Tag Archives: migrants

Video: The “incubation period” lie about Ebola, and why America is vulnerable to an Ebola outbreak from infected migrants

It’s a huge, dangerous lie. City officials in San Antonio, Texas, are claiming that no migrants from the Ebola-infected Republic of Congo could possibly be carrying Ebola into the United States because “Ebola has a 21-day incubation period,” they say. And the migrants have been walking for more than 21 days. Therefore, they cannot possibly have Ebola.

The “officials” saying this are either grossly incompetent or deliberately lying. (By the way, it also begs the question of how migrants from Africa “walked” to the U.S. / Mexico border. Can they walk on water?)

For starters, Ebola’s incubation period only averages 21 days. It can be 40+ days in some people, and that’s according to the World Health Organization. As previously reported by Natural News:

• 95% of Ebola incubations occur from 1 – 21 days
• 3% of Ebola incubations occur from 1 – 42 days
• 2% of Ebola incubations are not explained

Furthermore, migrants from the Republic of Congo could have been infected by other carriers who perished before reaching the U.S. border. Infected migrants could enter the USA on, for example, day 10 of their own incubation period. Or day 30. By the time they begin to explode with symptoms, they will have already been transported by bus to any one of dozens of U.S. cities that are currently receiving these migrants.

Surely medical personnel aren’t so stupid that they don’t understand the basics of infectious disease, symptomless carriers and incubation times. Surely doctors must know that magically declaring “zero risk” among people who come from a region of the world that’s known for producing symptomless carriers of Ebola isn’t a valid conclusion. Yet they draw these conclusions nonetheless, putting all of America at risk in order to appease the open borders pushers who seem to want America to be overrun with illegal immigrants.

Watch my short explanation video to learn more:

Donald Trump to Mexico: ‘We Want Action, Not Talk’

President Donald Trump has ridiculed the Mexican diplomatic delegation which will arrive in Washington, DC, on Wednesday, saying, “We want action, not talk.”

“Mexico is sending a big delegation to talk about the Border,” he tweeted Sunday afternoon. “Problem is, they’ve been “talking” for 25 years. We want action, not talk. They could solve the Border Crisis in one day if they so desired. Otherwise, our companies and jobs are coming back to the USA!”

The Mexican delegation is trying to prevent Trump from imposing escalating tariffs on Mexico’s exports if the country does not stop its export of illegal migrant labor to the United States. In the 12 months up to October 2019, Mexico’s territory is expected to serve as the delivery route for roughly 800,000 Latin American migrants who will damage Americans’ blue-collar wages, neighborhoods, and schools.

On Thursday, Mexico’s government published a response to Trump’s promise, saying that migrants have a right to walk into the United States.

Business groups also oppose the Trump tariff strategy partly because it will disrupt their cheap-labor production in Mexico.

Worse, if Trump’s plan succeeds, it would also slow or block their economic stimulus delivered by the inflow of Central American workers, consumers, and renters. The inflow is an indirect subsidy for companies because it reduces pressure on the companies to raise wages for Americans and also to hire sidelined, untrained, or low-quality American workers, or to buy the labor-saving machinery which makes Americans more productive and wealthy.

Earlier on Sunday, Trump dismissed the chances that Mexico’s government might quickly agree to help block the transshipment of cheap labor from Central America into U.S. worksites:

Trump’s focus on Mexico’s government comes as the Central American migration shows that a border fence or wall cannot work unless border laws are also reformed.

So, Trump’s deputies are using the tariff threat to persuade Mexico to sign a “safe third party” agreement which would allow U.S. border officials to return Central American migrants to Mexico or their home countries if they do not apply for asylum in Mexico.

The U.S. officials also want Mexico to better guard its 700-mile southern border with Guatemala. That task is made easier by the dense jungle which blocks easy passage for more than 500 miles of the Guatemalan-Mexico border.

Trump’s chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, described the administration’s goals during an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday show:

It’s much easier to secure that border than it is our border, because it’s so much shorter. It’s about a quarter of the length. They could do that. The Mexican government can crack down on their domestic terrorist organizations, their crime organizations. Right now, in Mexico, there’s roughly 100,000 people trying to move up to the U.S. border. They don’t do that by themselves. They do that with the cooperation of these, of these crime groups. The Mexicans can do more there.

