This may sound like a good way to pay for the ILLEGALS but, is it? Would the career polititions see this as a way to restock the  US coffers? They've already let a few million "immigrants in over the past couple of years, so how many more "non-working" illegals

would be allowed into the country? Especially if they're not working or taking jobs fron natural born citizens.

Biden wants to let in more immigrants but doesn’t want them to work   Story by Tyler Curtis • 15h ago 

Two years into his presidency, President Joe Biden is finally starting to prioritize immigration policy. Over the past month, his administration has announced new proposals to make it easier for refugees and asylum-seekers to migrate legally to the United States.

That sounds like great news for our historically slow and rigid immigration system. But because of restrictions on how quickly immigrants can get to work and the way the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is funded, the new proposals will end up hurting American businesses, as well as the very immigrants the Biden administration wants to help.

The Department of Homeland Security is now allowing asylum-seekers to enter the country via legal points of entry at the Mexican border. If they can demonstrate a “vulnerability” and pass a background check, Homeland Security will grant them a humanitarian visa and allow them to live permanently in the U.S.

Humanitarian visas are free for those applying for them, but processing large numbers of new immigrants isn’t easy or cheap, so the government needs to collect the money from somebody. Unlike other government agencies that chiefly rely on tax revenue to fund their operations, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services charges money directly to those who want to use their services. Possible immigrants (or their would-be employers) have to pay certain fees to get permission to move to and work within the U.S.

Because of this fee-for-service model, it makes sense for Citizenship and Immigration Services to offset rising costs due to an increase in humanitarian visas by increasing fees for other immigrants. Essentially, this means that foreign workers will be forced to subsidize the costs of processing poorer, nonworking immigrants.

And it has already begun. Earlier this month, Citizenship and Immigration Services announced that it wants to increase its fees and charge thousands of dollars, depending on the type of application. Because people must submit several different applications, it can wind up costing one worker $4,000 to $12,000 to complete the entire process. Some applications are already outrageously expensive. For example, a type of investor visa called the I-956 costs the applicant $17,795; Citizenship and Immigration Services wants to bump this up to an astounding $47,695.

READ ON

Kellyanne Conway: The Secret Service knows all of this

Jan 19, 2023 ##Fox news   The 'Outnumbered' panel discussed the latest on the Biden scandal and growing frustration as the White House continues to stonewall lingering questions.

You didn't hear a whole lot about these fires and now you hear NOTHING. Just what the Govt. wanted, for it to "GO AWAY"

 COVID Whistleblower, Military Vet Suggests What's Really Behind Food Plant Fires  By Joe Saunders January 19, 2023

The outbreak of damaging fires at U.S. food production plants in recent years has generated headlines and plenty of questions.

In an interview posted to the social media website Rumble this week, Dr. Andrew Huff, an epidemiologist with a background in what he described as “bioterrorism and agri-terrorism,” suggested an answer to what’s behind the outbreak.

And for Americans accustomed to living in relative peace and a land of plenty, it won’t be comforting.

Besides being a scientist, Huff’s personal biography bio states he is a combat veteran who served in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

He is best known recently as the former vice president of the research group EcoHealth Alliance and author of the book “The Truth About Wuhan: How I Uncovered the Biggest Lie in History,” which argues that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted from a “genetically engineered agent” leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

That conclusion was considered official heresy in the early days of the pandemic, but the “lab leak theory” has never gone away.

Huff’s take on the destruction at food processing plants in the U.S. and around the world is just as explosive.

In an interview with Emerald Robinson, a journalist with the conservative RAIR Foundation (Rise Align Ignite Reclaim), on her podcast “The Absolute Truth with Emerald Robinson,” Huff said the spate of suspicious fires matches up eerily well with government data he’d accessed while working on his Ph.D

READ ON

This Challenge To Illinois’ Gun Law Tees Up SCOTUS To Finally Nuke ‘Assault Weapons’ Bans By: Margot Cleveland...Jan 19, 2023

Illinois’ recently enacted ban on most semi-automatic rifles and so-called “high-capacity” magazines violates the Second Amendment, according to a lawsuit filed on Tuesday in a federal district court. The case, Harrel v. Raoul, represents one of the first challenges to so-called “assault-weapons” bans since the 2022 Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle v. Bruen made clear that the right to bear arms is not “a second-class right.”

Here’s what you need to know about the case and current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

On Jan. 10, 2023, Illinois enacted a ban on the manufacturing, delivery, sale, purchase, or possession of so-called “assault weapons,” which is defined by statute to include any semi-automatic rifle “with the capacity to accept a magazine holding more than ten rounds of ammunition,” if the rifle possesses any one of several features, such as “a pistol grip or thumbhole stock,” a “folding, telescoping, thumbhole, or detachable stock,” or a “flash suppressor.” The Illinois statute also identifies dozens of rifles expressly banned as “assault weapons,” including all AK-type rifles, all AR-type rifles, several Barrett and Bushmaster rifles, along with a catalog of other guns.

