Trump administration to release hundreds of immigrant families from detention
But with border nonprofits already stretched to capacity, many families will probably end up dropped off en masse at bus stations.
Hundreds, or even thousands, of migrant families are set to be released from government detention along the US-Mexico border over the next several days. But while the mass release of families may cheer critics of the Trump administration’s treatment of immigrant families, the government’s new plan will probably lead to hundreds of families getting dropped off en masse at bus stations — literally out in the cold.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency that’s generally responsible for immigrant detention, has already started mass releases of hundreds of families a day.
But in a break with standard policy, US Border Patrol has developed a plan to release some families directly if they’ve been held for more than a few days — instead of holding all families for ICE to pick up.
Plans for Border Patrol to release families directly were confirmed to Vox by two officials with knowledge of the mass-release operation. The sources said that releases from both ICE and Border Patrol could start as soon as Thursday and are expected to last for a few days — with hundreds of families a day set to be released in the Rio Grande Valley and around El Paso.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, Katie Waldman, did not confirm any plan to release families directly from Border Patrol custody.
However, in a statement, Waldman partly blamed a 2015 ruling extending legal protections to children who arrived with parents in the US — including requiring Border Patrol to keep them in custody for no more than 72 hours — for causing the current “immigration crisis”, saying it “incentivizes illegal alien adults to put their children in the hands of smugglers and traffickers” and “rewards parents for bringing their children with them to the United States.”
Releasing families who’ve entered the US without papers from detention is the exact outcome the Trump administration has spent all of 2018 deriding as “catch and release,” and which it has rolled out a series of policy initiatives — “zero tolerance” prosecution and widespread family separation, regulatory efforts to keep families in detention until they’re deported, the “asylum ban” now blocked in the courts, a not-yet-implemented plan to force asylum seekers to wait in Mexico — to prevent.
But the system for apprehending and detaining children and families is in crisis — and the consequences have been deadly.
Two children have died in the past month in Border Patrol custody in New Mexico, the area of the border where the US government has been most overwhelmed by unprecedented numbers of families crossing into the country. Felipe Alonzo-Gomez, who died in a New Mexico hospital just after midnight on Christmas Day, had been in Border Patrol custody for six days — a violation of both agency policy and the Flores settlement that governs the treatment of children in immigration custody — and had been shuffled among four different facilities.
Amid growing scrutiny of Border Patrol detention conditions, the new release plan may seem welcome to Trump critics. But that raises the question of where all those newly released families will go; who will help them adjust to life in the United States; and how they will get to where they need to go while awaiting their immigration court hearings.
Normally, local nonprofits take care of families after release at the border. But it’s not at all clear that local nonprofits have the capacity to care for hundreds more families — the lead nonprofit in El Paso, Annunciation House, was stretched beyond capacity even before ICE started releasing hundreds of families in the area earlier this week. And in some sectors, the government doesn’t even have a relationship with a local nonprofit that it can notify before dropping off families.
That means families who have no knowledge of the US might be getting dumped en masse at bus stations in the middle of winter, many without winter clothing and all without guidance about what to do next.
Officials and nonprofits alike at the border are being asked to do something they have never had to do before: take care of tens of thousands of migrant families coming in a month, often in large groups and often in remote areas. President Trump’s constant stoking of panic about immigrants coming into the US to commit crimes has overshadowed a real crisis at the border over the past several months — a crisis of resources. Unprecedented numbers of families are coming into the US without papers, and no one has the capacity to deal with them humanely.
Catholic priest, 73, who had 2,000 images and videos of child porn, discussed raping and murdering young boys in chat rooms, and once admitted to peeing in the wine for Mass is sentenced to 25 years in prison
Thomas Faucher pleaded guilty to distributing, possessing child pornography
He called himself ‘one sick puppy’ as he apologized to the courtroom Thursday
Possessed ‘violent, disturbing, and torturous’ images that involved children
Faucher told someone online he wanted to sexually abuse boys, was attracted to six-year-old boys, and that the thought of killing someone excited him
Faucher also revealed in chats he wanted to sexually abuse altar boys and babies
Police also found photographs of him peeing on a cross and a canon law book
A Catholic priest who had more than 2,000 photos and videos of child pornography on his computer and phone has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.
Thomas Faucher, a well-known priest in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, will not be eligible for parole and must register as a sex offender.
Faucher, 73, pleaded guilty to five felony crimes after investigators discovered thousands of disturbing images and chats about raping and murdering young boys.
He pleaded guilty to two counts of distribution of sexually exploitative material, two counts of possession of sexually exploitative materials, and one count of drug possession.
Faucher called himself ‘one sick puppy’ as he apologized to the courtroom before his sentencing on Thursday, according to the Idaho Statesman.
‘I am deeply sorry that I was and have been connected to that in any way,’ he told 4th District Court Judge Jason Scott.
‘I was one really sick puppy. I screwed up big time. I feel so much remorse and anger.’
