tourists from both Italy and abroad. The site also features prominently in the ‘Inspector Montalbano’ book series by the late Italian author Andrea Camilleri, and an Italian TV series of the same name.

The white limestone cliffs, formed in a shape of a staircase, hence its name, were once a hiding place for Mediterranean pirates. Yet the cliffs, put forward as a candidate for UNESCO World Heritage status, were plastered with red dye during the night of Friday, January 7.

The local police department launched a probe into the incident and law enforcement specialists managed to find out that the red dye was a red iron oxide powder mixed with water, Italy’s ANSA news agency reported. The police are now looking through surveillance camera images from local shops to potentially identify people who might have bought the substance in question recently.

The incident provoked a wave of outrage from both politicians and locals. President of Sicily Nello Musumeci condemned “the perpetrators of this cowardly act,” who “shamefully defaced” the cliffs.

People on social media also spared no words as they slammed the perpetrators, whom they described as “ignorant troglodytes” who committed a “criminal” and “ignoble” act. Others said they were “furious” and called the incident a “huge shame.”

On the bright side, people also voiced their support for the local volunteers who began the clean-up. The damage appears not to be permanent, since the lower part of the cliffs had been cleaned by the sea waves.

Vandalism appears not to be the only problem at the site, since it is also affected by natural erosion and a huge number of tourists who do not shy away from stealing pieces of the rock.

https://www.rt.com/news/545568-sicily-italy-tourist-marvel-vandals/