This article comes from
Tom Flocco.com
http://tomflocco.com/


House Leader Joins Bush To Assist Illegal Aliens
Date: Tuesday, March 02 @ 17:15:04 EST
Topic: Illegal Immigration

Flashback:
House Leader Joins Bush To Assist Illegal Aliens

[March 3, 2004 -- As Mexican President Vicente Fox visits President Bush at his Crawford, Texas ranch on Friday, issues of open U.S. borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants (now referred to as "undocumented workers") will dominate the talks.  The flashback story below reveals that Republicans and Democrats at the very highest levels of governent promulgate the same agendas regarding illegal lawbreakers who cross our half-protected borders each day.  Personal presidential favors, vineyard investments and family insider links aside, the issue of taxpayer-funded benefits for Mexican illegals providing cheap labor for wine industry investors is just one more indication that
government officials continue to fleece their American constituents.]

by Tom Flocco

PHILADELPHIA—January 26, 2003—(TomFlocco.com)—
While receiving wide media coverage and criticism because she pressed for U.S. acceptance of the Mexican government’s “Matriculas Consulares” identification cards [issued to illegal immigrants] to permit illegals to enter the San Francisco Federal Building which houses her district office, a number of legal, ethical, and constitutional questions remain unanswered regarding House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s curious actions and investments.  This, as her multi-million dollar wine industry investments are linked directly to the First Family, while her grape vineyards also stand to benefit from the cheap labor afforded by illegals from Mexico.

“The reason she [Pelosi] did this was that it would help her [illegal] constituents access [taxpayer-funded] services there,” her press spokeswoman, Cindy Jimenez, told us during a phone interview, “and this includes our office,” she added. Jimenez could not explain to us why Rep. Pelosi considered persons illegally entering the country [and her district] her “constituents.”


The San Francisco congresswoman’s strong stance on assistance for illegals facilitates the establishment of their financial credibility, essentially acting as a de facto “stealth amnesty” for illegal aliens. But Pelosi’s press advocates failed to mention that the legislator’s soft enforcement position regarding federal laws also happens to provide a cheap source of labor for building contractors, truckers, and farming industries, including the wine and raisin industry in California where Pelosi and her husband own vineyards.

According to Pelosi’s 2001 Annual U.S. House Financial Disclosure form [the most recent], filed on May 15, 2002, the Minority Leader owns two vineyards. [Zinfandel Lane Vineyard in St. Helena, CA worth between $5,000,001 and $25 million with annual income between $100,001 and $1 million / and Skellenger Lane Vineyard in Napa, CA worth between $1,000,001 and $5 million with annual income between $100,001 and $1 million] Pelosi's financial statement also reported that her husband currently owns $15-$50,000 stock in the Chalone Wine Group, Ltd., and recently sold his $15-$50,000 stock position in California’s Ravenswood Winery.

“Businesses are making money on the spending, banking and labor of illegal immigrants, while regular taxpayers pay for [illegal] immigrants’ health care, education and other needs; then they watch their own wages being depressed by the influx of cheap workers,” said Frosty Wooldridge, a Louisville author and advocate for slowing legal immigration. (1-10-2003, Boulder, Colorado Daily Camera)

DAYS OF WINE AND RAISINS

An Associated Press (AP) report found that “Despite agriculture’s more relaxed labor standards, it was on farms that the AP most often found illegal child labor, including the most extreme cases: the youngest workers toiling the longest hours for the least pay,” according to AP’s David Foster and Farrell Kramer. “Reporters saw 104 children working illegally in agriculture in the last five months....and underage children’s grape-cutting knives flashed in the sunny vineyards of California,” they added.

While AP found countrywide incidences of forged documents, paycheck fraud, and outright lying to federal investigators regarding child labor, there is as yet no information as to whether Pelosi’s vineyards employ either illegal immigrants or child labor.

