Tag: immigration

British Dad Arrested While Trying to Save Daughter from Rape Gangs Says Police Faked Records to Smear Him

A British father alleged in an interview on Friday that local Rotherdam police created fake arrest reports to derail an investigation into authorities repeatedly arresting him for attempting to rescue his daughter from a child rape den.

The now-infamous case of a Rotherham father arrested for trying to protect his daughter from child rapists took a new turn this week as the father, identified only as “Jack” in the interview, claimed that the force falsified records of his arrests, using inaccurate information and accusing him of being intoxicated during his rescue attempts.

British broadcaster GB News reports that years after the 2005 rapes of the daughter and arrests of the father, when the so-called grooming gang scandal became public knowledge, the unnamed man filed an official complaint about how his family had been treated. South Yorkshire Police are said to have denied his claim and attempted to discredit the story by issuing a custody sheet showing that the arrests actually took place in a different part of the town, and because the man was drunk.

The father insists that the document features key errors, including the man’s address being given as a home he did not move into until five years later. The father told GB News he believes police produced the document to cover up what they had done to his family. The broadcaster also reported it has viewed documentary evidence proving he had no connection to that address in 2005.

Keep reading

Democrats Collude With Judges To Keep Allowing Noncitizens To Vote In U.S. Elections

Abattle appears to be looming between President Donald Trump and the entire upper echelon of the national Democratic Party over Trump’s election Executive Order (EO) 14248. The order was signed on March 25, 2025, and entitled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.” EO 14248 addresses key election integrity deficiencies involving voter eligibility, ballot fraud, foreign interference, and accountability for wrongdoing. It also implements sorely needed mechanisms to assess the accuracy of voter rolls and the security of voting machines.

EO 14248 was immediately challenged by the “Who’s Who?” of the Democrat Party. Nineteen attorneys general filed a complaint in Massachusetts, while four top Democrat Party organizations filed their complaint in Washington, D.C., along with three civic groups. All similarly challenge certain parts of the election EO with only slightly different arguments.

Constitutional Arguments

At issue is the president’s constitutional power regarding elections. The complainants argue that elections are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the states according to a selective reading of Art. I Sec. IV of U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs fail to acknowledge the second sentence: “but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing [sp.] Senators.”

Thus, Congress, not the states, has ultimate jurisdiction over federal elections. That clause birthed the National Voting Rights Act (1965), the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA, 1993) and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA, 2002). Despite the clear, plain text of the U.S. Constitution, the attorneys general boldly state twice in their brief that their states will not adhere to those laws because: “Plaintiff States intend to administer federal elections according to State laws …”

Article II, Section II explains the general power of the president in providing: “… he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed …” Thus, the president has unquestioned authority to order that the Executive Branch take any steps necessary to ensure federal and state laws regarding any matter is upheld. That is precisely what EO 14248 does. The EO contains nine key sections, each of which issues Executive Branch orders, carefully crafted with references to federal laws, that the orders help to enforce for United States elections.

Proof of Citizenship

The complaints against the EO allege only theoretical harm since EO 14248 has never actually harmed anyone. With merely speculative claims about the future, the plaintiffs cannot truly meet the legal requirements of a cognizable, particularized injury necessary to establish the proper standing to bring a claim. Nevertheless, Washington, D.C. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a temporary injunction on two provisions involving proof of citizenship. Immediately, several media assets reported that a judge blocked the entire order even though the injunction was temporary and involved only two of roughly 40 total provisions in the order.

The judicial decision temporarily enjoins the president from ordering federal agencies to assess citizenship prior to providing the Federal Voter Registration Form to enrollees of public assistance programs. It also enjoined the president from ordering the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), to amend the National Mail Voter Registration form to include proof of citizenship. Thus, the form can temporarily continue to be used to register potential voters who attest to being citizens of the United States whether they are citizens or not.

This  decision does not square well with federal law which states: “It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any [federal] election …” 18 U.S.Code § 611(a) and that: “Whoever knowingly makes any false statement or claim that he is a citizen of the United States in order to register to vote or to vote in any Federal, State, or local election … Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned…” 18 U.S. Code § 1015(f).