Mulvaney also spotlighted the need for a “safe third country” deal with Mexico:

And lastly, they can make Mexico a safe third country. Keep in mind, if you — if you leave a country, say you leave El Salvador, and you say, “I’m seeking asylum,” the law says you’re supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country in which you arrive. Mexico is safe. The Mexican government can address this

Few establishment media outlets have described the administration’s goals or plans – or even ask Democrats if they would support a “safe third country” deal with Mexico. Instead, most prefer to spotlight business’ concerns and to argue that Trump’s strategy will hurt American consumers.

Mulvaney also argued that Mexico has not cooperated in securing the border:

Yeah, well, you assume, in that question, that we haven’t been having those conversations with the Mexicans, that of a sudden, this sort of came out of the blue, out of left field. And that’s not the case. You know we’ve been in contact with the Mexicans. One of the reasons that you have seen them slightly increase the number of people they’re taking back into Mexico is because we have been working with them for over, I think, almost two years now. So this –


What I told you before, about that group of 1,000 people crossing the border, was sort of the, the touchstone for this. But this is something the administration has taken up. I’ve been acting chief of staff now for about six months. I think we’ve probably discussed it two or three different times. So this is not a new idea. It was not out of left field.

Trump also used his Sunday tweets to slam Democrats for holding open the catch-and-release loopholes in the border fences:”

Many Democrats say the United States is a “nation of immigrants” — not of Americans. Democrats also prefer to portray the job-seeking economic migrants as needy refugees fleeing crime and fame, even though many of the migrants clearly state they are migrating to get U.S. jobs and to get their kids into U.S. classrooms.

Immigration Numbers

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately one million H-1B workers — and approximately 500,000 blue-collar visa workers.

The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and does not punish companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.

This policy of inflating the labor supply boosts economic growth for investors because it ensures that employers do not have to compete for American workers by offering higher wages and better working conditions.

This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor also shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations. It also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions. The labor policy also moves business investment and wealth from the heartland to the coastal cities, explodes rents and housing costs, shrivels real estate values in the Midwest, and rewards investors for creating low-tech, labor-intensive workplaces.

Hundreds of “Black Vest” Migrants Seize Terminal in Paris Airport: “France does not belong to the French!”

Yesterday, hundreds of undocumented migrants took control of Terminal 2 of the Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris France. Approximately 500 migrants seized the terminal.

“France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!” one person can be heard yelling into a loudspeaker.

The protest was organized by the migrant support group “La Chapelle Debout,” which said their members call themselves “Black Vests.”

The group comes amid the country’s months-long “Yellow Vests movement” over tax reforms; French citizens are required to carry yellow vests in their vehicles for emergencies.

A quick-thinking person took video, which has been widely shared across Twitter.

Here’s some follow-up video.
Migrants warn it won’t stop here.

The organized group released an official statement and warned this will not be the last effort such as this.

In an official statement, the group asked to meet with Prime Minister Edouard Philippe over the country’s asylum policy and the leaders of Air France. They demanded that the airline “stop any financial, material, logistical or political participation in deportations.”

Later Sunday, an Air France delegation met with the group, a member told local newspaper Le Parisien.

A migrant who took part in the protest warned it wouldn’t be the last.

“We have targeted Air France, and other actions will follow,” he told the paper.

All of the migrants involved appear to have a common thread.

This is not an isolated incidence of migrants behaving badly. Here’s another example and another still.
What an incredibly dangerous precedent

The migrants are reported to have refused to allow passengers to board their planes until their demands were met. They were held back by riot police but actually got a meeting with a representative of Air France.

What kind of precedent does this set? One tweet even suggests “Prime Minister Édouard Philippe caved into their demands and gave them all permanent legal status, though that hasn’t been confirmed.”

This means that you can go into a foreign country and make demands and people will actually listen. People will actually capitulate to your demands in a place where you are by the grace of the local government. If there was any doubt that there’d be more of these types of sieges, I think we can lay that to rest right now.

We have not seen the end of the Black Vests

I’m not against people migrating to other countries. I’ve done it myself and I’ve brought my children back to my own country. But there are processes. This is not one of those processes.

Currently, reports say the siege has ended. There are no reports of arrests.

France does not belong to the French, indeed

New DNA Test Finds Stunning Number Of Migrants Trafficking Children

New rapid DNA testing being used at the Southern border is catching tons of migrants who are faking family relationships with children.

The reason the fake the relationships with the children is to gain accesds to the United States and to be allowed in.

But in a pilot program of the rapid DNA testing technology a whopping 30 percent of the migrants tested were found to be faking the relationships, The Daily Mail reported.