However, according to AP and other media, numerous examples of illegal child labor and illegal immigrant labor clearly exist in the California wine and raisin industries which contribute to Pelosi’s congressional campaigns. And much of the problem rests with open borders and the congresswoman’s soft and compliant advocacy for lawbreaking illegals.

We were able to contact a knowledgeable source who lives in the wine country of California’s Napa Valley. Our source talked to another individual who knows the manager handling a number of the local vineyards -- including those owned jointly by Nancy Pelosi and her husband.

The source told us that “this farm manager is notorious for telling people who apply for work that he will pay them ‘so much per hour’ which is competitive with other vineyards; but two weeks later when they get their checks, the amount received is far less that what was verbally negotiated -- but never below the minimum wage. Disgruntled, they just quit and he hires more.”

The Napa Valley source also said that “the grape pickers who quit have recounted their experiences with this manager to others who have hired them and paid appropriate and higher level wages,” further corroborating the information.

According to the source, however, it was not established whether the owners, the farm manager, or both benefited from cheap labor maneuverings surrounding the vineyard properties; moreover, in fairness, we were told that this manager does quality work for the Pelosis, so laborers may have come to him because of his reputation, without knowing that “he pays below the industry average wage.” But financial shenanigans exist, we were told.

According to our Napa Valley source, more often than not, however, when it comes to harvest season, Napa county finds itself with many entry level harvest laborers fresh from Mexico, who lack knowledge of the habits of some less principled farm managers.

Knowledgeable about Napa’s wine country machinations, our source told us “It sounds like the Pelosis to be running with who they run with,” adding that “those who own and operate their own farm properties appreciate their laborers and pay them well.”

“Those who own vineyards because it’s a ‘thing to do’ and are clueless about farming perpetuate this labor exploitation problem that otherwise wouldn’t exist. True farmers are land stewards and protectors of their work-hands,” the Napa Valley resident told us.

CLEANING MONEY WITH THE WRATH OF GRAPES

Unfamiliar with the workings of the California wine industry, we raised our eyebrows when our Napa Valley source said someone should find out the exact amount of money the Pelosis actually earned from their vineyards, given their very small acreage of planted grapes and the large income claimed during a time of distressed prices and poor quality.

According to the May, 2001 issue of Napa Valley Online and opensecrets.org, the woman in line to become the next Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (should the chamber change hands in 2004) owns two vineyards -- Zinfandel Lane with 18.6 acres and rental “residences,” and Skellenger Lane with 8 acres and a “homesite” -- totaling 24.6 acres. However, only 9 total acres within the two vineyards are planted with grapes.

The congresswoman’s financial statement claims income of between $200,002 and $2 million dollars for the two properties. This means that the couple earned a minimum of $200,002 -- but possibly $400,000, $750,000, $1 million, $1.5 million -- or as much as $2 million income from the two vineyard properties. The point is, without a tax return, the exact answer is unavailable. However, enlightening information can be gleaned from available statistics regarding income derived from her 9 acres of planted grapes.

Our knowledgeable Napa Valley source reports that “a valuable, top-quality cabernet sauvignon wine vineyard normally receives about $3,000 per ton for the cabernet in an ‘up’ and ‘high demand’ market, which did not exist in 2001 or 2002.” [When Pelosi filed her most recent financial statement] “It is far less now, as California is confronted with a glut of premium quality grapes due to significant planting, and literally over-planting during the last ten years,” we were told.

“And this is the high side for income per ton and yield on the most expensive and desirable variety, cabernet sauvignon,“ our source stated, adding that “quality vineyards produce on average 4.5 tons per acre (as crops are thinned to improve fruit quality). The ‘return per acre’ as a gross income paid by the winery/wineries is thus $13,500 for highest quality.”

The congresswoman’s total planted grape acreage equals 9 acres x $13,500 income per acre of highest quality grapes = $121,500 total gross grape income for the two properties.