The executive order simply requires federal agencies to enhance their procedures to enforce federal law pursuant to the president’s constitutional power. To help justify this rather overreaching decision, Judge Kollar-Kotelly stated:  “As a consequence, the Democratic Party Plaintiffs and the members they represent face nationwide irreparable harms that this court must remedy.” In other words, Democrats are greatly harmed if they must abide by the law and cannot continue to try and register individuals who are not qualified to vote.

Keep reading

Globalist Economist Magazine Calls to ‘Scrap’ Asylum System (Then Import More Migrant Labor)

Western governments should “scrap” asylum laws and instead aid migrants closer to their home countries, says The Economist, a pro-globalist site for investors.

The scrapping of asylum is presented by the magazine’s London editors as a compassionate policy that ensures more aid to migrants close to their home countries:

Looking after refugees closer to home is often much cheaper. The UN refugee agency spends less than $1 a day on each refugee in Chad. Given limited budgets, rich countries would help far more people by funding [overseas] refugee agencies properly — which they currently do not — than by housing refugees in first-world hostels or paying armies of lawyers to argue over their cases.

However, the magazine’s concession is ultimately intended to divert voters’ rising anger away from legalized migration. “Fear of border chaos has fueled the rise of populism, from Brexit to Donald Trump, and poisoned the debate about legal migration,” the editors wrote in the cover story.

President Joe Biden welcomed 10 million migrants under the vague justification that they deserved asylum. But that policy helped elect Donald Trump — and has helped focus public opinion on the damage caused by legalized migration.

Keep reading

Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

As you’ve probably heard, Zohran Mamdani is the communist who recently declared victory in New York City’s Democrat mayoral primary. He is expected to become mayor in November after the general election.

Mamdani made several fraudulent claims when becoming a U.S. citizen in 2018 at the age of 26. Part of the naturalization process Mamdani went through includes the Oath of Allegiance, during which the applicant must recite the following statement: “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Prior to taking this oath, Mamdani completed Form N-400. Because of what we know about his political ideology, he lied in answering question 5b within part nine of the form — a question that asks the applicant if they have ever advocated for communism, among other inquiries. 

There is no question as to whether Mamdani is a communist. In 2021, Mamdani spoke to the Young Democratic Socialists of America and plainly stated that the “end goal” of his belief system is to “seize the means of production.” In a previous article, I listed Mamdani’s other radical positions, but in calling him a communist, I see no reason to go beyond his stated goal of seizing the means of production, as this is the fundamental economic concept of communism.

Being a communist is mutually exclusive with the Oath of Allegiance — meaning Mamdani committed perjury by making false statements in addition to immigration fraud on Form N-400. Obtuse critics of these claims might question whether Mamdani held communist beliefs while going through the naturalization process.

Mamdani’s interest and activity in politics predate his citizenship. In 2015, he volunteered for Ali Najmi’s campaign for New York City Council’s 23rd District in Queens. Najmi is a far-left criminal defense lawyer practicing in Manhattan. In 2017, Mamdani joined the Democratic Socialists of America and campaigned for Khader El-Yateem, a socialist who at the time was running for city council in New York City. 

The Democratic Socialists of America is a de facto communist organization, which means that Mamdani joined a communist enterprise prior to becoming a U.S. citizen. No meaningful difference distinguishes socialism and communism — only trivial, superficial divergences that amount to distinctions without differences. These are well-documented historical facts. Friedrich Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom” is a compendium of brilliant elucidations that detail the inseparable relationship between socialism, totalitarianism, and tyranny.  

Keep reading

EXPOSED: Trudeau government never vetted alleged terrorists behind Toronto plot

It took nearly a year, but thanks to Blacklock’s Reporter—who, as always, got the story first—we now know the full extent of just how badly the Trudeau Liberals bungled a major national security failure. According to a newly released briefing note, two Egyptian nationals accused of plotting a terrorist attack in Toronto were never properly screened by immigration officials.

Not before they entered the country. Not before they were handed work permits. And not even before one of them was given Canadian citizenship. No CSIS referral. No CBSA check. No comprehensive security screening whatsoever.

Let me walk you through this clown show.