ICE conducted the pilot for a few days earlier this month in El Paso and McAllen, Texas, finding about 30 per cent of those tested were not related to the children they claimed were their own, an official told the Washington Examiner.

The official said that these were not cases of step-fathers or adoptive parents.

‘Those were not the case. In these cases, they are misrepresented as family members,’ the official said.

It is unclear whether every family unit was tested during the pilot, or only those who raised some sort of red flag. An ICE spokesman did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The official said that some migrants did refuse the test and admit that they were not related to the children they were with, when they learned their claim would be subjected to DNA proof.

ICE said the Department of Homeland Security would look at the results of the pilot to determine whether to roll out rapid DNA tests more broadly.

After President Donald Trump’s administration backpedaled on ‘family separation’ in the face of enormous backlash last summer, the number of family units arriving at the southern border has skyrocketed.

Current U.S. law and policy means that Central Americans who cross the border illegally with children can claim asylum and avoid any lengthy detention in most cases.

Graham unveils bill to end asylum claims at US border, return minors to home countries

Sen. Lindsey Graham reveals new immigration bill as Feds arrest dozens over alleged immigration scam

Scam offered fake marriages for $70K; Border Patrol Foundation president Ronald Colburn weighs in.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on Wednesday unveiled a bill that would end asylum claims from Central America at the border and return unaccompanied minors to their home countries — a targeted effort to tackle the escalating migration crisis.

“This is a nightmare for smugglers,” Graham said. “This is a godsend to stop the humanitarian disaster.”

Graham’s bill is designed specifically to deal with loopholes he says are encouraging migrants from Central America to make the treacherous journey north and bring children with them. He pointed in particular to the 20-day limit for authorities to hold unaccompanied minors and families before having to release them into the U.S. homeland.

“The word is out on the street in Central America if you bring a minor child with you, your chance of being deported goes to almost zero, your hearing date is years away and we release you inside the country and that’s the goal of coming,” he said.

The bill would end asylum claims at the U.S. border for migrants from the Northern Triangle of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. Instead, those applications would be filed at refugee processing centers set up in the Northern Triangle and Mexico. The legislation would also allow unaccompanied minors to be returned to their country of origin, which Graham said would be treating them the same as minors from Canada and Mexico.

His bill would extend the time families can be held together from 20 days to 100 days to help allow claims to be filed without families being released into the U.S. It would also add an additional 500 immigration judges to deal with the backlog of asylum claims.

Until these loopholes are dealt with, Graham said, other border security measures and funding are pointless — including President Trump’s call for a wall on the southern border.
TSA planning to deploy hundreds of volunteer staff to southern borderVideo

“No matter how high the wall will be built, how many drones you have, no matter how many agents you have in the border, they’ll keep coming because they want to get caught,” he said.

Graham told reporters he was prepared to work with Democrats on moving the bill in Congress.

“If we do these four things, then the incentives created by our laws will cease to exist, this humanitarian disaster will begin to repair itself and I am willing to sit down with Democrats and find a way to address the underlying problem in Central America,” he said. “I am willing to put other immigration ideas on the table to marry up with this but what I am not willing to do is ignore this problem any longer.”

Democrats initially appeared skeptical, with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., telling ABC News: “Any immigration proposal that is harsh on children seeking asylum and does not address the root causes that are forcing them to flee their home countries will fail to stem the flow of migrants and is a nonstarter.”

Graham’s proposal comes after Customs and Border Protection said it apprehended or turned away more than 109,000 migrants attempting to cross the border in April, the second month in a row the number has topped 100,000.

Fox News confirmed Wednesday that The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is planning to send hundreds of officials to the southern border to help the Department of Homeland Security with the crisis.

Court WIN: Federal appeals panel rules Trump admin can continue sending asylum seekers to Mexico

When it comes to Leftists opposed to POTUS Donald Trump’s immigration policies, the president hasn’t won many court battles, but he picked up a victory on Tuesday that could be a very important factor in stemming the tide of humanity streaming towards the U.S. from Central America.

A panel of three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the administration can continue sending asylum-seeking migrants to Mexico to wait for their cases to be heard.

Politico reported:

Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, authored the 11-page opinion and wrote that the administration was likely to succeed on legal challenges to the policy under federal immigration and regulatory law.

O’Scannlain also said the Homeland Security Department could face harm if a federal court order freezes one of its enforcement tools.