Faucher, a well-known priest in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, will not be eligible for parole and must register as a sex offender
Faucher tried to convince the judge that he should not receive jail time so that he could help others and ‘give lectures on the evils of child pornography’, saying there were ‘many people’ who would ‘benefit’ if he wasn’t behind bars.
‘There are no people who will benefit if I am in jail or prison,’ he added.
But Scott was not convinced, calling the priest a ‘legitimate risk to the community’.
‘This is a crime that has potential for both immediate and long-lasting consequences,’ the judge added.
Detective John Brumbaugh of the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force took to the stand on Thursday to describe the extent of disturbing content he found on Faucher’s devices.
Brumbaugh said he first received a tip regarding two images that had been sent from the email address wtfauch@aol.com.
He then began investigating Faruch, discovering thousands of ‘violent, disturbing, and torturous’ images that involved ‘young-looking subjects’.
Faucher spoke extensively to a person called ‘Bruno’, telling them that he wanted to have sex with boys – including some in his own family – and was attracted to six-year-old boys.
The priest also told Bruno that he had ‘satanic desires’ and that the ‘thought of killing someone does begin to excite me’.
He admitted to fantasies about sexually abusing altar boys and babies and said he enjoyed watching a video of a boy being beaten to death.
Investigators found images of Faucher peeing on a cross and a canon law book. In one chat, Faucher claimed he urinated in the wine for Mass.
The priest had a Dropbox, shared with another user, titled ‘Innocence Defiled’. He admitted in chats that he felt ‘wonderful indifference’ as he solicited more child pornography.
Faucher was was initially charged with 21 counts of felony sexual exploitation of a child when he was arrested in February
‘It felt good to lie for no good reason except to do it,’ Faucher told Bruno in one chat.
‘Most of the time, I just make a new reality and believe it as long as it suits me.’
Details of the images and conversations were so graphic that many chose to leave the Ada County Courtroom on Thursday. Some were in tears.
Brumbaugh said the images even took a toll on himself and others who were working on the investigation.
‘The volume was something I haven’t come across,’ he told the courtroom.
Faucher was arrested in February. He told Brumbaugh that no one else had access to his email account.
He was initially charged with 21 counts of felony sexual exploitation of a child, as well as one count of felony possession of LSD and possession of marijuana and ecstasy.
Brumbaugh said there was no evidence in which Faucher expressed that he did not want to receive child pornography.
While pleading guilty, Faucher claimed that he couldn’t remember sharing child porn because he had alcohol-induced depression and dementia.
Following Faucher’s arrest, two men alleged that the priest had sexually abused them.
While the statute of limitations for most child sex crimes in Idaho was removed in 2006, the law was not retroactive – meaning abuse charges will likely never be filed.
Ada County Deputy Prosecutor Kassandra Slaven had asked for a 30-year prison sentence, noting that Faucher was diagnosed a pedophile and that an evaluation found there was a high risk he would reoffend.
‘It shakes the community. It shakes the members of the Catholic Church,’ she said. ‘He portrays himself as a victim and is not at all accountable for his actions.’
Defense attorney Mark Manweiler asked that Faucher receive probation and treatment, arguing that the evidence didn’t prove the priest looked at all the images on his computer and claiming Faucher ‘never sexually abused any child’.
Officials from the Diocese of Boise were in court for the sentencing, and spokesman Gene Fadness said they will seek to have Faucher defrocked.
‘It’s been agonizing every day for the parishioners at Saint Mary’s and for those in the community, even outside Saint Mary’s,’ he said.
‘[Faucher] was not just a priest, but a prominent priest, well known. This has been very difficult for everyone involved.’
‘Almost immediately after [Thursday], we will submit our case to Rome.’
The diocese also released a statement reiterating Fadness’ words.
‘The volumes of shocking information that the law enforcement investigation uncovered reveal the heinous nature of child pornography and the tragic impact upon its victims,’ the statement read.
‘While we cannot begin to fathom what brought Faucher to the point that he was able to enter into this evil and dark world, we are thankful for the efforts of the law enforcement community in doing what it can to protect our children from these crimes.’
Faucher was evicted from the home he rented from the diocese following his arrest. They had it exorcised before selling it.
These so-called conservatives are nothing but communist scum. RBG is 120 almost and she does not know if she is coming or going.
Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly found himself in hot water after he posted what many considered to be an insensitive tweet about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s cancer surgery.
The Supreme Court announced on Friday that Justice Ginsburg underwent a successful medical procedure that removed cancerous nodules from her lung.
“Justice Ginsburg is very ill,” O’Reilly tweeted. “Another Justice appointment inevitable and soon. Bad news for the left.”
Bill O’Reilly
✔@BillOReilly
Justice Ginsburg is very ill. Another Justice appointment inevitable and soon. Bad news for the left.
O’Reilly caught plenty of heat for his comment. “The View” co-host Meghan McCain called it “gross and ghoulish.”