Illinois’ recently enacted statute also makes it a crime to “manufacture, deliver, sell, purchase,” or “possess” magazines branded by the state as “large capacity ammunition” devices and referred to colloquially as “large-capacity magazines.” The statute categorizes magazines as “large capacity” if they can hold more than “10 rounds of ammunition for long guns and more than 15 rounds of ammunition for handguns.”

A group of individuals, gun businesses, and private organizations, including the Second Amendment Foundation, the Illinois State Rifle Association, and the Firearms Policy Coalition, filed suit on Tuesday against the Illinois attorney general, as well as several state prosecutors and law enforcement agents, arguing the statute violates the Second Amendment. On Wednesday, the case was assigned to federal Judge Stephen P. McGlynn, a Donald Trump appointee.

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, David G. Sigale, told The Federalist he anticipates seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction “very soon,” noting that the statute has been in force since the governor signed the law on Jan. 10.

In seeking a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs will need to establish they have “a likelihood of success on the merits,” meaning they will likely prevail on their claim that the Illinois law violates the Second Amendment.

READ MORE

Again with MSNBC...All the news media wants to talk about is "misinformation" WELL...How about this???

 MSNBC 

Lawrence: Insurrectionists are in charge of the House of Representatives

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell explains how the Republicans who weakened McCarthy as Speaker, sought pardons from Trump, and tried to overthrow the 2020 election gained seats on powerful committees as a federal judge in Washington acknowledges what the January 6th Committee found - that the attack on the Capitol was carried out on “Trump’s instructions.” 

BEWARE: the great reset

Ingraham: Global elites are pushing for a new world order 

Fox News  Jan 17th 2023 

Fox News host Laura Ingraham dives into what's happening at the World Economic Forum and what the Great Reset means on 'The Ingraham Angle.'
 

Harris Faulkner: Why was this different for Trump?   Fox News 

\

 Jan 18, 2023     The panel discussed the latest emerging details involving Biden's classified document scandal. #FoxNews 

SO...We're ALL racist ( all whites that is)

Tucker Carlson: Nobody talks about this  Fox New 

Jan 18, 2023 
WARNING-Graphic footage: Fox News host Tucker Carlson voices his concerns over Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee's latest legislation on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.' #FoxNews #Tucker

Is Garland protecting Biden with special  counsel?    Fox News 

Jan 14, 2023  Former Kansas Attorney General Phillip Kline claims U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland gave the special counsel investigating President Biden's classified documents scandal 'a very narrow focus' on 'Unfiltered with Dan Bongino.'

TWO SIDED JUSTICE... ONE FOR DEM AND ONE FOR GOP

'LET HIM ANSWER THE QUESTION' She  TRIED to stop Ted Cruz from getting THE  TRUTH... INTENSE MOMENT 

 Congress 

Newt Gingrich: Democrats are 'shaken' by this  Fox News 

Jan 16, 2023 #FoxNewsFox News contributor Newt Gingrich weighs in on bipartisan criticism against Biden following further escalations in his classified documents debacle. #FoxNews

I was always under the impression that states cannot make laws to ban a certain gun. It's the BATF job.

 Illinois banned assault weapons after a deadly mass shooting in the state. Now, some local sheriffs are refusing to enforce the law.

Story by insider@insider.com (Taylor Ardrey) • Yesterday 

Research has shown that "red flag laws" can be an effective way to intervene in mass shooting threats, but knowing how many mass shootings it has stopped can be difficult to measure. Alex Brandon/AP© Alex Brandon/AP

Some law enforcement agencies in Illinois said that they wouldn't enforce a new law that bans the sale of assault-style weapons.

The Protect Illinois Communities Act was passed earlier this month, prompted by a July 4 mass shooting.
Some law enforcement officials argue the legislation violates the Second Amendment.

Multiple law enforcement agencies in the state of Illinois said that they would not enforce new legislation that bars sale of assault-style weapons, arguing it violates the Second Amendment, according to reports.

Sheriffs in Illinois counties, including DeKalb, LaSalle, DuPage, and McHenry, among others, have publicly made their stance about the Protect Illinois Communities Act, WABC-TV reported on Friday.

The legislation, which also bans the sale and manufacturing of high-capacity magazines, was passed earlier this month as an effort to prevent gun violence.

"We won't sacrifice safety, but at end of the day, we believe we have to do what is right for our own communities," McHenry County Sheriff Robb Tadelman told the outlet.

Related video: 'Hundreds of lives will be saved': Illinois governor signs semiautomatic weapons ban (MSNBC)

READ MORE. VIDEO