More curiously however, our California wine country source revealed that “the AVERAGE cabernet price, however, is only $1,850 per ton x 4.5 acres x 9 acres = $75,000 total gross income for the Pelosi grapes from average quality fruit. So as you can see, the congresswoman may have some explaining to do about who buys their grapes and why they may be getting such an extraordinary price for them.”

We were also told that “her vineyards are ’postage stamp’ sized and basically ‘irrelevant’ to the industry -- small, nuisance-sized parcels that at best are difficult to contract with any winery, and are in areas not known to produce quality fruit within the Oakville district. It is marginal land, which is why it was not planted historically.”

The Napa source told us that “the biggest grape grower on Skellenger Lane [where one of the Pelosi vineyards is located] is Andy Beckstoffer -- and he likes to price his grapes to sell in a $10 per bottle of wine, for goodness sake. This is hardly an indication of extraordinary grape quality!” [suggesting that Pelosi’s Skellenger fruit is average at best.]

[Pelosi’s actual approximate “wine-grape income” is between $75,000 for average fruit and $121,500 for top-line fruit, given their reported planted acreage, and provided their fruit is of average quality -- if less than average quality, then income is even lower, suggesting that there is need of an explanation unless they show significant rental income from the vineyard properties. If Pelosi's tax return shows more that $200,002 income for the two vineyards, then there may be a significant problem.]

Cryptically, our source added that “Many Napa Valley residents find it less than amusing that politicians, judges, attorneys, and certain unsavory types seem to reap outrageously high prices for their crops, regardless of their quality.”

This is particularly disconcerting, in view of an instructive quote from the March 6, 1996 Napa Valley Register: “Napa County is very attractive to the illegitimate investor, thus making it attractive to money laundering,” adding that “Drug financiers, and wholesale and distributor level traffickers often invest in Napa County real estate markets, business or industry [i.e. wineries], the agency contends.”

Thus, according to the Napa Register, the use of vineyards to launder money from other illegal sources is likely to be an issue of interest in such areas as Napa and St. Helena, California. But the real question is whether the big golden state newspapers will report the story.

“Who buys the Pelosi grape crops?” said our source, “and what wineries, and what varieties do they grow, and how much are they paid per ton of each?” said the Napa Valley resident.

The Pelosi financial claims become problematic, our source claims, “if the amounts reported by Representative Pelosi represent ‘net income’ after all expenses of farming operations, debt payment, taxes, and management costs.”

For this would suggest they literally own hundreds of acres of vines to return such a substantial net income, especially if their potential or actual income from any “residence” rental on the vineyard property does not equal the difference in reported income.” Only a tax return would substantiate claims which on the surface do not seem to add up.

Minority Leader Pelosi claims income between $200,002 and $2 million for the two properties, so there may be a discrepancy with which to be reckoned. Our source tells us that “Pelosi spends a great deal of time at her Zinfandel Lane property with a tiny vineyard on a slight slope and while her other vineyard “residences” were not observed, the issue of rental income for a property regularly used by the owners would likely be the only source of additional income.”

“There are vineyards on her Skellenger Lane property but they are not marked or named. Vineyards are laid out in blocks, often about 4.5 acres in size, and it is often impossible to tell where one begins and ends except by differing trellis systems, for example,” we were told. And our source added that the Skellenger property would likely be considered a vineyard and future home-site, as Pelosi reported -- for there were no residences for rental.

“These are times when even long-term premium growers are receiving distress prices and finding it difficult to place their crops with a buyer. How is it that the Pelosis are receiving such extraordinary income from their grapes,” said our source. “And why isn’t the congresswoman suffering the same fate as the other growers?”

These are questions that should be asked by the California media for stories in that state’s newspapers. However, they don’t seem to be following the money; but we would bet there are other Americans who are having difficulty with issues like cheap labor, loss of jobs, and subsidizing illegals with taxpayer funds -- let alone possible money-laundering.