Ahmed Eldidi Sr. landed in Toronto in 2018. Seven months later, he had a work permit in hand. In May 2024, the government granted him full citizenship. And just one month after that, authorities discovered that Eldidi had appeared in a 2015 ISIS torture video. That’s not a typo. That’s the actual timeline.

A man who starred in ISIS propaganda was handed a Canadian passport. The vetting process?

Just vibes. But the Public Safety Minister at the time, Trudeau’s babysitter literally and figuratively, Dominic LeBlanc, said it was an example of everything working perfectly.

Keep reading

Germany Is Not Being Honest About Who Is Assaulting Children At Swimming Pools

Migrants will not stop molesting and assaulting children at swimming pools in the best and most democratic Germany of all time…

In the last 10 years, we’ve welcomed a lot of ill-behaved and criminal young men into our country for no discernible reason, and along the way we’ve had the dubious privilege of discovering whole new categories of crime. There is the hostile-immigrant-drives-his-car-into-a-crowd-of-unsuspecting-innocents crime, there is the hostile-immigrant-stabs-a-bunch-of-random-people crime, there is the immigrant-gang-collectively-rape-underage-girl-in-park crime, and there is the immigrants-at-swimming-pool-molest-or-assault-various-children crime.

The latter has been stealing the headlines since the latest (allegedly carbon dioxide-induced) ‘heatwave’ in Germany. Recent stories include this one about a 25 year-old man of undisclosed background (who is almost certainly a migrant, otherwise authorities would not be so secretive about his origins) exposing himself to a bunch of underage teenagers at a pool in Asperg (Baden-Württemberg). Or this one, about a 21 year-old Syrian at a pool in Schweinfurt (Bavaria) caught exposing himself to four boys. Or this one, about men of “dark complexion” who severely beat an 18 year-old and threw him down some stairs. Or this disturbing one, about two Syrians who groped and assaulted a 12 year-old girl at a pool in Hof (Bavaria), forcing her beneath the water repeatedly and leaving her with a bloody nose.

Stories like this often come in groups, and what set off the present cascade was a particularly grim incident from June 22nd in Gelnhausen (Hessen), in which a group of Syrian migrants aged 18 to 28 molested eight or nine underage girls at the local pool. When the girls first complained about what was happening, pool personnel sent them back into the water. After this incident became a nationwide story, the Mayor of Gelnhausen, Christian Litzinger (CDU) gave an interview in which he appeared to ascribe the crime to “high temperatures”, which can cause “tempers to flare up”.

Naturally, this is but a partial list comprising only those news reports that I found, that anybody bothered to report to the police and that have made it into the press. The problem is vastly more pervasive than my brief summary might suggest. Personally, I haven’t been to a public pool in Germany in 10 years. I would never go again, and I would certainly never send my kids there. What used to be occasionally amusing places to get a bit of exercise have become crowded loci of urban chaos invariably full of drunken 20 year-old men from the global south. Everybody knows this is happening but it’s very politically incorrect to acknowledge that it’s happening, and so it’s become the occasion for a great deal of bizarre messaging from our progressive establishment.

A small group of peculiar lunatics have decided that what we really need to do is remind everybody that groping and assaulting and molesting is not okay. Thus we’ve been treated to an array of bizarre anti-swimming-pool-molestation messaging campaigns that just love to reverse the typical ethnicities of perpetrator and victim.

Keep reading

Germany Begins Process to Restart Deportations to Syria, Starting with Criminals

The German government has begun the process of lifting the protection status for some Syrian refugees with the aim of returning them to their homeland now that the civil war has ended.

Germany has long been one of the top destinations for Syrian asylum seekers after civil war broke out in 2011. This was ramped up during the 2015 Europe Migrant Crisis when then-Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the gates of the EU, allowing in around a million migrants into Germany, including hundreds of thousands of Syrians.

Now, with the fall of the Assad regime in Damascus and the recent election of Christian Democrat Friedrich Merz in Berlin, Germany finally appears set to begin the process of returning at least some Syrians home.

According to broadcaster NTV, this will start with Syrians convicted of crimes, with the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (Bamf) being ordered to “start revocation activities” for criminals from Syria.

Previously, even criminal migrants from Syria were allowed to remain in Germany as Berlin had determined that their homeland was not safe for them to return to.

