Category Archives: Immigrants

CA state senator DeLeon admits ID fraud and should be prosecuted, Illegal aliens stealing our IDs jobs money resources and committing crimes, Alamance County NC 2008 report on illegals ID theft

CA state senator DeLeon admits ID fraud and should be prosecuted, Illegal aliens stealing our IDs jobs money resources and committing crimes, Alamance County NC 2008 report on illegals ID theft

“Maria Sanchez was arrested on May 6, 2008 by investigators of the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office for stealing and using the identity of Veronica Arias.
Sanchez used the name, SSN, DOB, of Veronica Arias who is a living resident of Texas.
As a post-arrest procedure, Maria Sanchez was processed under the 287G program and identified as an illegal alien. She was subsequently processed for deportation.
Sanchez was provided work notes by the Alamance County Health Department to return to work at HondaPower Equipment (this creates substantial tax implications for the real Veronica Arias who is a lawful U.S. resident/citizen).”…Alamance County NC sheriff report 2008

“What is your threshold for acceptable voter fraud since 1 vote can win most elections?”…Citizen Wells

 

Illegal aliens are stealing our IDs, jobs, money, resources and in some cases lives.

California state senator DeLeon had the audacity to admit that half of his family was here illegally and using fake IDs.

The left wants you to believe that is ok.

People like DeLeon are trying to mainstream accepting illegals as being good for the country, not doing anything wrong.

From Breitbart February 5, 2017.

“California State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Léon (D-Los Angeles) said last Tuesday that “half his family” was in the country illegally, using false documents, and eligible for deportation under President Trump’s new executive order against “sanctuary” jurisdictions.

De Léon, who introduced the bill, made his remarks at a hearing in Sacramento on SB54, the bill to make California a “Sanctuary State.

He said (at 1:27:34 in the video that follows):

… I can tell you half of my family would be eligible for deportation under [President Donald Trump’s] executive order, because if they got a false Social Security card, if they got a false identification, if they got a false driver’s license prior to us passing AB60, if they got a false green card, and anyone who has family members, you know, who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification. That’s what you need to survive, to work. They are eligible for massive deportation.”

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/02/05/california-state-senate-leader-family-illegal-false-documents-deportation/

You can listen to Senator DeLeon here:’

http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=4107#.WJUuibp1PqY.email

Senator DeLeon, et al should be prosecuted.

I hope that Donald Trump and Mike Pence will do so.

Did the illegal members of his family vote too?

From Citizen Wells November 2, 2010.

“The following controversy in NC received brief national attention in 2008.

From the Alamance County Sheriff’s Ofice, Alamance County Health Department Investigation, 2008.
(Alamance County is just east of Greensboro)

“On Monday June 23rd, 2008 the SBI initiated an
investigation into allegations that employees of the
Alamance County Health Department specifically Dr.
Kathleen Shapley-Quinn and Nurse Karen Saxer were
knowingly and willingly falsifying patient medical
records.”
“At the request of some patients, Alamance
County Health Department provided work
notes and prescriptions in alias names.

Providing these services would assist illegal
aliens with maintaining assumed or stolen
identities, which may be a violation of state, or
federal law. (Identity Theft, Fraud, etc.)”
“The staff was divided with some believing the practice of writing
work notes (utilizing aliases) to suspected illegal aliens was wrong
and therefore they refused to do so. Subsequently they reported
feeling pressured or feared repercussions.

Others, particularly Shapely-Quinn and Saxer believed the
guidance they had sought and received was vague at best, but
believed their actions did not violate the law and they were
providing care for their patients. Furthermore, according to
them, an illegal alien can not be refused medical care.”
“On more than one occasion Nurse Karen Saxer at the
direction of Dr. Shapley-Quinn prepared or made
health related employer work notes for patients under
alias names, knowing that the names on the documents
were in fact not the birth name or legal name of the
patient.”
“Veronica Arias, of Texas, reported on May 2nd, 2008 to
the ACSO that someone in Swepsonville, NC had
stolen her identity and was using same to be employed.

Maria Sanchez was arrested on May 6, 2008 by
investigators of the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office
for stealing and using the identity of Veronica Arias.

Sanchez used the name, SSN, DOB, of Veronica Arias
who is a living resident of Texas.”

NC voter fraud update, Voting machine errors, NC GOP lawsuit status, Voter registration issues

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

Trump immigration stance mirrors Bill Clinton 1995 State Of The Union Address, 7 countries selected for temporary ban ID’d as problematic by Obama Administration, 5 countries bombed, Imbeciles of America have united

Trump immigration stance mirrors Bill Clinton 1995 State Of The Union Address, 7 countries selected for temporary ban ID’d as problematic by Obama Administration, 5 countries bombed, Imbeciles of America have united

“The imbeciles of America have united.”…Citizen Wells

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

“Bill Clinton, in a January 24, 1995 State Of The Union Address, took a position on illegal immigrants almost identical to Trump’s. He received a standing ovation.”…Citizen Wells

 

One of my favorite cartoons.

ImbecilesUnite

The Imbeciles have united.

Democrats, the left, protestors funded by George Soros, et al are protesting Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

Trump imposed a temporary ban on entry of people from 7 countries, the same countries identified by the Obama Administration as problems, 5 of which were bombed by Obama controlled staff. These countries are also just a fraction of countries having large Muslim populations.

The imbeciles are screaming.

From Bill Clinton’s  State Of The Union Address in 1995.

“All Americans, not only in the States most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4652944/1995-bill-clinton-building-wall

And yet the imbeciles are screaming.

“Trump’s list of “Muslim” visa ban countries? They’re from Obama”

And yet the imbeciles are screaming.

“The Truth About Trump’s ‘Muslim Ban'”

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

Illegal aliens are voting, Trump is right, Number is irrelevant, Podesta email reveals Democrat concern, Washington Post 2014 article, “08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters”

Illegal aliens are voting, Trump is right, Number is irrelevant, Podesta email reveals Democrat concern, Washington Post 2014 article, “08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters”

“What is your threshold for acceptable voter fraud since 1 vote can win most elections?”…Citizen Wells

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

The Democrats continue to lie about voter fraud as being a problem and illegal aliens voting.

But they were caught expressing concern about it in a Podesta email from Wikileaks.

They believed that Obama had ineligible voters in Colorado in 2008.

“On Thursday, May 14, 2015, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> wrote:

High importance. I met with Jim and Mike in Denver. They are both old friends of the Clintons and have lots of experience. Mike hosted our Boulder Road Show event. They are reliving the 08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters. They want to organize lawyers for caucus protection, election protection and to raise hard $.”

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3563

From the Washington Post October 24, 2014.

“Could non-citizens decide the November election?”

“In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.

Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens
2008 2010
Self reported and/or verified 38 (11.3%) 13 (3.5%)
Self reported and verified 5 (1.5%) N.A.
Adjusted estimate 21 (6.4%) 8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/?utm_term=.c0f99f9d191c

1 illegal vote is too many.

Whatever the number, this must end and we must keep them out of our country.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Mexican accused of rape deported or removed 19 times, Deported 10 times and removed 9 times, Accused of raping a 13 year old girl on a Greyhound bus, 38 year old Tomas Martinez-Maldonado

Mexican accused of rape deported or removed 19 times, Deported 10 times and removed 9 times, Accused of raping a 13 year old girl on a Greyhound bus, 38 year old Tomas Martinez-Maldonado

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“All of the employment gains among women since the recession hit in December 2007 have been taken by foreigners, even at a time when the numbers of U.S.-born women surged more than 600,000, according to new federal statistics.”…Washington Examiner August 7, 2015

“If This Story Gets Out, We Are Screwed”…Wikileaks: Doug Band to John Podesta

 

 

From Fox News December 31, 2016.

“Mexican man accused of rape had 19 deportations, removals

A Mexican man accused of raping a 13-year-old girl on a Greyhound bus that traveled through Kansas had been deported 10 times and voluntarily removed from the U.S. another nine times since 2003, records obtained by The Associated Press show.

Three U.S. Republican senators — including Kansas’ Jerry Moran and Pat Roberts — demanded this month that the Department of Homeland Security provide immigration records for 38-year-old Tomas Martinez-Maldonado, who is charged with a felony in the alleged Sept. 27 attack aboard a bus in Geary County. He is being held in the Geary County jail in Junction City, which is about 120 miles west of Kansas City.

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, from Iowa and chairman of the judiciary committee, co-signed a Dec. 9 letter with Moran and Roberts to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, calling it “an extremely disturbing case” and questioning how Martinez-Maldonado was able to re-enter and remain in the country.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said it has placed a detainer — a request to turn Martinez-Maldonado over to ICE custody before he is released — with Geary County. ICE declined to discuss his specific case beyond its October statement regarding the 10 deportations.

Court filings show Martinez-Maldonado has two misdemeanor convictions for entering without legal permission in cases prosecuted in 2013 and 2015 in U.S. District Court of Arizona, where he was sentenced to serve 60 days and 165 days respectively.

A status hearing in the rape case is scheduled for Jan. 10. Defense attorney Lisa Hamer declined to comment on the charge, but said, “criminal law and immigration definitely intersect and nowadays it should be the responsibility of every criminal defense attorney to know the possible ramifications in the immigration courts.”

Nationwide, 52 percent of all federal prosecutions in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 were for entry or re-entry without legal permission and similar immigration violations, according to Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.”

Read more:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/12/31/mexican-man-accused-rape-had-19-deportations-removals.html

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Immigration legal and illegal destroying native born American jobs, 100% of female employment gains taken by foreigners since 2007, Half million fewer white Americans employed, Hispanic employment up 24 percent, Immigration surging 1.5 million arriving annually

Immigration legal and illegal destroying native born American jobs, 100% of female employment gains taken by foreigners since 2007, Half million fewer white Americans employed, Hispanic employment up 24 percent, Immigration surging 1.5 million arriving annually

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in September at 7.1 million. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”…US Labor Dept. September 2014

“All of the employment gains among women since the recession hit in December 2007 have been taken by foreigners, even at a time when the numbers of U.S.-born women surged more than 600,000, according to new federal statistics.”…Washington Examiner August 7, 2015

 

Donald Trump is right.

Illegal immigration is a big problem.

Especially those with criminal backgrounds or tendencies.

Despite the lies from Obama and the media about the economy and jobs created, we have a huge employment problem in this country and a record number of people working multiple jobs.

As a result of Obamacare, too many of the jobs created are part time jobs.

Illegal aliens are taking jobs from native born Americans.

But so are legal aliens who are more likely to take higher paying jobs.

Consider the following:

“Straight from the US Labor Dept. November 4, 2016.