FRIENDS IN "HIGH" PLACES

And in case anyone is wondering if there are Bush Administration links to Nancy Pelosi, the wine industry, and its California vineyard machinations -- there are some really curious ones. Moreover, the ties travel right to the White House, since George W. Bush’s 42 year old sister Dorothy “Doro” Bush-Koch is married to Washington, DC wine industry lobbyist Bobby Petri Koch -- George W.’s brother-in-law -- a match made in wine heaven. (Pictured on far left is Nancy Pelosi)

In July, 2003, Bobby Koch is set to become president and CEO of the Wine Institute, a trade organization of about 550 California wineries and affiliated businesses, according to WineSpectatorOnline (6-28-2002). Koch (pronounced “Cook”) has a past that includes stints as a staff director for past Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, and working at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for former Rep. Tony Coelho, both Democrats.

And according to the March, 2001 issue of Business Forward, interestingly, Koch played an active role in Bush’s presidential campaign, and the Democrat is even known to have Republican George W.’s ear.

However, Bush’s brother-in-law refuses to discuss his relationship with the President, says Business Forward, adding that “If I have something to say to the president, I’ll say it in private and in confidence, and I know that he can do the same with me.” So Democratic House Leader Pelosi and her fellow California grape growers and investors have a “close friend in the Republican family.”

But that’s not all. Nancy Pelosi’s 32 year-old daughter, Alexandra, a former NBC Dateline producer, had “an all access view [for eighteen months] from the back-of-the-plane of the guy who would become Bush 43” -- President George W. -- while he was running for president during the primaries, according to the Austin Chronicle. (1-3-2002)

How the younger Pelosi was picked for such a plum job as a 31 year-old was unexplained, but we will leave that to the imagination of the readers of this piece. Alexandra Pelosi, making her first film, followed George W. for a year-and-a-half on the road as an NBC producer, later editing hundreds of hours of footage into a 75 minute film called “Journeys With George.”

Of her ultimate press junket, the younger Pelosi told the Chronicle “I made this film simply to show what it was like to be a reporter sitting on the bus during a presidential campaign.” But we’re still not sure how or why a Democratic House Minority Whip’s (at the time) daughter gets eighteen months of unrestricted “access” to the Republican presidential nominee. Oh, that’s right. It was just a coincidence. So Republicans shouldn’t “wine” about the curious entree. ( Alexandra Pelosi, in a quiet moment with the President)


Savvy and informed observers will also remember that President Bush lobbied Mrs. Pelosi's House Intelligence Committee mightily against having a congressional investigation of the attacks on September 11. Ultimately, Rep. Pelosi became a co-chairperson of the Joint 9/11 Congressional Intelligence Committee -- having access to unpublicized 9/11 evidence at the very highest level.

Moreover, it has been widely acknowledged by hundreds of 9/11 independent researchers and websites exclusively devoted to the unanswered questions of September 11, that Rep. Pelosi's Committee effectively conducted a closed-door, sham and whitewashed 9/11 probe -- with virtually none of the key lines of inquiry publicly addressed  -- such as a) governmental deception and prior warnings, b) failed military air-defenses, c) pre-9/11 insider trading and the secret SEC "Control List," d) congressmen and senators meeting on the day of the attacks with the individual funding the hijackers, e) FBI obstruction of its field agents investigating Islamic terrorism, f) V.P. Cheney's refusal to divulge the members and agenda of the Presidential Energy Task Force and its relationship to terrorism, oil, gas, and the Caspian Sea basin, etc.

SUBSIDIZING WEALTH AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE

While Minority Leader Pelosi advocates and requests actions that clearly benefit illegal immigrants -- providing an endless supply of readily available and cheap but illegal labor for California farms [the "public services" for this labor, such as schools, police-fire protection, hospitals, and insurance premiums are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers], she and her grape growing associates and campaign contributors own vineyards in Napa County -- This, with ready-made opportunities to exploit their adjacent access to the infinite and illegal labor bounty.

Moreover, the unregulated immigration [and concomitant violation of multiple federal laws] which the powerful congresswoman advocates has staggering tax implications for medical care, schools, housing, food stamps, police, and fire protection.

