Category: The Opposition

State Department: refugee free-for-all until July 6th!

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Everyone wants to know what it all means… there is the 90-day travel ban (everyone, not just refugees) from six majority Muslim countries and then the 120-day moratorium for all refugees from all countries, but only for those refugees who don’t have certain relationships with those who got here before them.
And, so far it looks like resettlement agencies may not count as having “bona fide” relationships as ‘entities,’ but all of that could change next month, next week or the next minute!  Therefore I am not going to wander in to the weeds of all this or lose sleep over it.  We will just see how things evolve because there is nothing we can do to influence it all anyway.

By legislating from the bench, the Supremes have made it likely that even fewer persecuted Syrian Christians will be admitted to the US before late fall.

Just so you know we are at 49,248 refugees for this fiscal year when I checked Wrapsnet earlier this morning.  We will hit 50,000 probably by July 6th, then what?
And, just to give you some comparison, that 49,248 is the highest number of refugees (excluding FY16) that we have admitted by the end of June in the last ten fiscal years, so the contractors*** shouldn’t be whining about a lack of paying ‘clients’ this year.

Syrian Christians now have an even smaller chance of getting to the US.

While I was at Wrapsnet, I checked the Syrian numbers.  We have seeded 6,397 Syrians in to your towns and cities this fiscal year (which ends on Sept. 30th).  Of the 6,397, 6,258 were Muslims of some variety. That puts the rate at 98% Muslim for the year (so far) for Syrians.
That same rate (Muslims to others) applies for the 1,809 Syrians Donald Trump’s State Department admitted since inauguration day.
As I continue to mention, because we have admitted so few Christian Syrians, any applying now likely will  not have relatives here while the Muslims will, so expect the Syrian Muslim relatives to continue to be admitted (thanks to the Supreme Court writing refugee law!) because we all know that if they are relatives of someone here already, they couldn’t possibly be terrorists, right?
Here are a couple paragraphs from Vox.  They and other leftwing media are trying very hard to figure out what it all means for their friends who make a living in the refugee industry and for those wanting more new Democrat voters that refugees represent. And, of course, so that they can further vilify Donald Trump.

What the ban means for refugees who don’t have “bona fide” family members in the US according to the categories laid out by the State Department. Many advocates have argued that the Supreme Court’s ruling should permit nearly all refugees to enter the US, because refugees have to be placed with a resettlement agency before entering the country, and that should count as a “bona fide” relationship. But the Supreme Court didn’t specify that, and the administration doesn’t seem to be taking it that way.

In a press call on Thursday, a senior administration official said that “the fact that a resettlement agency in the United States has provided a formal assurance for refugees seeking admission is not sufficient, in and of itself, to establish a bona fide relationship under the ruling.” It’s not yet clear whether this means refugees will only be admitted if they already have close family in the US, or whether some stage in the resettlement process will count as a “bona fide” relationship. And all refugees who are scheduled to arrive in the US through July 6th will be able to come without incident. But after that, tens of thousands of refugees, and the resettlement agencies in the US that employ people to help them, remain under a cloud of uncertainty — and it’s not looking good.

State Department Press Briefing with unidentified speakers!

 

Trump senior administration officials speaking to the media: From the Department of Justice we have [Senior Administration Official Five]. From DHS we have [Senior Administration Official Four]. From State we have [Senior Administration Official Two] and [Senior Administration Official Three]. [Senior Administration Official One] is from the White House. Whoever it was that opened the press briefing we have no clue.
 
 
Thanks to Vox for alerting us to the State Department press briefing to selected media here yesterday.  You can read it inbetween your Independence day festivities.
Wouldn’t you think that the Trump Administration would at least try to be more open and transparent than the previous administration. I’ve noticed over the years that at these briefings, no one is permitted to know by whom they are being briefed!
No one in the Administration wants their name used—-just disgusting!

We’re joined today by senior administration officials from the White House, Departments of State, Homeland Security, and also from Justice. From the Department of Justice we have [Senior Administration Official Five]. From DHS we have [Senior Administration Official Four]. From State we have [Senior Administration Official Two] and [Senior Administration Official Three].

As a reminder, the call will be conducted on background. Attribution should be to senior administration officials.

Transcript of press briefing, here.
My previous posts on the this topic are filed in a new category:  Supreme Court.