There are half a million fewer white Americans employed than in 2007 despite the lies from Obama about creating jobs and the growth in population.

There are over 10 million more white Americans not in  the labor force than in 2007.

Hispanic employment has increased 24 percent since 2007.”

““MULTIPLE JOBHOLDERS HITS 21ST CENTURY HIGH, AS FULL-TIME JOBS TUMBLE”

“Recall that in September, the Household Survey revealed that the number of part-time workers soared by 430,000 as full-time workers actually declined by 5,000. The trend continued in October, when another 103,000 full-time jobs were lost, which was offset by a 90,000 increase in part-time jobs. In other words, the transition to a part-time worker society appears to have resumed after a hiatus.”

“But perhaps even more troubling than the breakdown in September job quality, was another seldom-touted series: the number of Multiple jobholders, or people who are forced to hold more than one job due to insufficient wages or for other reasons. It was here that the red flashing light came on because when looked on an actual, unadjusted basis, the number of multiple jobholders rose to 8.050 million, the highest number this century.””

October 2016 Labor Dept. data vindicates Trump on illegal immigration, White employment decimated, Big Hispanic gains, Obama Obamacare legacy, Fewer whites employed, Fewer full time jobs, Multiple jobholders increase, Obamacare has reduced employment in most states by between 1.5% and 3%

From the Washington Examiner August 7, 2016.

“Jobs shock: 100% of female employment gains taken by foreigners since 2007”

“All of the employment gains among women since the recession hit in December 2007 have been taken by foreigners, even at a time when the numbers of U.S.-born women surged more than 600,000, according to new federal statistics.

The jobs data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed gains in the “employment level” among “foreign born women” and losses among “native born women.””

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jobs-shock-100-of-female-employment-gains-taken-by-foreigners-since-2007/article/2569824

From the Center for Immigration Studies February 2015.

“For Every New Job, Two New Immigrants

Government data collected in December 2014 show 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the United States who arrived in January 2000 or later. But only 9.3 million jobs were added over this time period. In addition, the native-born population 16 and older grew by 25.2 million. Because job growth has not come close to matching immigration and population growth, the share of Americans in the labor force has declined dramatically — a clear indication there is no labor shortage. Despite this, Congress is considering proposals to increase legal immigration even further; and during the last Congress the Senate actually passed the Schumer-Rubio bill (S.744), which would have doubled legal immigration and legalized illegal immigrants.1 Congress’s disregard for the absorption capacity of the U.S. labor market has profound consequences for American workers.”

http://cis.org/for-every-new-job-two-new-immigrants

From the Center for Immigration Studies October 2016.

“Immigration Surging; 1.5 Million Arriving Annually”

“A Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) analysis of newly released data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) shows that 1.5 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) are settling in the country each year. The ACS is the Bureau’s largest survey and the new findings confirm research published by the Center in June of this year based on a much smaller Bureau survey, which also showed a significant increase in new arrivals in 2014 and 2015.1 Newly arrived immigrants include new green card holders (permanent residents); long-term “temporary” visitors who often stay permanently, such as guest workers and foreign students; and new illegal immigrants.”

“The just-released public-use data from the American Community Survey shows 1.5 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) arrived in 2014, and another 914,000 arrived in just the first six months of 2015.”

“The number who arrived in 2014 represent a 17 percent increase over the number who came in 2013, and a 38 percent increase over the number who came in 2011.”

“As a share of the U.S. population, 13.5 percent are now immigrants — the highest percentage in 105 years. As recently as 1970, less than 5 percent of the population were immigrants.”

http://cis.org/immigration-Surging-1.5-Million-Arriving-Annually-

From the Center for Immigration Studies November 15,  2016.

“The federal government is reassigning approximately 150 Border Patrol agents on temporary duty to assist the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol sector. The agents will help get a handle on the flood of aliens attempting illegal entry into the United States before the Trump administration takes office and, we have been promised, border security will be taken seriously.

The aliens’ surge is no surprise. Actually it’s been going on for many months, though without much press visibility, quite possibly because our friends in the mainstream media didn’t want to air anything that might help tip the election toward Donald Trump.

Truth be told, this is a continuation of the very same surge of aliens that began in 2013 and that briefly held public attention in 2014, before the Obama administration took its usual course by dropping an invisibility cloak over the whole mess while quietly laundering these aliens into the interior at great expense to the taxpayer.”

“More likely is that all these agents will be allowed to do is continue engaging in a sophisticated catch-and-release program, processing the aliens (often without having served them charging documents to appear in immigration court) only to pass them along for long-term resettlement.

Until I see proof, real proof, to the contrary, I will have to believe this is one last shell game in the waning days of an outrageous and ineffectual administration steadfastly pursuing its transformational agenda against the headwinds of the election.”

http://cis.org/cadman/confronting-surge-enforcement-theater

Illegal immigration is a big problem.

But why are we allowing so many legal immigrants to become US Citizens and take jobs away from native born Americans whose ancestors’ blood, sweat, toil and tears built and saved this country?

Get this message to the Trump Administration!!!

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Trump CBS 60 minutes interview, Deport immediately 2 to 3 million illegal immigrants, “What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records gang members drug dealers…..we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate”, Clinton admin let many in

Trump CBS 60 minutes interview, Deport immediately 2 to 3 million illegal immigrants, “What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records gang members drug dealers…..we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate”, Clinton admin let many in

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.”…Hillary Clinton, WABC 2003

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters.”…David Schippers

 

 

Donald Trump will be interviewed on CBS 60 Minutes tonight, November 13, 2016.

From CBS News November 13, 2016.

“President-elect Trump says how many immigrants he’ll deport”

“Donald Trump will appear in his first extensive post-election interview Sunday on “60 Minutes” at 7 p.m. ET/PT

President-elect Donald Trump’s hard-line immigration stance was a central part of his campaign message in 2016 — and he said in an interview airing Sunday that he plans to immediately deport approximately two to three million undocumented immigrants.

“What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate,” Trump said in an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes.” “But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally.”

He continued by saying that after the border is “secure,” immigration officials will begin to make a “determination” about the remaining undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

“After the border is secure and after everything gets normalized, we’re going to make a determination on the people that they’re talking about who are terrific people, they’re terrific people but we are gonna make a determination at that,” he said. “But before we make that determination…it’s very important, we are going to secure our border.”

Asked whether he really plans to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border — a proposal that served as a centerpiece of his campaign message — Trump replied, “Yes.””

Read more:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-elect-trump-says-how-many-immigrants-hell-deport/

Many of the illegal immigrants to be deported or incarcerated arrived or were allowed to stay during the Obama administration.

What you may not know is the following.

From Citizen Wells August 26, 2016.

“David Philip Schippers served as chief counsel to the United States House of Representatives managers for the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in the U.S. Senate from Jan. 1 through Feb. 28, 1999.”

“From 1963 to 1967, Schippers served as a member and later the chief of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the U.S. Department of Justice at Chicago.”

“Unlike his counterpart, Abbe Lowell, who is serving as the chief investigative counsel for the Democrats, Schippers is no Washington insider. He also isn’t a screaming partisan. Indeed, though a lifelong Democrat, he was hired in the spring by a Republican, Rep. Henry Hyde of Chicago, the panel’s chairman. The two men have been friends for 30 years. Hyde asked him to review Justice Department operations but to be ready to shift gears if Starr sent an impeachment report.”

“From David Schippers book, “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment”.

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.

In our investigation we uncovered a case study evidencing what is pejoratively known in political science circles as “Chicago Politics.”

Back in the early years of the twentieth century, “Hinky Dink” Kenna and “Bathouse” John Coughlin were recognized as the very models of the unsavory Chicago politician. The two once fixed an aldermanic election in Chicago’s First Ward. To do so, they imported thousands of ward heelers, friends, associates, and city workers and had them registered to vote from every building in the ward — from homes (of which there were few) to taverns and cribs (of which there were many). On Election Day the recent arrivals stopped at Hinky Dink’s tavern, picked up fifty cents, ate a free lunch, and went out to vote their consciences. Guess who won that election?

Essentially, the same tactics were used during President Clinton’s reelection in 1996. Only this time the Democrats weren’t handing out sandwiches. Instead, through CUSA, they were circumventing normal procedures for naturalizing aliens — procedures that check backgrounds and weed out criminals — and consequently they were handing out citizenship papers to questionable characters.”

“The White House wanted any applicant for citizenship to be naturalized in time to register for the November election, so the pressure on the INS was constant. On March 21 Elaine Kamarck in the Vice President’s office sent an e-mail to Farbrother saying: “THE PRESIDENT IS SICK OF THIS AND WANTS ACTION. IF NOTHING MOVES TODAY WE’LL HAVE TO TAKE SOME PRETTY DRASTIC MEASURES.” Farbrother responded, “I favor drastic measures.” If he couldn’t get what he wanted from the INS, he wrote, he would “call for heavy artillery.””

“Federal regulations require that, for an alien to obtain citizenship, his application for naturalization (citizenship) must be accompanied by a complete set of the alien’s fingerprints. The fingerprint cards are then sent to the FBI to determine if the applicant has a criminal or arrest record. The law provides that an application may be denied if the alien has a serious criminal record or if he falsely denies ever having been arrested, even if he was never convicted.

In the INS district offices, the alien applicant for naturalization cannot be scheduled for a personal interview until at least 60 days after the application is submitted. This delay is specifically intended to allow sufficient time for an FBI fingerprint check. If the check reveals an arrest record identification, the arrest report is inserted in the alien’s file prior to the interview. An arrest record does not automatically result in a denial of citizenship, but it alerts an examiner to spend additional time questioning the applicant and to request that he furnish further information.

If there is no criminal arrest record in the file prior to the interview, the examiner will assume that none exists. For that reason, the INS has always considered the FBI fingerprint check to be the only practical way of preventing violent felons, dope peddlers, and the like from obtaining citizenship. Any breakdown in the collecting, checking, and reporting of the fingerprints can cause a breakdown of the entire process.

In our investigation we developed sources inside the INS with specific knowledge of the facts who revealed that FBI arrest records that were being sent to the Chicago INS office simply were not being inserted into the aliens’ files. As a result, aliens with criminal records were being granted citizenship.

Our sources also disclosed that, just prior to the 1996 voter registration deadline, a box was discovered in the Chicago INS office containing nearly five thousand FBI arrest reports — reports that had arrived in time but had been ignored.

Later, when the office discovered that those reports had never been processed, the INS initially tried to blame the FBI, claiming that the Bureau had not provided the arrest records within the 60-day window. But the FBI had done its job in a timely manner. Then the INS tried to convince the public that the foul-up really hadn’t harmed the process much. The agency cited statistics showing that the rejection rate of 17 percent was just about what it had always been, so no harm, no foul. But the INS neglected to take into account the thousands of aliens with criminal arrest records who were not rejected, even though they would have been under the normal procedures. If the traditional process had been followed, the rejection rate in the summer of 1996 would have easily exceeded 30 percent and perhaps have been even higher.