Most Americans are totally unaware that Congress has enacted laws related to "chain immigration."  For once illegals acquire forged papers  or "back-door" bank accounts and driver licenses via matricula consular cards, and otherwise begin to develop their legitimacy as citizens, they may summon their family and relatives to also enter the country to acquire citizenship -- further extending the fraud while abusing the immigration laws.   ( INS building, San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)


Since the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has no viable record or clue as to where literally millions of illegals are located, how many there are, and what they are doing, etc., the agency is powerless to stop the endless stream of illegals moving into the cheap labor jobs as prior illegals  move on to compete with legal U.S. citizens for better-paying union jobs.  Legitimate American citizens just pick up the tab for Pelosi’s support of lawbreakers and her weak congressional oversight of the INS.
(INS Building- San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)

All this, notwithstanding a host of other taxpayer-funded services provided by legal American citizens. And what about foreigners who waited their turn to enter the U.S.A. without resorting to climbing fences, crawling through tunnels, jumping off boats at unguarded coastlines, or wading the Rio Grande river?

That her “undocumented constituents” are exploiting Mrs. Pelosi’s willingness to subsidize illegals at taxpayer expense while potentially providing cheap labor for her personal use and that of her friends, fellow landowners, and campaign contributors merits serious attention. And lawmakers look the other way -- confident that their local constituents will not "recall" them in between elections for their oversight failures.
(INS Building- San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)

Politicians from both sides of the aisle are literally tripping over themselves to pander for the votes border-crossing lawbreakers attempting to jump to the front of the line to become illegal citizens -- assisted and supported by powerful lawmakers with campaign and personal finance conflicts of interest.  This at the expense of law-abiding Americans who pay for automatic congressional salary increases and lavish pensions and perks, only to become financial and even 9/11 victims of congressional failure to protect the country by sealing the borders from terrorists who murder and lawbreakers who steal services from the public tax coffers.

No one is asking Leader Pelosi whether she is trading campaign cash from cheap-labor oriented industries in return for her un-enforced and unregulated immigration advocacy -- while potentially garnering some extra personal income for herself and her cheap-labor-seeking business associates and contributors -- all off the backs of an endless stream of illegals and otherwise low-cost labor.

Meanwhile, legitimate American citizens pick up the debt-load and increased tax tab for extra “services” and “maintenance” prior to when her “undocumented constituents” obtain their illegal and forged papers to perpetuate the same fraud well into future generations.

Bethany Rich, spokeswoman for the Fed’s General Services Administration (GSA), said “Mrs. Pelosi requested the procedure [to assist illegals] so cardholders would have access to the Internal Revenue Service office in the Federal Building.” However, Rich never explained how or why Pelosi would think illegals should be submitting tax returns if they had violated federal laws by entering the country illegally.

“Any illegal immigrant living in the U.S. can ask to speak to ‘their representative’ [?] in the district where they are illegally residing. Did you know that,” Cindy Jimenez told us, adding that “we do not ask brown-skinned people to see their ID cards in America.”


According to the Washington Times (1-10-2003), Pelosi’s new procedure was reviewed by U.S. Marshals and GSA’s Federal Protective Service, which provides security for the building: “They reviewed the security risks, and deemed them to be minimal,” Rich said.

However, according to staff lawyers at Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE), actions “aiding and abetting an illegal entrant in his continued illegal residence in the United States constitutes a dangerous and unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public, since, among other reasons, unlike legal entrants, an illegal entrant is not subject to a criminal background or health check before entering the United States.”

Our attempts to directly contact Pelosi for comment as to why she refuses to require illegals to undergo criminal background and health checks before allowing American taxpayers to support them with services accorded only to legal citizens were unsuccessful.

When asked whether she thought the INS was doing a vigilant job in protecting the sovereignty of America’s borders from those immigrants and terrorists who have been entering and residing in the country illegally, Pelosi’s press spokesperson Cindy Jimenez replied, “I am not going to get into issues dealing with why illegals are allowed to pass across our borders. I have to go now. Goodbye.” So much for tough questions.