State Dept. leaking like sieve to CNN, reveals WH thinking of moving refugee program to DHS

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Update July 1: Michael Leahy at Breitbart has more on this story, here yesterday.
I know, I know, it is a CNN story with Jake Tapper on the byline, but there is very likely truth to it.
I’m not weighing in on the merits (or demerits) of such a move, my purpose here is to once again show you that the Obama shadow government, in this case Anne Richard, FORMER Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration has a pipeline in to the career bureaucrats running the refugee program in the Department of State and she is carrying their news to the likes of CNN.

Anne Richard came to her former post at the Department of State from the federal contractor the INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE. Prior to her job at the IRC, she was at the State Department! The system is incestuous!

The primary reason that the Deep State would not support the move of the program to the Dept. of Homeland Security is that they (in State) have a decades-long cushy relationship with the refugee contractors that I keep yelling about (here and here just this morning).
They are all on the same page—more, more, more refugees for America!
First, get the contractors (yelling and propagandizing) out of the system completely and reform of the program could be accomplished. (This depends on the lazy lunks in Congress!)
And, second!

Trump must get his loyalists placed in positions above the bureaucrats to get this under control.

Career people can’t be fired unless, and until, they are caught in insubordination to a boss. Right now Trump is at fault for not picking their bosses!
Here is CNN quoting Anne Richard extensively so she must be the one carrying the tales….

Washington (CNN)The White House is considering a proposal to move both the State Department bureau of Consular Affairs and its bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration to the Department of Homeland Security, a senior White House official tells CNN.

The move, which the White House official cautioned was far from becoming official policy, would likely be controversial among diplomats and experts in State Department matters.

[….]

“It would be a huge mistake,” said Anne Richard, who led the bureau of Population Refugees, and Migration during President Barack Obama’s second term.

[….]

The proposals were written in a memo submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget from the White House Domestic Policy Council as part of President Trump’s March executive order pushing for ideas for Government Reorganization.

A State Department spokesperson referred CNN to the White House for comment.

The extremely complicated admissions process now starts with the UNITED NATIONS making the first cut as we have reported ad nauseam.

The White House did not explain the reasoning behind the recommendations, but perhaps the idea is rooted in a desire to streamline the refugee vetting process. As it stands currently, the United Nations High Commission of Refugees refers applicants to the State Department for vetting. This vetting is carried out by nine International Resettlement Support Centers (RSC) with American interests***; all of which are managed by the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration. Approved applicants are then sent to the Department of Homeland Security for final vetting. After final vetting at DHS, the State Department then resumes supervision of the process with its Reception and Placement Program.

[….]

Richard, the former Obama State Department official, pinned the proposal on an “imperfect understanding” of the bureau’s function. It’s not mainly a law enforcement body, Richard said, rather, it works with nongovernmental organizations and the UN to assist refugees around the world. [And that is the problem—the NGOs and the UN—ed]

More here.
*** Are there other interests operating Resettlement Support Centers???  See here.
Nine Department of State-funded Resettlement Support Centers (RSCs) not to be confused with the nine major refugee contractors (except that there is some overlap because some contractors work at these RSCs). Look at these locations. Can you say opportunity for fraud!

  • Amman, Jordan with sub-offices in Baghdad, Iraq and Cairo, Egypt;

• Bangkok, Thailand with a sub-office in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;

• Damak, Nepal;

• Havana, Cuba;

• Istanbul, Turkey with a sub-office in Beirut, Lebanon;

• Moscow, Russia with a sub-office in Kyiv, Ukraine;

• Nairobi, Kenya with a sub-office in Johannesburg, South Africa;

• Vienna, Austria; and

• Quito, Ecuador with small sub-offices in San Salvador, El Salvador and Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

The nine federal resettlement contractors who are fighting tooth and nail to let nothing rock their cushy relationship with the DOS:

 
 

And so it begins—the battle of the bona fides

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

“Anyone who has an existing relationship with a nonprofit, frankly tens of thousands of refugees, should be seen as having bona fide ties.”

Becca Heller

 
The US Supreme Court has taken it upon itself to re-write Refugee law by creating a new requirement (even if it is just for a few months) that refugees may enter the country ABOVE TRUMP’S CEILING OF 50,000 ADMISSIONS by September 30th if they can show a “bona fide relationship” to someone already here or to an “entity” in the US.
In Washington, DC, the scrambling to define those words—“bona fide relationship”—is underway!
The Refugee Act of 1980 has no provisions for going over the President’s CEILING except in an emergency and in such a case, the President (wishing to increase the ceiling) must “consult” with Congress.

The Supremes have thus gone beyond their Constitutional role and are crafting a new requirement that effectively nullifies Trump’s 50,000 admissions ceiling and strips the President and Congress of their authority under the Refugee Act of 1980.