“DHS is likely to suffer irreparable harm absent a stay because the preliminary injunction takes off the table one of the few congressionally authorized measures available to process the approximately 2,000 migrants who are currently arriving at the nation’s southern border on a daily basis,” he wrote.

The other two judges — Obama and Clinton appointees — supported the policy and allowed it to stay in effect, but nevertheless raised questions about it in separate, concurring opinions.

Judge William Fletcher, the Clinton appointee, argued that existing federal statute did not allow DHS to send migrants to Mexico under the program.

“The government is wrong,” he wrote. “Not just arguably wrong, but clearly and flagrantly wrong.“

And yet, by supporting O’Scannlain’s opinion, Fletcher must also believe that the administration was very likely to succeed on the merits of its case.

The Gateway Pundit noted:

Last month Judge Richard Seeborg blocked President Trump’s policy of returning asylum seekers to Mexico as they wait their turn for an immigration judge to hear their cases

Over 1% Of Guatemala, Honduras Have Crossed US Border In Last Eight Months: DHS…”over 4 million Guatemalans who intend to migrate to the United States”

Over 1% of the populations of Guatemala and Honduras have entered the United States since September, according acting Homeland Security chief Kevin K. McAleenan, who added that the figure includes 3% of one Guatemalan county alone.

Speaking at the 49th Washington Conference of the Americas, McAleenan said “The current migration flows, especially of vulnerable families and children, from Central America through Mexico, to remote areas all along the U.S. border, represent both a security and humanitarian crisis,” adding “The situation is not sustainable.”

McAleenan predicted that April figures for illegal immigration will be even worse than March’s shocking figures – which saw over 100,000 migrants enter the country and led to the White House shaking up its immigration team, according to the Washington Examiner.

“In March, we had over 103,000 irregular arrivals of undocumented migrants — 90% crossing the U.S. border unlawfully and unsafely in the hands of human smugglers. We will see similar numbers in April,” said the DHS chief – adding that a there has been a shift in illegal immigrants coming from Central America, from predominantly Mexico-based to Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

“These trends are deepening and accelerating. According to a recent USAID funded study conducted by Vanderbilt University’s Latin American Public Opinion Project in Guatemala earlier this year, 1 in 4 Guatemalans have an intention to migrate from Guatemala, with 85% of them expressing the United States as their preferred destination,” said McAleenan.

“That’s over 4 million Guatemalans who intend to migrate to the United States. Imagine if almost the entire population of the state of Western United States left the country. What kind of impact would that have on the economy, culture, and identity? What does that mean for future generations?”

He explained that the U.S. economy is a lure for illegal immigrants, and poor economic conditions at home are a “push.”

But, he added, Washington shares the blame. “The main cause of the current increases is the weakness in the U.S. immigration system, the vulnerabilities of our legal framework, which allow migrants, especially families and unaccompanied children, to stay in the U.S. for months or years, even though the vast majority will not ultimately receive legal status,” he said.

To the Central American insiders, he said that one solution will be to work better with those nations to deal with immigration and the economy. -Washington Examiner

“We want to work closely with all three countries’ customs administrations to help increase the efficiency of cross-border trade by reducing supply chain barriers and support exports and job creation. From an infrastructure, technology, automation, and legal perspective, DHS’s Customs and Border Protection is pursuing broad support for the region’s customs administrations to modernize practices in all of these areas,” he said, adding “DHS also intends to support the Department of State in highlighting those targeted aid programs where accountable partnerships have made an impact at addressing root causes of migration. The president has made clear that we need to operate from a shared understanding and invest only in efforts that produce results.”

U.S. asylum screeners to take more confrontational approach as Trump aims to turn more migrants away at the border

The Trump administration has sent new guidelines to asylum officers, directing them to take a more skeptical and confrontational approach during interviews with migrants seeking refuge in the United States. It is the latest measure aimed at tightening the nation’s legal “loopholes” that Homeland Security officials blame for a spike in border crossings.

According to internal documents and staff emails obtained Tuesday by The Washington Post, the asylum officers will more aggressively challenge applicants whose claims of persecution contain discrepancies, and they will need to provide detailed justifications before concluding that an applicant has a well-founded fear of harm if deported to their home country.

The changes require officers to zero in on any gaps between what migrants say to U.S. border agents after they are taken into custody and testimony they provide during the interview process with a trained asylum officer.

“Officers conducting credible fear interviews should also be addressing any more detailed inconsistencies between the applicant’s testimony during the credible fear interview and other testimony in sworn statement,” John Lafferty, the head of the asylum division at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), wrote to staff in an email, outlining the changes.