The White House, the INS, and the Justice Department publicly denied any political motive in the CUSA program to expedite the citizenship procedure. What the United States got is undeniable:
More than 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied;

An additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable for various technical reasons and were never resubmitted; and

Another 61,000 people who were given citizenship with no fingerprints submitted at all.
Those numbers were developed by the accounting firm of KPMG Peat Marwick as a result of an audit of the 1996 CUSA program.

What we had here was a perfect example of the Clinton-Gore administration’s overarching political philosophy: “The ends justify the means,” coupled with “win at any cost.” It was a philosophy of governance that, as our investigations into other areas proceeded, we would find repeated again and again.

When the results of the KPMG Peat Marwick audit were made public, the INS and Justice vowed to remedy the situation, root out the felons, and revoke erroneously awarded citizenship. Everyone congratulated the administration for acting so quickly — and then promptly forgot about it.”

“We received no cooperation from either the Justice Department or the INS. Instead we received nothing but complaints about not going through the proper channels, investigating old news, being partisan — if not racist — and so on. But we reasoned that if criminals were given citizenship in 1996, at least some of them had probably continued their criminal activity in the two years since. We asked the GAO — an investigative agency that works for Congress and is therefore not subject to White House or Justice Department pressures — to give us FBI arrest records related to the CUSA program. We were given unquestioned cooperation and boxes of FBI reports.

We reviewed every document in those boxes, pulling out about a hundred of the most violent or serious crimes committed by aliens prior to naturalization and documented by arrest records. I specifically excluded minor immigration crimes, tax offenses, or white-collar crimes such as driving under the influence. I asked the staff to search for drug trafficking and violent crimes such as rape and child abuse. Those are the types of crimes that are most often repeated. A child abuser tends to abuse again, and a rapist tends to rape again.

After a few days — and going through only a few of the 20 or so boxes — we had our basic 100 heinous crimes, including one criminal who was actually in jail at the time he was naturalized.

We asked the FBI if it had arrest records for crimes committed by the same aliens in this country since 1996 and sent them our one hundred profiles.

Less than a week later, the FBI sent the updated arrest records to the Justice Department. (Per an agreement between the FBI and the Justice Department, all materials requested from the Bureau must go through Justice.) But when we inquired about them, the department claimed that it hadn’t yet received the records. An hour later, however, Justice called back to say that the “misplaced” reports had been located.

Of those 100 arrest records updated by the Bureau, some 20 percent showed arrests for serious crimes after the subject was given citizenship. Based on these random results, we asked for updates on every arrest record in our 20 boxes. Our plan was to update every report, using only FBI numbers and with the FBI redacting all identifying information to address the issue of privacy concerns. If, as we anticipated, anywhere near 20 percent came back with subsequent crimes, we would then confront the Justice Department, demand the identity and address of these known criminals, and point out that they had been given citizenship illegally and were still engaged in criminal activity. Unfortunately, before we could go further, the referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr arrived. Had we been given sufficient time to develop evidence and witnesses, the CUSA matter might have been included in the abuse of power impeachment article.

The 1996 arrest records are still available, and I am sure the FBI is still willing to update all of them. In the meantime, thousands of criminals are now citizens of the United States because it was assumed they would vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.”

Clinton immigration abuse, Blatant politicization of INS during 1996 presidential campaign, White House pressured INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program, Grant citizenship to thousands of aliens counted as likely Democratic voters, David Schippers Bill Clinton impeachment investigation

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Hillary Alicia Machado choice consistent with Clintons crime corruption and immigration policies, Clinton administration pushed rapid naturalization and allowing citizenship to criminals, Democrat David Schippers exposed pressure on INS for votes

Hillary Hillary Alicia Machado choice consistent with Clintons crime corruption and immigration policies, Clinton administration pushed rapid naturalization and allowing citizenship to criminals, Democrat David Schippers exposed pressure on INS for votes

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigration.”…Hillary Clinton, WABC 2003

On Hillary Clinton: “evil incarnate.”…David Schippers

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

Hillary Clinton believes that using Alicia Machado to taint Donald Trump in the eyes of women and voters is a good idea. That is because she is so used to acting like and associating with criminals and being involved in shady activities, she doesn’t think a thing of it.

For anyone paying attention this will backfire on her.

From American Action News September 28, 2016.

“Who is Alicia Machado? The Truth”

“Who is Alicia Machado and how did she become a US citizen?

As Hillary made her finals remarks in the first presidential debate, she proudly proclaimed that she stood with Trump bullying victim Alicia Machado. Personally, I find the notion of hurling insults at women (including Rosie O’Donnell) on the basis of their physical appearance distasteful.  When I heard Trump called Machado names like “Little Miss Piggy” I didn’t like it. Even though as a Miss Universe, Machado’s job was to maintain her weight and physical appearance, I will concede calling someone “Little Miss Piggy” or “Miss Housekeeping” is a little much. At the same time, time people within the pageant have claimed she was extremely difficult to deal with.

But that’s neither here nor there. After the debate, many news and media outlets such as NBC, CNN, and Inside Edition  produced “Who’s Alicia Machado?” pieces. In all of these stories, her bio went from winning Miss Universe and being bullied by Trump to becoming a US citizen. It was similar to their coverage of Barack Obama in 2008, where apparently he had nothing occur in his life between being President of the Harvard Law Review and giving a speech at the 2004 DNC. As I watched sympathetic piece after sympathetic piece, in my gut I knew there was something wrong with the name Alicia Machado. No, it was not implicit bias or racial profiling that caused me to feel this. It was an interview with Anderson Cooper.

Amazingly, overnight, Machado’s Wikipedia page was edited, so I had to do a little digging to research many of the things I had heard about her. According to Associated Press reports in January 1998, Machado was accused in court documents of driving her ex-boyfriend Juan Rodriguez Reggeti to shoot his brother-in-law, Francisco Antonio Sbert Mousko, outside the funeral of Mousko’s wife as she was being eulogized. In addition to being the victim’s wife, the dead woman was also Reggeti’s sister.

Machado was ordered to testify in court as her attorney’s claimed she was filming a soap opera. In February of 1998 the Associated Press published a report that a Venezuelan judge claimed Machado threatened to kill him after he indicted her boyfriend for attempted murder. Venezuelan beauty queen Alicia Machado threatened “to ruin my career as a judge and … kill me,” Judge Maximiliano Fuenmayor said on national television. There were also claims that Machado’s boyfriend snatched the shooting victim’s 11-year-old son, his nephew. Machado would avoid prosecution because witnesses could not be produced to testify against her. At the same time, her alibi was never corroborated by witnesses.

We don’t know if Machado is guilty of any crime, but considering all of this, Machado’s recent interview with Anderson Cooper is troubling. In contrast to many of his colleagues, Cooper apparently does his due diligence. During the interview Cooper asked Machado, “There are reports that Trump surrogates tonight have been referencing and pointing to on CNN and elsewhere about an incident in 1998 in Venezuela, where you were accused of driving a getaway car from a murder scene. You were never charged with this,” Cooper said. “The judge in the case also said you threatened to kill him after he indicted your boyfriend for the attempted murder. I just want to give you a chance to address these reports that the Trump surrogates are talking about,” Cooper continued. Machado’s response was, “You know, I have my past. Of course, everybody has a past. I’m not a saint girl. But that is not the point now.” Quite frankly, that is as perplexing as it is honest. The typical response of an innocent person when accused of being an accessory to murder would be to rebut or deny the allegations. Machado did neither; she essentially admitted her involvement in a case she was never even charged in.”

“Hillary utilizing Machado as a political prop does not surprise me. Hillary is a low character individual who is desperate for the presidency. What concerns me about this situation is how someone like Alicia Machado was ever granted US citizenship. Becoming a United States citizen is a privilege; there’s a diverse pool of applicants, ranging from hard working laborers to highly educated scientists. Many are dying for a chance to become a citizen and live out the American Dream, and yet, we grant citizenship to someone with the baggage of Machado? Granting citizenship to a person of Machado’s character devalues what it means to became a naturalized citizen. In the end, Machado is no victim. She’s a reminder of how sick and twisted the Clintons are, and a poster child for why we need immigration reform.”

http://americanactionnews.com/articles/who-is-alicia-machado-the-truth#WHkGHRoPlScYohWl.99&#8243;

From David Schippers book, “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment”.

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.

In our investigation we uncovered a case study evidencing what is pejoratively known in political science circles as “Chicago Politics.”

Back in the early years of the twentieth century, “Hinky Dink” Kenna and “Bathouse” John Coughlin were recognized as the very models of the unsavory Chicago politician. The two once fixed an aldermanic election in Chicago’s First Ward. To do so, they imported thousands of ward heelers, friends, associates, and city workers and had them registered to vote from every building in the ward — from homes (of which there were few) to taverns and cribs (of which there were many). On Election Day the recent arrivals stopped at Hinky Dink’s tavern, picked up fifty cents, ate a free lunch, and went out to vote their consciences. Guess who won that election?

Essentially, the same tactics were used during President Clinton’s reelection in 1996. Only this time the Democrats weren’t handing out sandwiches. Instead, through CUSA, they were circumventing normal procedures for naturalizing aliens — procedures that check backgrounds and weed out criminals — and consequently they were handing out citizenship papers to questionable characters.”

“The White House wanted any applicant for citizenship to be naturalized in time to register for the November election, so the pressure on the INS was constant. On March 21 Elaine Kamarck in the Vice President’s office sent an e-mail to Farbrother saying: “THE PRESIDENT IS SICK OF THIS AND WANTS ACTION. IF NOTHING MOVES TODAY WE’LL HAVE TO TAKE SOME PRETTY DRASTIC MEASURES.” Farbrother responded, “I favor drastic measures.” If he couldn’t get what he wanted from the INS, he wrote, he would “call for heavy artillery.””

“Federal regulations require that, for an alien to obtain citizenship, his application for naturalization (citizenship) must be accompanied by a complete set of the alien’s fingerprints. The fingerprint cards are then sent to the FBI to determine if the applicant has a criminal or arrest record. The law provides that an application may be denied if the alien has a serious criminal record or if he falsely denies ever having been arrested, even if he was never convicted.