Before I give you the  NY Times on the battle of the bona fides, you might want to read Andy McCarthy here (not much of a victory) on the decision as he raises an important point about giving powerful legal rights to some random immigrant who just happened to get here earlier who can now, with a demand to bring in the family members, have a legal right to supersede the President’s power to keep us safe.

International Refugee Assistance Project is one of the original litigants.

Here is the NY Times (other news outlets are signalling as well in which direction the refugee industry is going on this) which begins with the usual get-your-minds-right sob story with a couple of refugee ‘stars’ of the article telling their sad tale.
Skipping to the important part ……

About four out of 10 refugees who come to the United States have no family ties in the country, according to independent estimates. In some cities known for taking in refugees — like Boise, Idaho; New Haven; and Fayetteville, Ark. — those with no family ties are a majority.

On Monday, the Supreme Court threw into question whether such refugees, who are among the most vulnerable people seeking a haven after fleeing persecution or conflict, will be approved for resettlement in the United States.

In agreeing to hear two cases on President Trump’s travel ban, the court introduced a new phrase to the fraught discussion of refugees and Muslim immigrants: “bona fide relationship.”

Those who can show a “bona fide relationship” with a “person or entity” in the United States will not be affected by Mr. Trump’s 120-day halt to refugee admissions or his 90-day ban on travel from six majority-Muslim countries, according to the court’s order. Those refugees or travelers must be admitted, at least for now.

However, those who have no family, business or other ties can be prohibited, the court said.
The justices gave some examples of a bona fide relationship: visiting relatives in the United States, attending a university or taking a job offer.

Here we go! No family ties? So, they are setting the stage for demanding that anyone already connected, even tangentially, to a US refugee resettlement contractor*** should be admitted in addition to the relatives!

On a conference call Monday, lawyers who have fought the Trump administration argued that other refugees and travelers should also be allowed in because, like Mr. Dagoum, they often have ties to a nonprofit organization that has been helping them even before they land in the United States.

“Anyone who has an existing relationship with a nonprofit, frankly tens of thousands of refugees,” should be seen as having bona fide ties, said Becca Heller, director of the International Refugee Assistance Project.

Representatives of some resettlement agencies said they were awaiting guidance from the State Department. Heather Nauert, a State Department spokeswoman, said on Tuesday that the department would consult with the Justice Department on how to define “bona fide relationship,” a process she expected to take two more days. Meanwhile, anyone already approved for travel to the United States by July 6 would be allowed in, she said.

Continue reading here.
Just checking the numbers at Wrapsnet and see that as of this morning we are at 48,920 refugees admitted this fiscal year (began Oct. 1, 2016). We are thus 1,080 away from Trump’s 50,000 CEILING—a ceiling now rendered meaningless by the Supreme Court with this assertion.
With this below from the Court’s opinion, Trump (and America!) loses big time (where are you Congress?):

 
 
My previous posts on the Supreme Court debacle are here and here.
*** These are the nine major US resettlement contractors and working under them (using your tax dollars) are hundreds of local subcontractors.

Refugee contractors brought refugee lobbyists to Washington (again) last week

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

They do this every year. It is the sort of thing those of you concerned about an overload of refugees in your communities can’t really do, first and foremost because it is expensive to travel to Washington. And, our pro-reform side has no money!!!
I suspect your tax dollars helped pay for the lobbying organized each year through one of the nine major federal resettlement contractors—Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (headquartered in a posh section of Baltimore).

LIRS Leadership Academy last week. That is LIRS CEO Lynda Hartke in the bluish jacket in the front row. Learn about their finances here (they are 95% funded with taxpayer dollars): https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2017/02/28/south-carolina-lutheran-agency-cutting-staff-will-bigwigs-in-baltimore-see-pay-cuts/

However, this story from the Huffington Post that focuses on visits to Texas’s two US Senators confirms what we have said and what you should do—keep up the political pressure on your Washington reps from back home!  And, I mean, keep it up!
Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON ― On a hot D.C. summer day on Tuesday, seven refugees from Texas made their way to the office of their home state senator, Ted Cruz, to do what one does in the nation’s capital: lobby.

[….]

The former refugees had come to Washington for the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service Leadership Academy, where they had spent the last few days training and strategizing on how to help new arrivals and convince politicians that it was right and humane to do the same. It was the fifth year of the program, with 48 former refugees from 17 states participating.