BANKING ON AN ENDLESS SOURCE OF NEW BANK ACCOUNTS

Los Angeles Wells Fargo Bank -- in violation of federal law -- has entered into an "arrangement" with the Consulate General of Mexico to accept the Matricula Consular card as valid identification for opening bank accounts. [Click here to read story]

Pelosi (D-8th-CA), ranked as the 17th richest Washington, DC House or Senate lawmaker in the 9-9-2002 issue of Roll Call, lists a Wells Fargo Bank mortgage held by her husband on San Francisco real estate for between $500,000 and $1 million dollars, and a joint Wells Fargo account for between $15,000 and $50,000.

Thus, Pelosi benefits from a huge Wells Fargo mortgage while her bank benefits from thousands of new accounts opened by illegal immigrants -- funneled indirectly toward the bank by Leader Pelosi’s pro-illegal advocacy. Such examples of Washington’s unspoken quid-pro-quo business-legislator climate speaks volumes as perks are passed around, even in the face of current unpunished corporate stock fraud.

According to her financial statement, Nancy Pelosi and her husband live in a Washington K Street residence worth between $1 million and $5 million, and recently purchased a Norden, CA town home worth between $1 million and $5 million. A visit to www.opensecrets.org will acquaint the uninitiated citizen as to the financial status of their own legislators and administration officials.

According to the office of Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-6th-CO), chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, a number of American banks currently recognize the card issued by Mexican consular officials throughout the U.S. to illegals as a valid ID to open an account, including such large institutions as Wells Fargo Bank, Bank One, and U.S. Bancorp, etc.

Thus far there are no statistics regarding how many illegal immigrants open new bank accounts using forged documents available on the internet, according to Tancredo. And statistics are thus far unavailable as to how many illegals or questionable immigrants are working in the California vineyards and raisin farms.

But Tancredo said that “Mexican officials have stated that getting local governments to accept these cards is a way to maneuver around the U.S. Congress -- which has so far blocked attempts to pass any amnesty provision for illegal aliens.”

“It is extremely disconcerting to see agents of a foreign country actively trying to lobby American elected officials to aid and abet lawbreakers, but it is even more infuriating when cities and members of Congress become co-conspirators,” said Tancredo.

Unbelievably, Knight-Ridder Newspapers (1-13-2003), reported that Mexico literally bypassed the U.S. government: “The matricula is the greatest achievement of the Mexican government, and it doesn’t have anything to do with the Bush Administration,” said Primitivo Rodriguez, a Mexican sociologist, immigration expert and author. “Mexico never talked with Bush or with Secretary of State Colin Powell or any legislators. They talked to banks.”

The Colorado legislator’s press release on the matter said that the Phillip Burton Federal Building, site of Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco district office, is the first of its type in the country to accept the Mexican Consulate ID card. The building began accepting the cards on Wednesday, January 8, 2003, as part of a four-month trial program, which incredibly, will mainly serve illegal immigrants who are ineligible for U.S. identification.

LAW & ETHICS VS. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

While we have recently been harsh regarding the corruption of the Bush administration, the actions of the House Minority Leader clearly present potential incidences of Federal law violation. And as such, should be investigated and prosecuted with equal intensity so that the public’s confidence in the legal system is restored.

(Doro Bush-Koch, Wife of Bobby Koch - - Wine industry lobbyist)

[Lou Dobb’s CNN “Daily Enron Scoreboard” reminds citizens that the legal system is broken and white collar financial crime is left unpunished. Moreover, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott just lost his position for an off-handed racial comment while House Minority Leader Pelosi’s actions literally abet and aid terrorists and law-breaking illegals -- while also encouraging criminal and health hazards. Where is the equality? Where is the fairness? Tucked away behind a cloak of personal and financial conflicts of interest?]

In Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), criminal penalties are provided for regarding Pelosi’s acts which clearly “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.”