In the INS district offices, the alien applicant for naturalization cannot be scheduled for a personal interview until at least 60 days after the application is submitted. This delay is specifically intended to allow sufficient time for an FBI fingerprint check. If the check reveals an arrest record identification, the arrest report is inserted in the alien’s file prior to the interview. An arrest record does not automatically result in a denial of citizenship, but it alerts an examiner to spend additional time questioning the applicant and to request that he furnish further information.

If there is no criminal arrest record in the file prior to the interview, the examiner will assume that none exists. For that reason, the INS has always considered the FBI fingerprint check to be the only practical way of preventing violent felons, dope peddlers, and the like from obtaining citizenship. Any breakdown in the collecting, checking, and reporting of the fingerprints can cause a breakdown of the entire process.

In our investigation we developed sources inside the INS with specific knowledge of the facts who revealed that FBI arrest records that were being sent to the Chicago INS office simply were not being inserted into the aliens’ files. As a result, aliens with criminal records were being granted citizenship.

Our sources also disclosed that, just prior to the 1996 voter registration deadline, a box was discovered in the Chicago INS office containing nearly five thousand FBI arrest reports — reports that had arrived in time but had been ignored.

Later, when the office discovered that those reports had never been processed, the INS initially tried to blame the FBI, claiming that the Bureau had not provided the arrest records within the 60-day window. But the FBI had done its job in a timely manner. Then the INS tried to convince the public that the foul-up really hadn’t harmed the process much. The agency cited statistics showing that the rejection rate of 17 percent was just about what it had always been, so no harm, no foul. But the INS neglected to take into account the thousands of aliens with criminal arrest records who were not rejected, even though they would have been under the normal procedures. If the traditional process had been followed, the rejection rate in the summer of 1996 would have easily exceeded 30 percent and perhaps have been even higher.

The White House, the INS, and the Justice Department publicly denied any political motive in the CUSA program to expedite the citizenship procedure. What the United States got is undeniable:
More than 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied;

An additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable for various technical reasons and were never resubmitted; and

Another 61,000 people who were given citizenship with no fingerprints submitted at all.
Those numbers were developed by the accounting firm of KPMG Peat Marwick as a result of an audit of the 1996 CUSA program.

What we had here was a perfect example of the Clinton-Gore administration’s overarching political philosophy: “The ends justify the means,” coupled with “win at any cost.” It was a philosophy of governance that, as our investigations into other areas proceeded, we would find repeated again and again.

When the results of the KPMG Peat Marwick audit were made public, the INS and Justice vowed to remedy the situation, root out the felons, and revoke erroneously awarded citizenship. Everyone congratulated the administration for acting so quickly — and then promptly forgot about it.”

“We received no cooperation from either the Justice Department or the INS. Instead we received nothing but complaints about not going through the proper channels, investigating old news, being partisan — if not racist — and so on. But we reasoned that if criminals were given citizenship in 1996, at least some of them had probably continued their criminal activity in the two years since. We asked the GAO — an investigative agency that works for Congress and is therefore not subject to White House or Justice Department pressures — to give us FBI arrest records related to the CUSA program. We were given unquestioned cooperation and boxes of FBI reports.

We reviewed every document in those boxes, pulling out about a hundred of the most violent or serious crimes committed by aliens prior to naturalization and documented by arrest records. I specifically excluded minor immigration crimes, tax offenses, or white-collar crimes such as driving under the influence. I asked the staff to search for drug trafficking and violent crimes such as rape and child abuse. Those are the types of crimes that are most often repeated. A child abuser tends to abuse again, and a rapist tends to rape again.

After a few days — and going through only a few of the 20 or so boxes — we had our basic 100 heinous crimes, including one criminal who was actually in jail at the time he was naturalized.

We asked the FBI if it had arrest records for crimes committed by the same aliens in this country since 1996 and sent them our one hundred profiles.

Less than a week later, the FBI sent the updated arrest records to the Justice Department. (Per an agreement between the FBI and the Justice Department, all materials requested from the Bureau must go through Justice.) But when we inquired about them, the department claimed that it hadn’t yet received the records. An hour later, however, Justice called back to say that the “misplaced” reports had been located.

Of those 100 arrest records updated by the Bureau, some 20 percent showed arrests for serious crimes after the subject was given citizenship. Based on these random results, we asked for updates on every arrest record in our 20 boxes. Our plan was to update every report, using only FBI numbers and with the FBI redacting all identifying information to address the issue of privacy concerns. If, as we anticipated, anywhere near 20 percent came back with subsequent crimes, we would then confront the Justice Department, demand the identity and address of these known criminals, and point out that they had been given citizenship illegally and were still engaged in criminal activity. Unfortunately, before we could go further, the referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr arrived. Had we been given sufficient time to develop evidence and witnesses, the CUSA matter might have been included in the abuse of power impeachment article.

The 1996 arrest records are still available, and I am sure the FBI is still willing to update all of them. In the meantime, thousands of criminals are now citizens of the United States because it was assumed they would vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/BookReview-InsideStoryClintonImpeachment

From Reuters November 24, 2010.

“Concerned by North Korea’s artillery attack on a South Korean island, the 1996 beauty queen winner got muddled when tweeting for world peace via her @aliciamachado77 account.

“Tonight I want to ask you to join me in a prayer for peace, that these attacks between the Chinas do not make our situation worse,” she wrote late on Tuesday.

Her gaffe unleashed a rush of insulting posts, prompting her to go offline.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20140107091026/http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/24/oukoe-uk-korea-north-venezuela-idAFTRE6AN67020101124

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

Clinton to blame for 9/11, CIA officials reveal what went wrong, E-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official, CIA never recovered from the “Human Rights Scrub” policy, Reported by NewsMax on September 11, 2001

Clinton to blame for 9/11, CIA officials reveal what went wrong, E-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official, CIA never recovered from the “Human Rights Scrub” policy, Reported by NewsMax on September 11, 2001

“August 1998: covert operations limited to a ‘capture operation,’ not kill
As will be shown, Clinton vacillated over signing a memo that would authorize the killing of bin Laden. He first authorized only a capture, then agreed to allow bin Laden’s killing, only to weaken the language later. CIA officials were under the impression they did not have permission to kill the al-Qaeda leader.”…Washington Post February 16, 2016

“I could have killed’ Osama bin Laden in 1998”…Bill Clinton

“Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton’s CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a “human rights scrub” policy.”
“After that, each asset had to be certified as being ‘clean for human rights violations.’
“What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people.”
Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the “Human Rights Scrub” policy.”…NewsMax September 11, 2001

 

 

Yesterday Citizen Wells proved proof, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Clinton Administration was most responsible for 9/11.

9/11 15th anniversary September 11, 2016, Clinton administration most responsible, Citizen Wells proof, Bill Clinton multiple opportunities to capture Bin Ladin, INS weakened by Clinton political agenda, Government and country immersed in scandals and prosecutions

 

Reported by NewsMax on September 11, 2001.

 

“Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us – that is, our national security agencies.

Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.

Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as “Harry”:

Here’s what Harry said:

“… Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!”

He continued: “There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we’ve heard over the past eight years or so are hollow.”

Of course, it’s obvious why the media doesn’t want any finger pointing.

Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years?

The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.

During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so.

I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton’s personal corruption was wholesale and mirrored how he was corrupting America’s national security.

I wrote articles and said repeatedly that America, sadly, may end up paying a heavy price for Bill Clinton and the major media’s complicity.

I don’t believe the worst has passed with the incidents of today.

We remain vulnerable and weak.

Brutally, we witnessed our weakness today.

During eight years, Clinton decimated America’s military. Our forces were cut almost in half under his stewardship.

Research and development on all new weapons systems were brought almost to a halt as other nations continued to build. Clinton destroyed nearly our entire arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. Monsters like Saddam flourished as Clinton bombed aspirin factories, tent cities in Afghanistan and worthless radar stations in the Iraqi desert.

These are open facts, easily verifiable.

But Clinton, the ever clever bastard, was more insidious. Little, systematic changes were undertaken to destroy America’s intelligence agencies.

Let me explain. A regular NewsMax reader, “Roger,” was a CIA spy in the Mideast.

I met him almost two years ago. Roger wanted to tell me why a gung-ho American quit the CIA in disgust.

Roger said the CIA was not interested in recruiting spies.

Clinton and company knew they could not just tell the CIA to stop recruiting spies. That would look stupid and embarrassing.

So they just changed the rules of how spies are recruited, raising the bar on requirements to such a high degree that the most valuable spies could never meet CIA standards and couldn’t work for us.

Previously, I wrote how Clinton effectively stopped the recruitment of Chinese nationals by demanding that only high-ranking embassy officials could be recruited – knowing this is almost impossible. Roger told me that. Roger reminded me again of this today.

He noted that Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton’s CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a “human rights scrub” policy.

Here’s how Roger described it in an e-mail Tuesday evening: “Deutch and Nora, Clinton’s anti-intelligence plants, implemented a universal ‘human rights scrub’ of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for 6 months to a year. This was after something happened in Central America (there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there) that got a lot of bad press for the agency.

“After that, each asset had to be certified as being ‘clean for human rights violations.’

“What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people.”

Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the “Human Rights Scrub” policy.

Perhaps that was the intention.

But we, the American people, Congress, and honest media need to examine all of these issues, now and quickly. If we don’t, we risk even more grave dangers than those that we just lived through.”

Read more:

http://www.newsmax.com/Pre-2008/CIA-Officials-Reveal-What/2001/09/11/id/663541/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

9/11 15th anniversary September 11, 2016, Clinton administration most responsible, Citizen Wells proof, Bill Clinton multiple opportunities to capture Bin Ladin, INS weakened by Clinton political agenda, Government and country immersed in scandals and prosecutions

9/11 15th anniversary September 11, 2016, Clinton administration most responsible, Citizen Wells proof, Bill Clinton multiple opportunities to capture Bin Ladin, INS weakened by Clinton political agenda, Government and country immersed in scandals and prosecutions

“As I stated earlier, this is not about sex or private conduct, it is about multiple obstructions of justice, perjury, false and misleading statements, witness tamperings and abuses of power, all committed or orchestrated by the President of the United States.”…David Schippers report to House Judiciary Committee

“August 1998: covert operations limited to a ‘capture operation,’ not kill
As will be shown, Clinton vacillated over signing a memo that would authorize the killing of bin Laden. He first authorized only a capture, then agreed to allow bin Laden’s killing, only to weaken the language later. CIA officials were under the impression they did not have permission to kill the al-Qaeda leader.”…Washington Post February 16, 2016

“I could have killed’ Osama bin Laden in 1998”…Bill Clinton

 

 

After reading the below, if you do not believe that the Clinton Administration is the most responsible for 9/11, you are some combination of the following:

1. Dim witted.
2. Hard core end justifies the means liberal.
3. Anti American.

Part 1

Clinton had multiple opportunities to capture Bin Ladin.