This year is different from the last four. Now they are operating in the age of Donald Trump, who wants to cut the number of refugees to be resettled in the U.S. and bar them from entry for at least four months. The Texas advocates are facing an anti-refugee wave at the state level that Trump tapped into nationally. Texas took in the second-highest number of refugees of any state in fiscal year 2016, but its Republican leadership has echoed the president’s approach, last year taking the extreme move of dropping out of the resettlement program, making it the largest state to do so. Gov. Greg Abbott has also tried to bar Syrian refugees from the state entirely. And while Republican officials in Texas can’t legally keep refugees out, they’ve done their best to say they are unwelcome.

Despite the open hostility that is exhibited by their state ― or perhaps because of it ― refugee advocates feel an intense urgency to change minds. That includes Cruz, who supported measures to bar certain groups of refugees and backed Trump’s travel ban, which is now blocked in the courts. The former refugees knew that having a positive reception from congressional staffers wouldn’t change much, if anything. But they felt that if they met the staff in person, they could work to maintain and grow relationships within the state. After visiting Cruz’s Washington office, Nsenga suggested that they reach out to Cruz’s offices in Texas as soon as possible to request meetings, since they take some time to schedule.

After visiting Cruz’s office they went on to meet Senator Cornyn’s staff and we learned a very important bit of information for Texas taxpayers concerned about the impact of refugee resettlement on the state:

This time they decided to also ask what they could do to win the senator over. They said the Cornyn staffer told them that his office gets a lot of calls expressing concerns about refugee resettlement and hardly any from people who support refugees. [Hint!—ed]

“She said, ‘You can help by educating fellow Texans about refugees,’” Emmanuel Sebagabo, a former refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, said afterward.

It was a tangible bit of information that the former refugees felt could serve them well.

[….]

…. They [politicians] don’t base their policy positions on whether constituents set up apartments for people resettling in their states, and they haven’t been universally moved by protests against Trump’s executive orders. Politicians care about getting elected and reelected; they care about doing what their constituents call on them (literally and figuratively) to do.

It’s a basic principle of advocacy, but it can get lost when activists are focused on more immediate matters, like getting people resettled in a new country. Now up against Trump, Abbott, Cruz, Cornyn and other Republicans, the refugee advocates got a reminder that they can’t forget about the politics. They need to convince more fellow Texans that refugee resettlement is a good thing, but that requires combating messages from politicians who spread fear that refugees can be dangerous. They need to convince those who support refugees to not just offer places to stay, warm meals and social services. They need them to call politicians’ offices and show up at town halls.

Yup!
Continue reading here.
Thanks to HuffPo reporter Elise Foley for giving us those important reminders!
By the way, this article focused on Texas, but you can be sure they were visiting YOUR Senators and members of Congress too!
This article is posted in my relatively new category ‘What you can do’ here.

Did Sec. of State Tillerson's right hand man, Brian Hook, set a major policy shift on refugees?

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

“…..if he hires Brian Hook, he will be opening his arms to a member of the very establishment he campaigned against.”

Daniel DePetris

 
Update July 31, 2017: More on Hook and the Romney/Bushies, here.
Last night I told you that twitter phenom Mike Cernovich immediately fingered Tillerson’s chief policy advisor, Brian Hook, as the State Department official who okayed the release of an e-mail last month to their refugee industry partners around the world announcing a huge jump in weekly refugee admissions.

(So far we have not seen the bump-up from 900 to 1,500 a week that was  announced as Trump and Tillerson were wrapping up a world tour. That is not to say it isn’t still coming.)
A jump to 1,500 a week for the remaining weeks of the fiscal year would push Trump’s numbers up above 2—56,424 and 58,238—and perhaps as many as 5 of Barack Obama’s years! (Here).
When the New York Times announced the stunning news (we wrote about it here), I and many others following the issue closely, were completely flummoxed—-how could Trump go so far from his campaign promises, and did he think no one was watching?
 ***Update*** Just checked the numbers and there is no sign of any bump-up. We admitted 2,244 in the last 3 weeks (June 2-June 23) which represents an average of 748 refugees a week.
We don’t know if Cernovich is correct, but when you learn more about Hook, it makes sense.
Here is what you need to know about who Rex Tillerson relies on for policy decisions in a State Department being run almost completely by career bureaucrats who frankly hate Donald Trump.
And, incidentally, it easily could have been Hook (Tillerson’s chief policy strategist) who was the leader of the pack stomping on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban while shilling for GEORGE SOROS here last week.
Here is Brian Hook’s bio.
Here is what Alex Pfeiffer (Daily Caller) said about him and his appointment in March:

Brian Hook, a Trump critic and former Bush administration official, is currently serving as the State Department’s director of policy planning, The Daily Caller has learned.