The only question remaining is whether a talented attorney or legal organization has the courage and tenacity to pursue a claim against the Justice Department for failure in its oversight responsibility concerning citizens and/or legislators who use their power to violate federal immigration laws.

FILE’s attorneys clarify Pelosi’s actions by explaining that “encourage” and “induce” include actions that permit illegal aliens to be more confident that they could continue to reside with impunity in the United States, or actions that offer illegal aliens “a chance to stand equally with all other American citizens.”

FILE is an immigration reform group seemingly planning to jump all over those government agencies, legislators and individuals failing to uphold immigration laws by suggesting that they plan to initiate civil action in the courts.

The reform group’s attorneys suggest that “to prove that a state, local government agency [or even a powerful federal legislator like Leader Pelosi] ‘encouraged or induced’ illegal Mexican aliens, all the government [Justice Department] needs to establish is that the agency [or legislator] knowingly helped or advised the aliens, or emboldened them, or made them more confident in their continued illegal residence in the United States.”

Thus, the Justice Department’s and FILE’s lawyers need go no further in their search for incontrovertible evidence than to sit in when Pelosi meets with her illegal “constituents,” as her press spoksperson says she calls them, in the San Francisco Federal Building in her legislative district. And perhaps FILE may want to litigate Justice’s failure to prosecute Pelosi’s actions.

But questions arise as to whether President Bush would quash any Ashcroft Justice Department effort to enforce the law. For George W. allowed Pelosi’s daughter Alexandra unprecedented presidential “access“ for 18 months; moreover, his brother-in-law Bobby Koch, is the top lobbyist for vineyard owner-investor-congresswoman Pelosi, the California Wine Institute, and her fellow grape-growers. Who knew?  (Top Right -Bobby Koch)

What a shame that personal and financial conflicts of interest and ethical violations at the very highest levels of government have to affect the enforcement of immigration law which protects Americans from terrorists, foreign criminal and health issues, and illegals who drain the U.S.Treasury’s funds for “services.”


Both Democrats and Republicans should be outraged at such legal and ethical injustices. And what about foreigners who wait their turn to apply for legal entry into the U.S.? Will Congress hold hearings? Fat chance -- unless their feet are held to the fire.


FILE goes one step further in reporting that Section 401 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (amended by the Illegal Immigration and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) prohibits non-qualified [illegal] aliens from receiving most “Federal public benefits.”


The group’s attorneys solidify Pelosi’s actions by explaining that “any policy that accepts the matricula consular for the purpose of doling out city services [let alone the ‘services’ of a Federal House Minority Leader in her district offices] explicitly violates this provision of federal law insofar as the services to illegal aliens are paid for with federal funds.”


Unfortunately, Leader Pelosi is also breaching Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution [the Commerce Clause], according to FILE: “Congress has ‘plenary power’ over all aspects of immigration law, including ‘the right to provide a system of registration and identification’ for aliens, because ‘the entire control of international relations’ is invested in the national government” -- not solely with Congresswoman Pelosi.


Courts have repeatedly held that no governmental authority may establish any policy that relates to immigration other than Congress and authorized federal agencies, and that the “power to regulate immigration is unquestionably exclusively a federal power,” according to FILE’s legal staff.


But it gets worse for the California congresswoman. Entering the United States without inspection [illegal entry] is a criminal offense under 8 U.S.C. [United States Code] 1325.   Providing public services to such an alien in “knowing and reckless disregard” of the alien’s illegal status amounts to aiding and abetting a crime, and is a criminal violation in and of itself.


By the INA Section 274 (a) aiding and abetting statute, the distinction is eliminated between principles and accessories in alien smuggling crimes. And courts have held that aiding and abetting also relates to conduct [by any person] while the illegal alien is in the United States.


Moreover, official acceptance of the matricula consular by ANY public entity can be said to be dangerous and negligent, and, therefore, the public entity, and its officers or representatives, may not enjoy sovereign immunity in many states under certain circumstances wherein government immunity is strictly construed by the courts and its waiver liberally or deferentially construed, also according to FILE’s attorneys.