From NewsMax November 1, 2001 via Citizen News.

“CIA Sources: Clinton Administration ‘Didn’t Want’ Bin Laden Arrested”

“A U.S. intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity, this week called the Clinton administration’s decision to pass up a chance to arrest Osama bin Laden in 1996 a “disgrace,” saying “somebody didn’t want this to happen.”

A second intelligence official, also speaking anonymously, corroborated the charge that there was a deliberate effort to let bin Laden escape from the Sudan to Afghanistan, saying “somebody let this slip up.”

The intelligence officials, both of whom were involved in secret negotiations between Washington and Khartoum to take bin Laden into custody, offered the damning accounts to New York’s Village Voice.

The Voice’s first source said the chance to arrest bin Laden should have been a no-brainer, despite FBI claims that it lacked the evidence to convict him in an American court. “We kidnap minor drug czars and bring them back in burlap bags,” he told the paper.

The State Department may have blocked the wily terrorist’s arrest to placate a part of the Saudi Arabian government that supported him, he speculated.

The second official lamented that the U.S. lost a treasure trove of intelligence on the elusive al-Qaeda chief when it let him slip away. “It was not a matter of arresting bin Laden but of access to information,” he told the Voice.

“We could have dismantled his operations and put a cage on top … That’s the story, and that’s what could have prevented September 11. I knew it would come back to haunt us.”

Sudan’s former defense minister, major general Elfatih Erwa, agreed, telling the paper that he tried to warn the Clinton administration that letting bin Laden escape from the Sudan to Afghanistan was a major blunder.

“We knew that if he went to Afghanistan no one could control him (but) the U.S. didn’t care,” Erwa said. “They forgot about human intelligence after the Cold War. The feeling of supremacy led them astray. Many think that. Now they’re harvesting the thorns.”

http://citizenwells.net/2015/06/17/cia-sources-clinton-administration-didnt-want-bin-laden-arrested-newsmax-november-1-2001-two-us-intelligence-officials-deliberate-effort-to-let-bin-laden-escape-from-the-sudan-to-afghanistan/

From the LA Times August 1, 2014.

“Bill Clinton: ‘I could have killed’ Osama bin Laden in 1998”

“A day before Sept. 11, 2001, former President Bill Clinton told an audience that he could have had Osama bin Laden killed, but chose not to, because an attack could have endangered innocent women and children in Afghanistan.”

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bill-clinton-osama-bin-laden-20140801-story.html

Citizen Wells comments:

  1. What was Bill Clinton and his staff busy doing in 1998? If you don’t know the answer you had better start reading this site.
  2. This sounds like damage control because Clinton had many opportunities. See below.

From the Washington Post February 16, 2016.

“Bill Clinton and the missed opportunities to kill Osama bin Laden”

“1. May 1998: Tarnak Farms raid plan rejected

The CIA planned hard on an effort to capture bin Laden and to bring him to the United States for a trial. But at the last minute the CIA senior management lost its nerve and apparently never brought the plan to Clinton for a decision.”

“2. August, 1998: A campaign for continued air strikes is shelved after al-Qaeda attacks two U.S. embassies in Africa

After the embassy attacks, Clinton ordered air strikes against al-Qaeda targets, which were deemed ineffectual. Officials discussed but do not reach agreement on a campaign of follow-on air strikes.”

“3. August 1998: covert operations limited to a ‘capture operation,’ not kill

As will be shown, Clinton vacillated over signing a memo that would authorize the killing of bin Laden. He first authorized only a capture, then agreed to allow bin Laden’s killing, only to weaken the language later. CIA officials were under the impression they did not have permission to kill the al-Qaeda leader.”

“4. December 1998: Missile strike against Kandahar is rejected; memo to ‘kill’ bin Laden misunderstood

Officials had intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, but decided not to allow a missile strike because of fears of civilian casualties. Later intelligence indicates bin Laden had already left that location.”

“5. Early 1999: Decision not to deploy the AC-130 gunship option

From the 9/11 Commission report:

After the decision — in which fear of collateral damage was an important factor — not to use cruise missiles against Kandahar in December 1998, Shelton and officers in the Pentagon developed plans for using an AC-130 gunship instead of cruise missile strikes. Designed specifically for the special forces, the version of the AC-130 known as “Spooky” can fly in fast or from high altitude, undetected by radar; guided to its zone by extraordinarily complex electronics, it is capable of rapidly firing precision-guided 25, 40, and 105 mm projectiles. Because this system could target more precisely than a salvo of cruise missiles, it had a much lower risk of causing collateral damage. After giving [White House official Richard] Clarke a briefing and being encouraged to proceed, Shelton formally directed Zinni and General Peter Schoomaker, who headed the Special Operations Command, to develop plans for an AC-130 mission against Bin Laden’s headquarters and infrastructure in Afghanistan. The Joint Staff prepared a decision paper for deployment of the Special Operations aircraft.”

“Though Berger and Clarke continued to indicate interest in this option, the AC-130s were never deployed.”

“6. February-March 1999: A decision not to strike bin Laden’s desert camp

Another potential target — bin Laden’s desert camp — slips by because of diplomatic considerations.

From the 9/11 Commission report:”

“No strike was launched. By February 12 Bin Laden had apparently moved on, and the immediate strike plans became moot. According to CIA and Defense officials, policymakers were concerned about the danger that a strike would kill an Emirati prince or other senior officials who might be with Bin Laden or close by. … The lead CIA official in the field, Gary Schroen, felt that the intelligence reporting in this case was very reliable; the Bin Laden unit chief, “Mike,” agreed. Schroen believes today that this was a lost opportunity to kill Bin Laden before 9/11.”

“7. February 1999: The decision to again amend the covert action authorization, canceling the ‘kill’ authorization of December and reinstating the ‘capture’ language

From the 9/11 Commission report:

In February 1999, another draft Memorandum of Notification went to President Clinton. It asked him to allow the CIA to give exactly the same guidance to the Northern Alliance as had just been given to the tribals: they could kill Bin Laden if a successful capture operation was not feasible. On this occasion, however, President Clinton crossed out key language he had approved in December and inserted more ambiguous language. No one we interviewed could shed light on why the President did this. President Clinton told the Commission that he had no recollection of why he rewrote the language.

Later in 1999, when legal authority was needed for enlisting still other collaborators and for covering a wider set of contingencies, the lawyers returned to the language used in August 1998, which authorized force only in the context of a capture operation. Given the closely held character of the document approved in December 1998, and the subsequent return to the earlier language, it is possible to understand how the former White House officials and the CIA officials might disagree as to whether the CIA was ever authorized by the President to kill Bin Laden.”

“8. May 1999: The decision not to do the missile strike on Kandahar

Another opportunity presents itself, and top officials again do not pull the trigger, to the intense frustration of lower-level officials.

It was in Kandahar that perhaps the last, and most likely the best, opportunity arose for targeting Bin Laden with cruise missiles before 9/11. In May 1999, CIA assets in Afghanistan reported on Bin Laden’s location in and around Kandahar over the course of five days and nights. The reporting was very detailed and came from several sources.

If this intelligence was not “actionable,” working-level officials said at the time and today, it was hard for them to imagine how any intelligence on Bin Laden in Afghanistan would meet the standard. Communications were good, and the cruise missiles were ready. “This was in our strike zone,” a senior military officer said. “It was a fat pitch, a home run.” He expected the missiles to fly. When the decision came back that they should stand down, not shoot, the officer said, “we all just slumped.” He told us he knew of no one at the Pentagon or the CIA who thought it was a bad gamble. Bin Laden “should have been a dead man” that night, he said.”

“9. November-December 2000: The decision not to strike against bin Laden after the al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole

As the nation is gripped by the post-election struggle between Bush and Al Gore, Clinton administration officials hesitate about retaliating against bin Laden for the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen. Bin Laden was fully prepared for retaliation, but it never came. Eventually, a response gets lost in the transition from the Clinton to Bush administration.”

“[No attack was launched and one angry official] rhetorically asked of Defense officials: “Does al-Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon to get their attention?””

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/16/bill-clinton-and-the-missed-opportunities-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/

Part 2

INS effectiveness weakened due to political agenda demands of Clinton Administration.

 

David Schippers was the majority chief investigative counsel for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. He was also a lifetime Democrat and voted for Clinton twice.

From Schippers and his book “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment.”

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.”

“Farbrother and the NPR won the assignment of getting the INS to process more than a million applicants by the end of the summer. As early as March 1996, GAO documents reveal, he was reporting his efforts, recommendations, and results to Vice President Gore. Farbrother reported how he had told the INS and the Justice Department to waive “stupid rules,” and he told Gore that unless reforms were implemented, the backlog wouldn’t be “processed in time.”

As Farbrother noted in a March 22 e-mail to Gore, he had told INS Deputy Commissioner Chris Sale and Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick “to delegate broad authority to the managers in” New York, Chicago, Miami, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. But the INS and the Justice Department were not immediately complying with his demands, he said. Keeping the pressure on, Farbrother sent Sale a fax reiterating how important this delegation was in order “to get the results the Vice President wants.” In the fax he also commented, “I need you or Doris [Meissner] to sign something like the attached,” referring to a memo giving those INS district directors “full authority to waive, suspend, or deviate from DOJ and INS nonstatutory policies, regulations, and procedures provided you operate within the confines of the law.”

The White House wanted any applicant for citizenship to be naturalized in time to register for the November election, so the pressure on the INS was constant. On March 21 Elaine Kamarck in the Vice President’s office sent an e-mail to Farbrother saying: “THE PRESIDENT IS SICK OF THIS AND WANTS ACTION. IF NOTHING MOVES TODAY WE’LL HAVE TO TAKE SOME PRETTY DRASTIC MEASURES.” Farbrother responded, “I favor drastic measures.” If he couldn’t get what he wanted from the INS, he wrote, he would “call for heavy artillery.””

Read more:

http://cis.org/BookReview-InsideStoryClintonImpeachment

Clearly the priority of the INS,  Immigration and Naturalization Service, was to naturalize as many immigrants as possible befoer the next election.

Next we will examine the immigration status of the 9/11 hijackers.

From FAIR, Federation for American Immigration Reform.

“Identity and Immigration Status of 9/11 Terrorists

“According to authorities, all of the hijackers who committed the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were foreigners. All of them entered the country legally on a temporary visa, mostly tourist visas with entry permits for six months. Although four of them attended flight school in the United States, only one is known to have entered on an appropriate visa for such study, and one entered on an F-1 student visa. Besides the four pilots, all but one of the terrorists entered the United States only once and had been in the country for only three to five months before the attacks.