Brian Hook is not only a Bushie, but a Romney advisor and cheerleader. When Trump did not choose Romney for Sec. of State, was Hook the bone Trump threw to the Bush/Romney interests. Was Tillerson required to take Hook?

Foreign Policy magazine previously reported that Hook was Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s favorite for the role and a department spokeswoman confirmed to TheDC Thursday that Hook got the job. The director of policy planning is a key position responsible for running the department’s internal think tank, which is home to the secretary of state’s speechwriters.

Hook previously served in the Bush administration in several roles, including as assistant secretary of state for international organizations, and later served as a foreign policy adviser for Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign.

The State Department official also co-founded the John Hay Initiative, a neoconservative group that organized a letter of over 100 Republican foreign policy experts who would refuse to back Trump. Eliot Cohen, another co-founder of the John Hay Initiative, has been a strong critic of the Trump administration.

During the Presidential campaign, Hook disagreed with every one of Trump’s positions, so clearly he is opposed to slowing the flow of refugees to America.

The John Hay Initiative*** advocated for a foreign policy that Trump rejected during the presidential campaign. It called for a tougher stance against Russia and more involvement overseas. Hook told Politico in May, “Even if you say you support him as the nominee, you go down the list of [Trump’s] positions and you see you disagree on every one.”

After Foreign Policy reported that Hook might land a State Department role, Daniel DePetris, a National Interest contributor, wrote, “Trump should know what he’s getting himself into: if he hires Brian Hook, he will be opening his arms to a member of the very establishment he campaigned against.”

More here.
Then we learn even more from a huge article at Politico.  Of course Politico is writing in support of the State Department bureaucrats who, first and foremost, hate Donald Trump and are working daily to undermine his White House (at least on the issue we care the most about, see here).
Politico tells us that because the Tillerson State Department has hired so few people loyal to the President, foreign governments are going directly to Hook or, Jared Kushner!

In theory, the Policy Planning office is a kind of in-house think thank that develops long-range strategy, but in practice it often feeds the secretary of state with views about day-to-day problems. The lack of Trump appointees at the State Department’s regional desks and embassies, and the sidelining of many career diplomats, has added pressure on Hook’s office to develop policy for Tillerson.

It’s also led foreign governments to seek out other avenues of communication. Trump has nominated only a handful of U.S. ambassadors, and some countries have responded simply by reaching out directly to Hook or to other White House officials, including Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Politico tells us that career bureaucrats went bonkers over Trump White House decision on refugees.

Others say asking senior aides who were deeply and visibly supportive of an array of Obama-era foreign policy initiatives — including the Iran deal — to reverse, modify, or unwind those initiatives, is difficult if not impossible. Even before Tillerson’s confirmation, the State Department’s dissent channel — an internal venue for career officials to register concerns with the trajectory of American policy — lit up with protests over the administration’s temporary ban on refugees.

So, did Hook (Politico calls him Tillerson’s “policy brain”) agree to the announcement of a stepped-up refugee admissions schedule to appease the swamp monsters—the long-time bureaucrats who almost unanimously donated to Hillary’s presidential campaign?

Simon Henshaw, Acting Asst. Sec. https://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/bureau/213334.htm

And, one more thing.  We have been pointing out for many weeks that the US Refugee Admissions Program is being run by long-time bureaucrats and that there has been no move to find a Trump loyalist to fill the Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) position.
Politico confirms that Trump/Tillerson have made no move to get their own people in place.
LOL! Politico suggests that the ‘career civil servants’ want some leadership, but, at least for PRM, I’m betting they are pretty happy to have no Trump-appointee holding the reins so that they can simply run the show and persuade Hook/Tillerson that opening the spigot to 1,500 refugees a week will go unnoticed.
Politico continues…..

About four months after Tillerson’s confirmation, Hook has told associates that his boss is in no rush to fill the several hundred senior-level posts that require political appointments. Trump has yet to nominate a single assistant secretary, leaving the department’s top posts for regions like Europe, Asia and the Middle East vacant. Instead, career civil servants — “acting” assistant secretaries — are filling the jobs until their replacements are nominated, a move that is eliciting criticism from department veterans.

By the way, it will be a battle-royal in the Senate over the PRM job, but there is no reason that Tillerson can’t (right now!) get an advisor who knows something about the USRAP, and such an advisor/consultant does not require Senate confirmation.  Indeed it should be noted that George W. Bush had to get his Asst. Sec for PRM (Ellen Sauerbrey) in place by using a recess-appointment.
Much more here at Politico.
*** More on Hook at the John Hay Initiative.