The new guidelines and directive to asylum officers are among the most significant steps the administration has taken to limit access to the country for foreigners seeking asylum, whose right to apply for humanitarian protection is protected by U.S. law and rooted in post-World War II international treaties granting refuge to those fleeing persecution. The changes appear to signal that the administration wants to turn away asylum seekers earlier in the legal process, aiming to cut down on the number of applicants who enter the court system and to deter others from attempting to cross into the United States to seek asylum.

“The asylum program is a scam,” Trump said last month in a speech. “Some of the roughest people you’ve ever seen, people that look like they should be fighting for the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) . . . you look at this guy you say ‘Wow, that’s a tough cookie!’ ”

Tighter control over asylum claims would fit into a broader White House effort to control the parameters of legal immigration. White House officials — including senior adviser Jared Kushner — met with Republican members of Congress on Tuesday as they drafted a proposal that would base the immigration system largely on an immigrant’s ability to contribute to the economy. The Trump administration already has set lower limits on refugees, is cracking down on visa overstays and has alleged that many asylum seekers crossing the southern border are frauds.

The government also has been sending some asylum seekers back to Mexico as part of a program that requires migrants to stay on the other side of the border until their U.S. court hearings are complete. A federal court blocked the implementation and expansion of the program, and the government has appealed that finding. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can temporarily continue the program while the court waits to hear the case, though two of the three judges on the panel indicated that they had broader legal reservations about the policy.

With a record number of Central American families arriving at the border and swamping U.S. courts with asylum claims, President Trump has repeatedly scoffed at the protections and has told crowds that dangerous criminals are using it to game the system and stay in the United States.

One asylum officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, said the changes are “huge” and would make the screening process more time-consuming by requiring officers to provide detailed written analysis before referring an applicant to the courts.

Jessica Collins, a CIS spokeswoman, confirmed that new guidelines — included in a lesson plan Reuters has posted online — were issued to officers, describing them as a “periodic update.”

“As part of this periodic update, we have reiterated to asylum officers long-standing policies that help determine an individual’s credibility during the credible fear interview and have ensured there are consistent processes for both positive and negative credible fear determinations,” Collins said in a written statement.

Homeland Security agencies already are struggling to comply with court orders limiting the amount of time families with children can be held in detention, and further processing delays could exacerbate dangerous overcrowding at Border Patrol stations and immigration jails. Some areas along the border have been overwhelmed, at times seeing three times as many migrants as they have beds in detention facilities, leading many to be directly released into the United States after initial questioning.

Migrants taken into custody at the border who state a fear of persecution in their homelands typically receive a cursory interview with an asylum officer, and it is up to that officer to evaluate whether the person’s story is credible enough to be referred to immigration courts for a fuller assessment.

The initial screening is known as a “credible fear” assessment, and it has become a particular focus of frustration for the White House at a time when illegal border crossings have jumped to a 12-year high, exceeding 100,000 per month.

The influx has swamped U.S. agents and filled Border Patrol stations far beyond their capacity, forcing the government to frequently bypass the credible-fear-screening process and release tens of thousands of Central American families with little more than a notice to appear in court.

Matthew Albence, the acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told reporters Tuesday that his agency has released 168,000 family members since Dec. 21.

“We’ve released four times as many people as we’re able to arrest on an annual basis,” Albence said, noting that ICE makes approximately 40,000 “at large” arrests of immigration violators in the U.S. interior each year.

Statistics show that most migrants who claim persecution pass the initial credible-fear screening, but far fewer ultimately receive asylum from a judge. An avalanche of new applicants in recent years has contributed to a backlog of more than 860,000 cases in U.S. immigration courts, and it can take years for an asylum applicant to get a final answer in court.

That lag time has created a loophole in U.S. immigration enforcement, Homeland Security officials say, especially for applicants who arrive with children. They are typically released from custody and allowed to remain in the country while their cases are adjudicated. The process allows them to spend years living and working in the United States, regardless of whether their claims are ultimately found to be valid.

Trump’s senior policy adviser, Stephen Miller, has led the push to tighten up the asylum system, and his frustration with the slow pace of change was at the heart of his recent attempt to oust L. Francis Cissna, the head of CIS, according to three administration officials. Cissna kept his job after senior GOP senators came to his defense and urged Trump to keep him.