The four pilots had been in the United States for extended periods, although none was a legal permanent resident. Some had received more than one temporary visa, most of which were currently valid on September 11, but at least three of them had fallen out of status and were, therefore, in the United States illegally.”

The Pentagon Plane (AA Flight 77, Dulles to Los Angeles)

  1. Hani Hasan Hanjour (26) — Saudi Arabian — pilot
    • First came to U.S. in Oct. 1991 to study English in Tucson, Arizona.
    • Had been in U.S. in April 1996, when he lived in Oakland, Cal. where he studied English, and later received flight training in Scottsdale, Arizona. He left in Nov. 1996 and returned again in Nov. 1997 while he obtained a FAA commercial pilot certificate. He left again in April 1999.
    • Obtained student visa (F-1) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in Sept. 2000 after an initial refusal. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, Hanjour failed to reveal in his visa application that he had previously traveled to the United States.
    • Returned Dec. 2000 to study English at Holy Names College (Oakland CA) but never showed up at the school. In illegal status because he did not enroll, and his entry permit had expired at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in San Diego, Phoenix and Mesa, Ariz. (with Nawaf al-Hamzi), and later in Northern Virginia.
    • Had a Virginia driver’s license.
  2. Khalid al-Mihdhar (or Almidhar) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained U.S. tourist visa in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in April 1999.
    • In Malaysia in Jan. 2000. Followed by Malaysian agents tipped off by CIA (see Wash. Post 2/3/02).
    • Arrived at Los Angeles Jan. 15, 2000 with Nawaf al-Hamzi on B-2 tourist visa from Malaysia.
    • Lived in San Diego, where he took flight training in May 2000 with Nawaf al-Hamzi.
    • Left U.S. in June 2000 and obtained new B-1 visa in Saudi Arabia. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, his application falsely indicated he had not previously traveled to the United States and contained “suspicious indicators.” It also revealed that he had more than one passport.
    • Returned July 4, 2001, lived in New York.
    • Put on the Watch List for terrorists in August 2001 after entering U.S. last time.
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Had a Virginia driver’s license.
  3. Nawaf al-Hamzi (or Alhamzi) — Saudi Arabian (brother of Salem)
    • Obtained U.S. tourist visa in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in April 1999. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, his application contained “suspicious indicators.”
    • In Malaysia in Jan. 2000. Followed by Malaysian agents tipped off by CIA (see Wash. Post 2/3/02).
    • Arrived at Los Angeles Jan. 15, 2000 with al-Midhar from Malaysia.
    • Lived in San Diego, where he took flight training in May 2000 with al-Midhar, in Dec. 2000 moved to Mesa Arizona (with Hani Hanjour), and later to Fort Lee, N.J., Wayne, N.J. and Northern Virginia.
    • Applied to INS July 12, 2000 for extension of permitted stay in U.S. (apparently granted for additional six months).
    • Put on the Watch List for terrorists in August 2001. (with al-Mihdhar)
    • Had been in illegal visa overstay status for nine months at the time of the attack.
    • Had California, Florida and Virgina driver’s licenses.
  4. Salem al-Hamzi (or Alhamzi)- Saudi Arabian (brother of Nawaf)
    • Obtained U.S. tourist visa in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in April 1999.
    • Arrived U.S. June 2001.
    • Lived in Fort Lee, N.J., Wayne, N.J.
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Had a Virginia driver’s license.
  5. Majed Moqed — Saudi Arabian
    • Identity in doubt.
    • Entered on tourist visa obtained in Saudi Arabia after May 2001.
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Had a Virginia driver’s license.

The WTC North Tower Plane (AA Flight 11, Boston to Los Angeles)

  1. Mohamed Atta — Egyptian (43) — pilot
    • Born in Egypt in 1968.
    • Graduated from Cairo Univ. with degree in Architectural Engineering in 1990.
    • Obtained visitor visa in Berlin Germany, May 2000.
    • Entered U.S. at Newark on June 3, 2000 on tourist visa and given entry permit until December 2, 2000.
    • Applied in Sept. 2000 to INS for change in status to trainee.
    • Attended Huffman Aviation school in Venice Florida with al-Shehhi.
    • Arrested in Florida for driving without license, and failed to show up for court date — bench warrant issued.
    • Subsequently obtained Florida driver’s license.
    • Obtained FAA pilot’s certificate.
    • According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, had overstayed his entry permit as of Dec. 4, 2000.
    • Flew to Madrid Jan. 2001.
    • United Arab Emirate (UAE) authorities state Atta detained in January 2001 on basis of his name appearing on terrorist alert list, but was not held in absence of U.S. charges. UAE states that U.S. authorities were warned Atta intended to return to U.S.
    • Returned to U.S. on January 10, 2001 at Miami and was sent to secondary inspection because he acknowledged being in flight training but did not have required trainee visa. Interagency Border Information System (IBIS) database checked. Admitted by INS based on pending application for change to trainee status.
    • Moved to Georgia in Jan. 2001 for additional flight training with al-Shehhi.
    • Left U.S. and returned from Madrid on July 19, 2001 and given permission to stay until November 2, 2001.
    • Also lived in Hollywood and Coral Springs, Fla.
    • Received change of status approval by INS in September a year after the attacks.
  2. Satam al-Suqami (25) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained business visa in Saudi Arabia (but was residing in United Arab Emirates).
    • Entered U.S. in May 2001. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, asked for and was admitted for 20 days and was in overstay status at the time of the attacks. The Commission staff also said his passport was doctored (presumably with pages removed to hide his travel to countries where he obtained terrorist training).
    • Was the only terrorist who did not have a U.S. ID to board the plane and used his passport.
    • Was in overstay status at the time of the attack.
  3. Waleed al-Shehri (or Alshehri) (21) — Saudi Arabian (brother of Wail)
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Entered U.S. in May 2000.
    • Licensed pilot.
    • Lived in Hollywood, Orlando and Daytona Beach (all in Florida).
    • In illegal nonimmigrant status (visa overstay) at time of the attack.
    • Had a Florida driver’s license.
  4. Wail (or Wael) al-Shehri (or Alshehri) (25) — Saudi Arabian (brother of Waleed)
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Lived in Hollywood, Fla. and Newton, Mass.
    • Had a Florida ID card.
  5. Abdulaziz al-Omari (or Alomari) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia in June 2001.
    • According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, his passport was doctored (presumably with pages removed to hide his travel to countries where he obtained terrorist training).
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in Hollywood, Fla.
    • Had a Florida and Virginia driver’s licenses.

The WTC South Tower Plane (UA Flight 175, Boston to Los Angeles)

  1. Marwan al-Shehhi (or Alshehhi) — United Arab Emirates — pilot
    • Studied electrical engineering at Tech. Univ. in Hamburg.
    • In January 2000, obtained 10-year, multiple entry tourist visa in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
    • Entered the U.S. in May 2000, applied September for change of status to student.
    • Attended flight school in Florida, obtained FAA pilot’s certificate.
    • Took at least 3 trips out of U.S. and back. (Overstayed entry permit as of Nov. 2000, left U.S. in Dec. 2000, returned Jan. 2001.)
    • Attended flight school in Georgia with Atta in Jan. 2001. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, was sent to secondary inspection, but was admitted.)
    • Flew to Egypt April 8, 2001, returned from Morocco May 2, 2001.
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in New York City area, Georgia and moved to Hollywood, Fla. in July with Atta and trained at Huffman Aviation in Venice.
    • Had a Florida driver’s license.
  2. Fayez Ahmed Rashid Ahmed al-Qadi Banihammad (aka Fayez Ahmed) — United Arab Emirates
    • Obtained tourist visa in United Arab Emirates.
    • Entered U.S. in June.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
  3. Ahmed al-Ghamdi (or Alghamdi) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Entered U.S. in May.
    • In illegal visa overstay status at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • Had a Florida ID card.
    • Had a Virginia driver’s license.
  4. Hamza Saleh al-Ghamdi (or Alghamdi) (20) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • Had a Florida driver’s license.
  5. Mohand al-Shehri (or Alshehri) — Saudi Arabian
    • Identity in doubt.
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Admitted to U.S. in May.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.

The Pennsylvania Plane (UA Flight 93, Newark to San Francisco)

  1. Ziad Samir Jarrah — Lebanese — pilot
    • Born in Lebanon in 1975.
    • Studied aircraft construction and maintenance at Hamburg tech. univ. 1996-00.
    • Obtained five-year, multiple-entry tourist visa in Germany.
    • Entered U.S. in June 27, 2000 at Atlanta.
    • Trained as a pilot in Venice, Florida and Virginia Gardens, Florida but never obtained student trainee visa.  Received FAA pilot’s certificate.
    • Took at least 5 trips out of U.S. and back (flew to Germany July 25 and returned August 5, 2001).
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Had a Florida driver’s license.
  2. Saeed al-Ghamdi (or Alghamdi) — Saudi Arabian
    • Identity in doubt.
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, application falsely stated he had not previously applied for a U.S. visa.
    • Entered U.S. in June 2001. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, he was sent to secondary inspection, because he had a one-way ticket and $500, but was admitted.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • Had a Florida ID card.
  3. Ahmed Ibrahim A. al-Haznawi (or Alhaznawi) (21) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Entered the U.S. in June 2001. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, his passport may have had “suspicious indicators.”
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • Had a Florida driver’s license.
  4. Ahmed Abdullah al-Nami (or Alnami) (23) — Saudi Arabian
    • Obtained tourist visa in Saudi Arabia.
    • Entered the U.S. in May 2001. According to the 2/04 Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, his passport may have had “suspicious indicators.”
    • In legal nonimmigrant status at the time of the attack.
    • Lived in Delray Beach, Fla.
    • Had a Florida ID card.

Other Conspiritors:

  • Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (Coordinator) — Indicted in 1996 in N. Y. for his role in an earlier terrorist plot. Had a Saudi Arabian passport (although not a Saudi national) — obtained a U.S. visa in July 2001.
  • Ramzi Bin-al-shibh — Yemeni (potential pilot) — denied visa four times.
  • Zakariya Essabar — Moroccan — potential pilot/hijacker — denied visa.
  • Saeed “Jihad” al Gamdi — Potential hijacker — denied visa.
  • Ali Abdul Aziz Ali — Pakistani — financial facilitator — denied visa.
  • Mohamed al Kahtani — potential hijacker — denied visa.

http://www.fairus.org/issue/identity-and-immigration-status-of-9-11-terrorists

Part 3

Bill Clinton, his staff and other government resources were distracted by his sexual escapades, coverups and legal wrangling.

From just July 1998, before the Impeachment.

“July 1998

July 1, 1998: Linda Tripp makes her second appearance before the grand jury, during which the Lewinsky tapes may have been played.

