patrick.net

The prosecution alleged that Kelly shot his AK-style rifle at Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, a resident of Nogales, Mexico, who was crossing his land illegally some 115 yards away.

Cuen-Buitimea had several deportations for illegally entering the United States, most recently in 2016.

Kelly and his lawyers claimed that Kelly shot warning shots into the air, but didn't aim at Cuen-Buitimea. No bullet was recovered at the site.

Kelly's lawyers tried to poke holes in the prosecutor's account of the incident and accused law enforcement officials of failing to follow other leads that would have cleared their client of any wrongdoing. They also accused law enforcement of falsely claiming that Kelly admitted to shooting at multiple people.

"That was not true, Alan never said that. Law enforcement wasn't listening and they didn't care, they already decided that he was guilty," said defense attorney Brenna Larkin...

Authorities were not able to find the bullet that struck Cuen-Buitimea. The defense claimed he was shot by another person in the group.

The defense maintained that the illegal immigrants were smugglers and that Cuen-Buitimea was likely shot by one of his fellow travelers. But the police, allegedly, wouldn't look into that possibility and only focused on pinning the crime on Kelly.

Nearly Half of Democrats Would Support Trump’s Plan For Mass Deportations

Nearly half of Democrats would support Donald Trump’s plan for mass deportations during his second presidential term, according to new polling data.

The poll, conducted by Axios in partnership with Harris Poll, found that 51 per cent of the American public would support the plan, including 42 per cent of Democrats, 68 per cent of Republicans and 46 per cent of independents.

Florida police capture "newcomer" from Guatemala after he stabbed his girlfriend and her 4-year-old daughter to death.

Governor Reynolds signed a new immigration law on April 10th, and last week said the state would start enforcing it in July. “The only reason we had to pass this law is because the Biden administration refuses to enforce the laws already on the books,” she told Epoch Times on Thursday.

Under the new criminal law, Iowa authorities can arrest any person with outstanding deportation orders, who was previously removed from the United States, or who was previously denied admission to Iowa.

Last month, the Biden Administration gave Governor Reynolds until today, May 7th, to agree she will not enforce the new law, or else the federal government will sue Iowa, arguing the state’s new law is unconstitutional, since the power to regulate immigration is reserved to the federal government, not the states. ...

But Iowa’s law anticipated constitutional challenges, and tried to avoid those problems by tracking federal law. So the federal government’s Orwellian argument will have to be framed as the right to not enforce the law. In other words, under the doctrine of preemption, states can make similar laws but may not contradict federal law. Iowa will argue it is just tracking federal law and not contradicting it. Biden’s DOJ will argue with a straight face that Iowa’s law contradicts Biden’s deliberate choice to not enforce the immigration laws.

Last night, the House narrowly passed The Equal Representation Act, a bill that would add a citizenship question to the Census to prevent illegals from being counted for representation in Congress and the Electoral College.

Almost 10 million illegals have been allowed into the country by Alejandro Mayorkas since Biden took office, and now I think we know why.

As the census is currently conducted, illegal immigrants can be counted, which gives states with high levels of illegals more seats in the House of Representatives, and more electoral votes.

Over 6,300,000 illegals have already been shipped to mostly Democrat cities around the nation.

This bill was designed to prevent that, and every single Democrat just voted against it.

If you weren't already clear on why Democrats love illegal immigration, there ya go.

You might have noticed that mass migration to the West is a huge problem.

It is very bad for native Westerners, because it promises to transform our societies utterly, in permanent ways and not for the better. Curiously, it is also far from great for the centre-left political establishment responsible for promoting mass migration, because it has inspired a vast wave of popular opposition and filled the sails of right-leaning, migration restrictionist parties with new wind. Mass migration is also bad for taxpayers, for domestic security, for the welfare state, for many other aspects of the postwar liberal agenda and for our own future prospects. In short, mass migration is bad for almost everybody and everything.

There is a reason that nations have borders, and this is much the same reason that we have skin and that cells have membranes. You won’t survive for very long if you can’t control what enters you.

Despite the obvious fact that mass migration is bad, our rulers cling to migrationism like grim death. Given a choice between disincentivising asylees and intimidating, browbeating and harassing the millions of anti-migrationists among their own citizens, our governments generally choose the latter path, even though it is obviously the worse of the two.

Additionally unsettling, is the fact that official justifications for mass migration often have a creepy, post-hoc flavour about them. They sound much more like excuses dreamed up after the borders had already been opened, rather than any kind of reason mass migration must occur. When the migrationists really started to go crazy in 2015, for example, we were told that border security was simply impossible in the modern world and that infinity migrants were a force of nature we would have to deal with. That didn’t sound right even at the time, and since the pandemic border closures we no longer hear the inevitability narrative very much, although – and this is very bizarre to type – there is some evidence that high political figures like Angela Merkel believed it at the time. It is well worth thinking about why that might have been the case.

Watch this illegal immigrant complain that her free food and housing is not good enough

Imagine illegally entering India or China, getting free food and housing, then complaining. It'd never happen.

But here in the U.S., where the tax money meant for American vets, seniors, and kids is being pouring into housing illegals from 100+ countries around the world, the illegals have a message:

'It's very traumatic,' said Mercedes Vasquez-Simmons, translating for Pena. 'She says it's been quite traumatic. Everything that has been told to us to come to Monroe County, to Rochester hasn't been fulfilled.'