One senior DHS official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to comment, said Miller and others in the administration are struggling against an asylum officer corps that doesn’t share its immigration goals and would rather refer an applicant to the courts than risk making the wrong choice in a rushed decision with life-or-death consequences.

The administration’s changes take effect immediately, and asylum officers will be trained in their application in the coming weeks, according to the emails and CIS officials.

The overhaul follows a White House directive last week ordering Homeland Security and Justice Department officials to tighten asylum rules by limiting access to work permits for applicants and charging fees for the first time to migrants who arrive on U.S. soil seeking humanitarian protection.

[Trump tightens asylum rules, will make immigrants pay fees for first time]

Those changes also direct the Justice Department to complete the processing of asylum claims within 180 days.

Lafferty also told staff that 10 U.S. Border Patrol agents had volunteered to join a pilot program that will train them to conduct credible fear screenings. As many as 50 agents will be trained in the coming months, he said.

Immigrant advocates who say agents should not be making such consequential decisions about the credibility of migrants’ deportation fears and their eligibility for humanitarian refuge have raised concerns about the plan.

“Credible fear interviews involve the discussion of sensitive, difficult issues,” Julie Veroff of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrant Rights Project wrote Monday, calling the plan “highly concerning.”

“Federal law thus requires that credible fear interviews be conducted in a ‘nonadversarial manner,’” Veroff wrote. “Credible fear interviews have always been conducted by professionals who specialize in asylum adjudication, not immigration enforcement.”

New POTUS plan: Border Patrol agents could soon decide migrant ‘asylum’ claims, speeding deportation

As Democrats in Congress and activist judges in federal courts continue to thwart POTUS Donald Trump’s efforts to bring sanity and security to the U.S.-Mexico border, the president and his administration continue looking for new and inventive ways to bypass the obstruction.

A new plan being considered by the White House would allow Border Patrol agents to decide whether migrant claims of “asylum” are legitimate and whether they should be processed as such — or immediately deported, the Washington Examiner reported, citing an administration source.

This would dramatically speed up the effort to clear backlogs and allow migrants to return to their home countries.

The new plan would empower specially-trained Border Patrol officers to conduct “credible fear” interviews to judge the validity of a migrant’s asylum claim. Migrants must first pass this initial interview process before they would be allowed to officially file their asylum claim.

At present, there is a backlog of about 900,000 asylum cases to be heard, a ridiculous figure considering there are less than 500 immigration judges, meaning some migrants have to wait five years before their cases are heard.

And by then, most have disappeared into the interior of the country.

The objective behind having Border Patrol agents screening asylum claims is to ensure that far fewer migrants are able to register official asylum claims and begin the process of waiting to have their claim heard by a judge; invalid cases can be immediately adjudicated.

The Blaze noted:

The current system for immigrants claiming asylum is that they surrender to Border Patrol, get held in detention for up to 72 hours. A representative from U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services comes to hear their claim and conduct the “credible fear” interview once the immigrant is in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody.

Report: Smugglers And Cartels Profited Up To $2.3 Billion From Central American Migrants In 2017

In March, an eye-opening New York Times report elaborated on the humanitarian catastrophe involving migrants subjected to sexual violence and gang rape by cartels and traffickers at our beleaguered southern border. The Times reported:

On America’s southern border, migrant women and girls are the victims of sexual assaults that most often go unreported, uninvestigated and unprosecuted. Even as women around the world are speaking out against sexual misconduct, migrant women on the border live in the shadows of the #MeToo movement.

The stories are many, and yet all too similar. Undocumented women making their way into American border towns have been beaten for disobeying smugglers, impregnated by strangers, coerced into prostitution, shackled to beds and trees and — in at least a handful of cases — bound with duct tape, rope or handcuffs.

The New York Times found dozens of documented cases through interviews with law enforcement officials, prosecutors, federal judges and immigrant advocates around the country, and a review of police reports and court records in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. The review showed more than 100 documented reports of sexual assault of undocumented women along the border in the past two decades, a number that most likely only skims the surface, law enforcement officials and advocates say.

As Rachel Bovard argued shortly thereafter at American Greatness, the Times’ report highlighted a “serious and endemic crisis of assault.” Tragically, as Bovard persuasively pointed out, “as long as our asylum laws encourage illegal immigration through ease of entry and catch and release; as long as migrants believe that putting their lives in the hands of a coyote is worth it; as long as illegal immigrants know it is more advantageous to show up with a child than to come alone, this epidemic of sexual assault will not only sustain itself, it will grow.”