July 7, 1998: Linda Tripp returns for her third day of testimony before the grand jury, as the Maryland state’s attorney opens investigations into Tripp’s taping of her conversations with Monica Lewinsky. The investigation is aimed at deciding whether Tripp had broken Maryland state laws that require both parties in a conversation to consent to be taped.

July 7, 1998: The U.S. Court of Appeals rules that Secret Service agents must testify before the grand jury, upholding Judge Norma Holloway Johnson’s earlier decision.

July 9, 1998: Monica Lewinsky announces she is prepared to cooperate in the Maryland investigation into the legality of Linda Tripp’s tapes of phone conversations as Tripp appears before the grand jury for the fourth time.

July 14, 1998: Ken Starr subpoenas Larry Cockell, head of the president’s security detail. The Justice Department, backed by the Secret Service, requests a full panel appeal of the Secret Service testimony decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals.

July 17, 1998: Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist denies an extension of the temporary stay on Secret Service testimony. The subpoenaed Secret Service agents appeared before the grand jury, although only three of them testify. Larry Cockell, who is not one of the agents to testify, spends the afternoon waiting.

July 21, 1998: The U.S. Court of Appeals holds a hearing on alleged leaks of grand jury information to the media by Ken Starr’s office. The hearings center on Judge Norma Holloway Johnson’s secret sanctions against Starr and his subsequent appeal. The sanctions would require Starr to turn over documents and other evidence related to the alleged leaks.

July 25, 1998: Word emerges that Independent Counsel Ken Starr has served President Clinton with a subpoena that calls for his testimony before the Lewinsky grand jury next week. Negotiations are underway on the scope, timing and format of Clinton’s testimony.

July 27, 1998: The U.S. Court of Appeals rules that attorney-client privilege does not protect presidential confidant Bruce Lindsey from answering all questions put to him before the Lewinsky grand jury.

July 28, 1998: In a dramatic breakthrough, lawyers for Lewinsky and Starr work out a full immunity agreement covering both Lewinsky and her parents, Marcia Lewis and Dr. Bernard Lewinsky.

July 29, 1998: President Bill Clinton agrees to testify voluntarily and Starr’s office withdraws the subpoena. Clinton’s testimony is set for August 17 at the White House.

July 30, 1998: Sources say that as part of her immunity agreement, Lewinsky has handed over to prosecutors a dark blue dress that she alleges may contain physical evidence of a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. The dress is turned over to the FBI lab for testing.”

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/johnson/clintontimeline.htm

Once again, this was only one month.

The tip of the iceberg.

Bill Clinton, his staff and the government was consumed by this!

They were distracted from their duties.

The nation and the world suffered for Bill Clinton’s self absorption.

This is not an opinion.

It is fact!

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

Hillary Clinton 2003 – 2004 Immigration, I am adamantly against illegal immigrants, Acting conservative to run for president?, Or damage control for Clinton Administration policies?, Senator Clinton statement on act passage December 8 then Rosemary Jenks House testimony scrubbed December 9, Citizen Wells exclusive

Hillary Clinton 2003 – 2004 Immigration, I am adamantly against illegal immigrants, Acting conservative to run for president?, Or damage control for Clinton Administration policies?, Senator Clinton statement on act passage December 8 then Rosemary Jenks House testimony scrubbed December 9, Citizen Wells exclusive

“I think the most compelling thing about Hillary is that she will stop at nothing to achieve her end and that she views the public as plebeians easily seduced into believing her point of view.”…Linda Tripp

“The only question that remains today is whether or not Hillary Clinton gets away with another cover-up, like she did in the Vince Foster case, and runs for President in 2016, or will she finally be held accountable, and Americans learn the truth about the Benghazi terrorist attack?”…Canada Free Press December 18, 2012

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

 

When I discovered the damning testimony of Rosemary Jenks was scrubbed from the House Judiciary website on December 9, 2004, I smelled a rat.

A big Clinton rat.

After poking around on the internet for a while I finally found it.

One day apart.

The “Rosetta Stone” of investigative journalism.

In a WABC interview in 2003 Hillary Clinton was quoted as saying:

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.”

“Clearly, we have to make some tough decisions as a country, and one of them ought to be coming up with a much better entry-and-exit system so that if we’re going to let people in for the work that otherwise would not be done, let’s have a system that keeps track of them,”

“People have to stop employing illegal immigrants,”
“I mean, come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand on the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx. You’re going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work.”

The Washington Times reports December 13, 2004.

“Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush, a strategy that supporters and detractors alike see as a way for the New York Democrat to shake the “liberal” label and appeal to traditionally Republican states.

Mrs. Clinton — who is tagged as a liberal because of her plan for nationalized health care and various remarks during her husband’s presidency — is taking an increasingly vocal and hard-line stance on an issue that ranks among the highest concerns for voters, particularly Republicans.”

“In an interview last month on Fox News, Mrs. Clinton said she does not “think that we have protected our borders or our ports or provided our first responders with the resources they need, so we can do more and we can do better.””

““I think she’s realizing how much this issue has grown since 9/11,” he said. “If you talked about it before then, you were just a flat-out racist. Now it’s this huge issue.”

Moving to the right of even some Republicans, the former first lady told WABC she favors “at least a visa ID, some kind of entry-and-exit ID. And … perhaps, although I’m not a big fan of it, we might have to move towards an ID system even for citizens.”

Jennifer Duffy with the Cook Political Report said a conservative stance on immigration would be wise in the event Mrs. Clinton runs for president in 2008.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/dec/13/20041213-124920-6151r/

On December 8, 2004 Senator Hillary Clinton placed the following on her official website:

“Senator Clinton on the Passage of The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004

Today is an historic day. We are coming to the end of a process that began immediately after the September 11 attacks and is ending with an historic reorganization of the intelligence community. Today’s vote, coming after months of testimony before the 9/11 commission, weeks of hearings on Capitol Hill and tough negotiations in Congress, represents a signal accomplishment in reforming our government to protect our homeland and fighting the War on Terror.

Today’s accomplishment, The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, would not have been possible without the courage, dedication and hard work of the families of the victims of September 11th. It was the persistence and resilience of these brave family members who lost their loved ones on September 11th that led to the creation of the 9/11 Commission. And it was their continued resolve that helped to keep the heat on Congress to insure that those recommendations were put into law. While not every recommendation of the 9/11 Commission is included in this bill, the bill makes historic changes in the way our government will collect and analyze intelligence so that we hopefully never again have to live through a day like September 11th.

In the aftermath of September 11th, and as the 9/11 Commission report so aptly demonstrates, it is clear that our intelligence system isn’t working the way that it should. The Commission report, following on the work of prior commissions that have studied the issue, details how we have 15 different intelligence agencies who are not sharing information, not communicating with one another and missing important linkages. This legislation, through the creation of a Director of National Intelligence (DNI), breaks down the artificial barriers in the intelligence community and insures that there is a high level official, answerable to the President, who is working to insure that our intelligence agencies are sharing information and communicating with one another.

This legislation gives the DNI budget authority over the intelligence community which will allow him or her to exercise proper control over the coordination among agencies. In Washington, budget authority means real authority and strengthening the DNI is a major accomplishment of this bill. He or she will also be responsible for budget execution and have the authority to reprogram funds and transfer personnel. These powers will allow the DNI to establish objectives and priorities for the intelligence community and manage and direct tasking of collection, analysis, production, and dissemination of national intelligence.

This legislation also establishes a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, as the 9/11 Commission recommended. The creation of this Board is intended to ensure that at the same time we enhance our nation’s intelligence and homeland defense capabilities, we also remain vigilant in protecting the civil liberties of Americans. Our civil liberties define us as Americans. As the 9/11 Commission said, “Our history has shown us that insecurity threatens liberty. Yet, if our liberties are curtailed, we lose the values that we are struggling to defend.” The conference report being considered today essentially charges the Board with primary executive branch responsibility for ensuring that privacy and civil liberty concerns will be appropriately considered in the implementation of provisions designed to protect us against terrorism. While the legislation that initially passed the Senate explicitly provided the Board with subpoena powers, the conference report that we are voting on today does not. That omission is unfortunate, and I will work with my colleagues in Congress to address this issue and provide such powers in the future, so that the Board will have the tools it will need to help us maintain the proper balance between our nation’s security and our liberties.

The legislation calls for dramatic improvements in the security of our nation’s transportation infrastructure, including aviation security, air cargo security, and port security. Through this legislation, the security of the Northern Border will also be improved, a goal I have worked toward since 2001. Among many key provisions, the legislation calls for an increase of at least 10,000 border patrol agents from Fiscal Years 2006 through 2010, many of whom will be dedicated specifically to our Northern Border. There will also be an increase of at least 4,000 full-time immigration and customs enforcement officers in the next 5 years.

While I look forward to a productive debate on immigration issues in the next Congress, I am pleased that there are a number of key immigration reform provisions in this legislation, including those addressing the process of obtaining U.S. visas.

I am also pleased that the legislation addresses the root causes of terrorism in a proactive manner. This is an issue that I have spent a good deal of time on in the past year because I believe so strongly that we are all more secure when children and adults around the world are taught math and science instead of hate. The bill we are voting on today includes authorization for an International Youth Opportunity Fund, which will provide resources to build schools in Muslim countries. The legislation also acknowledges that the U.S. has a vested interest in committing to a long-term, sustainable investment in education around the globe. Some of this language is modeled on legislation that I introduced in September, The Education for All Act of 2004, and I believe it takes us a small step towards eliminating madrassas and replacing them with schools that provide a real education to all children.

But we are being shortsighted if we limit our educational investments to countries with predominantly Muslim populations, and if we focus solely on expanding the number of U.S.-run schools in these areas, as the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act does. Instead, the U.S. should work with the global community to create strong incentives for developing countries to build universal, public education systems of their own. Only then will our investments have the maximum impact because only then will they result in systemic change.

We do not know where the next Afghanistan will spring up. But we do know that extremism will flourish where educational systems fail.

The 9/11 Commission, and the commissions before it, including the Homeland Security Independent Task Force of the Council on Foreign Relations, chaired by former Senators Warren Rudman and Gary Hart (“Hart-Rudman Commission”) and The Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, chaired by former Governor James Gilmore III (“Gilmore Commission”), called for dramatic improvements in the sharing of intelligence information. In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, I worked with a number of my colleagues in the Senate on a bi-partisan basis in focusing on the need for greater sharing of terrorist-related information between and among federal, state, and local government agencies. The sharing of critical intelligence information is vitally important if we are to win the war against terrorism. We need to ensure that our front line solders in the war against terrorism here at home — our local communities and our first responders — are as informed as possible about any possible threat so that they can do the best job possible to protect all Americans. I am pleased that this legislation mandates major improvements in this regard.