However, others have argued that the government needs to go further, with the anti-mass migration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party saying that previous refugees must also be returned home, not just criminals.

AfD MP Gottfried Curio said: “After more than half a year has passed since the fall of the Assad regime, a new government has been established and the fighting has essentially ended. It is time for the federal government to also take these new realities into account in its asylum policy.”

Keep reading

French Left-Wing MPs Introduce Amendment To “Reduce” Coverage Of Migrant Crime Stories

When reality does not mesh with the “narrative,” the left’s standard tactic is to turn to censorship, and the French left is no different. The French Greens and other left-wing parties now want to make sure that news stories are not used for ideological purposes by the “far right,” claiming that certain media outlets are causing a “moral panic” around immigration due to migrant murders.

According to a parliamentary amendment tabled on June 25, 2025, by a group of Green and left-wing MPs in the National Assembly, news stories of actual events that have happened, and actual lives lost, are being improperly used by the right.

Another post from the French Observatory for Journalism ,wrote: “BREAKING NEWS | Green and left-wing deputies submit an amendment to REDUCE the coverage of crime stories in PUBLIC media. The authors believe these stories are used for ‘political exploitation;’ the text cites the murders of Lola and Thomas.”

Keep reading

USAID Gave Known Con Man $800M Contract To Do Kamala’s Work On ‘Root Causes Of Migration’

President Joe Biden’s USAID awarded an $800 million contract to a business operating out of a Virginia home even after it formally ruled that its key manager lacked “honesty or integrity” — a reference to the fact that, according to a May 12 guilty plea, he had secured USAID contracts through bribery for a decade.

The contract was for addressing “issues affecting the root causes of irregular migration from Central America to the United States” — the work that Biden assigned to Vice President Kamala Harris, but which she never appeared to address, a Daily Wire investigation found.

The Department of Justice announced Friday that Walter Barnes III, the founder of government contractor Vistant (previously known as PM Consulting Group, or PMCG) and Roderick Watson, a USAID contracting official, pleaded guilty to a bribery scheme in which Barnes and two others conspired to pay Watson $1 million in exchange for $544 million in contracts.

What has not been reported is that the Biden administration continued to steer contracts to Vistant/PMCG even after it knew of the massive corruption: the migration contract, even larger than the $544 million in the indictment, and others that are still active.

The $800 million contract went to a joint venture between Barnes’ company and CollaborateUp, a tiny consultancy run out of a suburban home in Falls Church, Virginia, where its CEO, Richard Crespin — who runs the company while also working at a think tank — lives. The Virginia home was the address listed on the $800 million contract.

In announcing its $800 million contract, CollaborateUp said it would address the “irregular migration from Central America to the United States” by addressing “climate change.” Its website also touts its work “advancing DEIA” and combating “misinformation.”

This year, it added Mark A. Green, a former Republican congressman who served as Donald Trump’s appointee to lead USAID during his first term, to its payroll as a “senior advisor,” according to its website.

Keep reading

The Curbing Of The Administrative State

The Supreme Court delivered an opinion last week that not even the best of the punditry class was prepared to understand. The decision was Trump vs. CASA, and the topic concerned the nationwide injunction against Trump’s management of U.S. immigration policy. As with more than 40 other cases, federal district judges have intervened to stop the president from exercising executive powers.

The opinion could not be plainer: “Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts.” That principle applies not only to this case but to the whole panoply of cases that have tethered the ability of the president to manage executive branch operations. The courts have presumed authority over the president that the Constitution plainly does not grant.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the following of the unjoined dissent by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson: “[It] is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an Imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”

Court watchers called this an unprecedented rebuke of a colleague in a majority opinion.

The practical effect of the decision is to underscore the meaning of Article 2: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”

Why should this be controversial? Here we get into the overwhelming reality of the structure and operations of the U.S. government that stand in complete contradiction to the U.S. Constitution. It’s been going on for more than a century and has never been fundamentally challenged. Until Trump, most presidents were fine with it and offered no serious challenge. The legislature too has chosen to look the other way.

The issue is the fourth branch of government that is nearly the whole of the operational side of government as we know it. We elect leaders and representatives but our votes have carried ever less power over the course of a century. We know that but it has not always been obvious.

Keep reading