Thus, “If any illegal entrant, whose illegal presence in the United States can be shown to have been encouraged, induced, harbored, and/or aided by any public entity [or elected legislator], commits a crime while illegally present in the United States, during the commission of which an American citizen suffers personal injury,” FILE says it will attempt to help the injured party bring a personal injury suit against the public entity and, to the extent allowed by law, against its officers, individually and severally, for damages.


So House Minority Leader Pelosi is placing her personal fortune of millions in stocks, bonds, vineyards, bank accounts, rental properties, and multiple personal residences -- not to mention her House Leadership position -- at risk in order to violate federal laws and the United States Constitution, her local constituents none the wiser.


Maupin, who owns a gun store, patrols his property on the Mexican border in a fully camouflaged halftrack.  Mexicans don't bother him much any more.


The immigration watchdog group also reminds ALL Americans that aiding and abetting an illegal entrant in his continued illegal residence in the United States [as Congresswoman Pelosi is clearly doing] constitutes a dangerous and unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public, since, among other reasons, unlike legal entrants, an illegal entrant is not subject to criminal background or health check before entering the United States.


The organization recently noted an aggressive Mexico City-backed campaign within the U.S. to push for acceptance of the ID card issued to illegals. Roberto Rodriguez Hernandez, general director of the ID project for Mexico’s foreign ministry, made no secret of his motives and tactics, according to the Washington Times:


“It’s necessary to push the need for an [amnesty for illegals] at all levels. A little lobbying, pushing from [U.S.] mayors up to governors, then going through congressional representatives [pro-Mexico federal legislative puppets advocating unregulated and uncontrolled immigration?] and senators is worth the effort.”


Worse, however, is that weak congressional oversight is allowing the above effort to be coordinated on U.S. soil in Mexico’s 43 consulates scattered across the country, as the Bush Treasury Department also appears to have given banks tacit approval to accept the Mexican IDs, according to the Washington Post (12-22-2002).


This is the view of the US / Mexico border one mile from the ocean, facing East. The huge road is for Border Patrol Vehicles only.


The Post cites recent surveys showing a growing gap between what the U.S. public thinks about immigration and what U.S. political and business leaders think: Some 60 % of the public regards the current level of immigration as a “critical threat” to United States security, for example.


Vulnerability to terrorism can indeed be one consequence of the illegal immigration that Democrat House Leader Pelosi advocates but the phenomenon is far from one dimensional.


Pelosi’s legal and constitutional breaches may already be un-repairable, however, for according to the Washington Post, one million Mexican ID cards have already been distributed to illegals living in the U.S. just this past year alone -- health, safety, and terrorism issues, let alone taxpayer-funded “illegal services” notwithstanding.

(Picture, Mexican Government Capitol)

That Pelosi and other uncontrolled immigration advocates are a threat to the health, safety and well-being of American citizens is quite evident; but the Minority Leader is only one key leader in the pro-illegal immigration movement. There are other officials -- some at the highest levels -- who are also ignoring the public surveys, in order to encourage illegal entry into America.



("The fence" in the middle of the freeway is to keep the illegal Mexicans from getting run over by Cars, Trucks, Etc.  Thousands a year are hit by cars trying to run from the Border Patrol, SD, CA)

The question is whether some individual or group will legally challenge the clear and present threats Congresswoman Pelosi imposes upon her fellow citizens by her dangerous pro-illegal immigration advocacy and actions -- all in clear violation of multiple federal and constitutional laws.






Home   |   Contact Tom   |   Fair Use Notice   |   Store   |   News   |   Story Archive   |   In Brief Archive



We gratefully accept contributions to help with web expenses:
Tom Flocco
P.O. Box 172,
Newtown Square, PA 19073


This Site Copyright © 2002-2007 under the DMCA by tomflocco.com