Contained in Title VII of the Act are provisions from the “9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004,” legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Lieberman and for which I am proud to have been an original cosponsor. Among its provisions are those that address homeland security preparedness, including a call for a unified incident command system and significantly enhancing interoperable communications between and among first responders and all levels of government. Title VII also speaks to the need for allocation of additional spectrum for first responder needs and to assess strategies that may be used to meet public safety telecommunication needs, an issue that I have focused on intensely as co-chair of the E-911 Caucus.

I am extremely disappointed, however, that this legislation does not specifically mandate an improvement in how the federal government allocates critical homeland security funds to states and local communities around the country. As many of my colleagues know, I have repeatedly called upon the Administration and my colleagues to implement threat-based homeland security funding to ensure that the homeland security resources go to the states and areas where they are needed most. I have introduced legislation in this regard and even developed a specific homeland security formula for Administration officials to consider.

But threat-based funding is not only important to me and to the New Yorkers whom I represent; it was also a primary recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. Specifically, in its report, the Commission stated: “We understand the contention that every state and city needs to have some minimum infrastructure for emergency response. But federal homeland security assistance should not remain a program for general revenue sharing. It should supplement state and local resources based on the risks or vulnerability that merit additional support. Congress should not use this money as a pork barrel.”

The 9/11 Commission also recommended that an advisory committee be established to advise the Secretary on any additional factors the Secretary should consider, such as benchmarks for evaluating community homeland security needs. As to these benchmarks, the Commission stated that “the benchmarks will be imperfect and subjective, they will continually evolve. But hard choices must be made. Those who would allocate money on a different basis should then defend their view of the national interest.” In short, the Commission made unequivocally clear that the current method of allocating the majority of federal homeland security resources, i.e., on a per capita basis alone, must be changed.

Not only did the 9/11 Commission recommend that such changes be made in how federal homeland security funds are allocated, but commissions before it, such as the Rudman Commission, have strongly recommended it as well. Indeed, the Rudman Commission stated more than a year and a half ago that “Congress should establish a system for allocating scarce resources based less on dividing the spoils and more on addressing identified threats and vulnerabilities. . . . To do this, the federal government should consider such factors as population, population density, vulnerability assessment, and presence of critical infrastructure within each state.”

Both the Senate and House-passed intelligence reform bills that were reconciled in this conference report contained language that sought to effectuate this important recommendation but, unfortunately, such language was not included in the conference report. As the 9/11 Commission, Rudman Commission, many other homeland security experts, and I have repeatedly asserted, there are few issues more important to our nation’s homeland defense than homeland security preparedness and the proper allocation of the resources to achieve that preparedness. Therefore, I will continue to work as hard as I can with my colleagues on a bi-partisan basis to make the 9/11 Commission’s call for threat and risk-based funding a reality.

At the end of the day, this legislation has the capacity to improve our security and make us safer. I would especially like to note the dogged persistence of Senators Collins and Lieberman, who were unflinching in their work on this important bill. However, passage of this legislation is just the beginning. We have now given our government the tools to make a difference. But as with anything in our system, success depends on the independence and accountability of those appointed to carry out these reforms. It is critical that the American people, and we in Congress, insist upon accountability from those whom we are asking to implement these reforms. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate in that effort.

Once again, thank you to the 9-11 families, the 9-11 Commission and all those who have worked to make this legislation a reality. Now, the hard work of implementing these reforms begins.

https://web.archive.org/web/20051128080436/http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=233911&&#038;

Obviously Hillary Clinton was posturing herself for the 2008 election.

Appearing to care about the immigration problem and national security.

There is even a bigger reason for her to do so.

The record of the Clinton Administration abusing the INS and rapid naturalization of immigrants to secure additional Democrat voters for the 1996 election.

This was exposed by David Schippers in his role as chief counsel to the United States House of Representatives managers for the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton, in his subsequent book “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment” and subsequent articles.

From David Schippers October 2000.

“In October 1996, in one of the first public accounts of this matter, former Center Senior Fellow Rosemary Jenks testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration about many of the abuses surrounding the Citizenship USA program. Ms. Jenks concluded that due to pressure from the White House, and in particular the Vice President’s office, the Immigration and Naturalization Service disregarded many of the requirements of the naturalization process that ensure that only qualified immigrants with no significant criminal history may become citizens. She subsequently testified before the House immigration subcommittee on the same matter, in April 1997. Her remarks before that committee may be found at www.house.gov/judiciary/666.htm.

In his new bookSellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment, David P. Schippers, former Chief Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, details his investigation of these same issues. He concludes that were he and his investigators afforded more time, it is likely the abuses of the Citizenship USA program would have been included in the list of impeachable offenses against President Clinton. Below is an excerpt from Schippers’ book, published last month by Regnery.

My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.

In our investigation we uncovered a case study evidencing what is pejoratively known in political science circles as “Chicago Politics.”

Back in the early years of the twentieth century, “Hinky Dink” Kenna and “Bathouse” John Coughlin were recognized as the very models of the unsavory Chicago politician. The two once fixed an aldermanic election in Chicago’s First Ward. To do so, they imported thousands of ward heelers, friends, associates, and city workers and had them registered to vote from every building in the ward — from homes (of which there were few) to taverns and cribs (of which there were many). On Election Day the recent arrivals stopped at Hinky Dink’s tavern, picked up fifty cents, ate a free lunch, and went out to vote their consciences. Guess who won that election?

Essentially, the same tactics were used during President Clinton’s reelection in 1996. Only this time the Democrats weren’t handing out sandwiches. Instead, through CUSA, they were circumventing normal procedures for naturalizing aliens — procedures that check backgrounds and weed out criminals — and consequently they were handing out citizenship papers to questionable characters.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/BookReview-InsideStoryClintonImpeachment

Ironically and/or fitting, the link to the Rosemary Jenks House Judiciary testimony above contained the following: “666”.

I clicked on the link and it had been scrubbed.

I next went to the Wayback Machine and after trying different dates for copies, I discovered that the testimony was there for December 9, 2004 but not December 10, 2004.

Isn’t that interesting.

The House Judiciary website.

On December 8, one day before Hillary writes of the passage of  “The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004” and the strengthening of national security and the borders and the next day, House testimony about how the Clinton Administration abused the INS and the system to expedite and procure more Democrat voters for the 1996 election disappears.

Coincidence?

Mathematically highly improbable.

From Rosemary Jenks’ testimony:

“Adjudication Speed–The five CUSA cities managed to accelerate naturalization processing times from more than one year in many cases to six months. This allowed the INS to meet its goal of adjudicating more than one million naturalization applications in FY 1996, but only at great cost to the integrity of the system.

FBI Fingerprint Checks–A February 1994 report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Justice Department identified three major problems with the INS policy on fingerprint checks: 1) the INS had no way to verify that the fingerprints submitted by an applicant actually belonged to that applicant since the INS was no longer taking the fingerprints itself; 2) some applications were wrongly approved because the FBI had not completed the criminal history check before the interview was scheduled or because the FBI “hit” had not been properly filed; and 3) INS often did not resubmit new fingerprint cards when the FBI rejected the original set as illegible. OIG found that 5.4 percent of aliens submitting applications for benefits had an arrest record. The top reasons for arrest were immigration violations/deportation proceedings (32%), assault/battery/rape (19%), theft/robbery/burglary (18%) and drug possession/distribution (10%). A December 1994 General Accounting Office (GAO) report identified the same problems with the INS fingerprint policy.

The “streamlined” naturalization process did not address any of these problems, but instead, exacerbated them. The INS still had no way to verify that the fingerprints an applicant submitted actually belonged to the applicant. In May 1995, the INS published a proposed rule to require that all applicants have their fingerprints taken by an INS-certified “designated fingerprint service” (DFS). Personnel at these DFSs would be properly trained to take fingerprints and fill out the necessary paperwork, and they would be required to ask for identification showing that the person named on the fingerprint card was the same person being fingerprinted. The final rule, however, was not published until June 1996, and final implementation was delayed from November 1, 1996 to March 1, 1997 to insure that INS had certified an adequate number of DFSs.

Fingerprint cards were supposed to be mailed by the Service Centers to the FBI on a daily basis to insure that the FBI had adequate time to run the criminal history check. In March 1996, however, the FBI did a sampling of receipts from 20 INS offices. Over 60 percent of the fingerprint cards received from Los Angeles had been at the Los Angeles office for more than 30 days before they were submitted. For the New York City office, 90 percent had been at the office for more than 30 days. At the same time the INS was dramatically increasing the workload of the FBI, it was, in practice, cutting the FBI’s response time.

The preliminary results of the INS internal review of naturalization applications approved during CUSA, as presented to the Subcommittee by Assistant Attorney General for Administration Stephen Colgate clearly show that the problems were severe. Of the 1,049,872 immigrants granted U.S. citizenship under CUSA:

71, 557 were found to have FBI criminal records, including INS administrative actions (e.g., deportation proceedings or other immigration violations), and misdemeanor and felony arrests and convictions;

Of these 71,557, 10,800 had at least one felony arrest, 25,500 had at least one misdemeanor arrest, but no felonies, and 34,700 had only administrative actions initiated against them;

113,126 had only name checks because their fingerprint cards were returned to the INS by the FBI because they were illegible;

66,398 did not have FBI criminal record checks because their fingerprint cards were never submitted to the FBI by the INS; and

2,573 were still being processed by the FBI.

As of late February 1997, 168 of these new citizens had been found to be “presumptively, statutorily ineligible” for naturalization based on their criminal record, and in another 2,800 cases, it could not be determined based on available information whether they were eligible or not.

It is important to note that none of the numbers given above indicates the degree to which applicants for naturalization lied on their applications, thereby committing perjury, which should make them ineligible for naturalization. They also do not indicate the number of applicants who may have submitted someone else’s fingerprints to avoid having their criminal record revealed. Finally, for the 180,000 applicants whose fingerprints were illegible or never submitted, the INS has no way to go back and check because it is not legally allowed to require citizens to resubmit their fingerprints. Thus, unless these new citizens volunteer to have their fingerprints taken, we will never know if they were actually eligible or not.”

Read more:

From David Schippers and his book:

“Had we been given sufficient time to develop evidence and witnesses, the CUSA matter might have been included in the abuse of power impeachment article.

The 1996 arrest records are still available, and I am sure the FBI is still willing to update all of them. In the meantime, thousands of criminals are now citizens of the United States because it was assumed they would vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.”

So, who scrubbed the Rosemary Jenks testimony from the House Judiciary website?

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/