“There’s really nothing more gross and ghoulish than people in the media pontificating on a public persons health and the hypothetical political ramifications of their death,” McCain tweeted. “Join me in praying for RBG to have a speedy and healthy recovery – we are Christians, aren’t we Bill?” (RELATED: Justice Ginsburg Told Audience Her Health Was ‘Fine’ Days Before Cancer Operation)
Meghan McCain
✔@MeghanMcCain
There’s really nothing more gross and ghoulish than people in the media pontificating on a public persons health and the hypothetical political ramifications of their death. Join me in praying for RBG to have a speedy and healthy recovery – we are Christians, aren’t we Bill?
Bill O’Reilly
✔@BillOReilly
Justice Ginsburg is very ill. Another Justice appointment inevitable and soon. Bad news for the left.
Lets rewrite this ugly tweet: . Justice Ginsburg is recovering from successful removal of two very small cancerous cysts in her lung. Her doctors say it has not spread and they expect a full and swift recovery- we all hope for that.
Bill O’Reilly
✔@BillOReilly
Justice Ginsburg is very ill. Another Justice appointment inevitable and soon. Bad news for the left.
So we are punishing our military for killing terrorist.
After eight years, two investigations and the intervention of a congressman, Maj. Matthew Golsteyn is being charged with murder in the death of an Afghan man during a 2010 deployment.
Golsteyn’s commander “has determined that sufficient evidence exists to warrant the preferral of charges against him,” U.S. Army Special Operations Command spokesman Lt. Col. Loren Bymer told Army Times in a brief email statement Thursday.
“Major Golsteyn is being charged with the murder of an Afghan male during his 2010 deployment to Afghanistan,” Bymer wrote.
The major’s attorney, Phillip Stackhouse, told Army Times that he and his client learned of the charges on Thursday as well, and that the murder charge carries with it the possibility of a death penalty.
Stackhouse called his client a “humble servant-leader who saved countless lives, both American and Afghan, and has been recognized repeatedly for his valorous actions.”
Bymer confirmed that Golsteyn has been recalled to active duty and is under the command of the USASOC headquarters company. An intermediary commander will review the warrant of preferred charges to determine if the major will face an Article 32 hearing that could lead to a court-martial.
That commander has 120 days to make that decision.
Golsteyn had been placed on voluntary excess leave, an administrative status for soldiers pending lengthy administrative proceedings, Bymer said. He is not being confined at this time.
The path to these charges has been a winding one.
Golsteyn, a captain at the time, was deployed to Afghanistan in 2010 with 3rd Special Forces Group. During the intense Battle of Marja, explosives planted on a booby-trapped door killed two Marines and wounded three others who were working with the major’s unit.
During those heated days, Golsteyn earned a Silver Star, the nation’s third-highest award for valor, when he helped track down a sniper targeting his troops, assisted a wounded Afghan soldier and helped coordinate multiple airstrikes.
He would be awarded that medal at a 2011 ceremony at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The award was later approved for an upgrade to the Distinguished Service Cross, the second highest award for valor.
But both the medal and his coveted Special Forces tab would be stripped from him due to an investigation that eventually closed in 2014 without any charges.
An Army board of inquiry recommended a general discharge for Golsteyn and found no clear evidence the soldier violated the rules of engagement while deployed in 2010. This would have allowed Golsteyn to retain most of his retirement benefits under a recommended general discharge under honorable conditions.
Though he was cleared of a law of armed conflict violation, the board found Golsteyn’s conduct as unbecoming an officer.
Golsteyn was out of Special Forces and in a legal limbo as he awaited a discharge.
That could have been the end of it, but in mid-2015, Army documents surfaced, showing that Golsteyn allegedly told CIA interviewers during a polygraph test that he had killed an alleged Afghan bomb-maker and later conspired with others to destroy the body.
Those documents were part of a 2011 report filed by an Army investigator, Special Agent Zachary Jackson, who reported that Golsteyn said after the Marines were killed in the February blast that his unit found bomb-making materials nearby, detained the suspected bomb-maker and brought him back to their base.
A local tribal leader identified the man as a known Taliban bomb-maker. The accused learned of the leader’s identification, which caused the tribal leader to fear he would kill him and his family if released.
Trusting the leader and having also seen other detainees released, Golsteyn allegedly told CIA interviewers that he and another soldier took the alleged bomb-maker off base, shot him and buried his remains.
He also allegedly told the interviewers that on the night of the killing, he and two other soldiers dug up the body and burned it in a trash pit on base.
Stackhouse has previously called this alleged admission a “fantasy” that his client confessed to shooting an unarmed man.
Then, in late 2016, during an interview with Fox News, Golsteyn admitted to a version of the incidents involving the killing of the alleged Afghan bomb-maker.
The Army opened a second investigation near the end of 2016.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, himself a Marine veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan, stepped in on Golsteyn’s behalf, writing a letter to the Army secretary and making scathing public comments about the case, calling the Army’s investigation “retaliatory and vindictive.”
The congressman called on Army leadership to “fix this stupidity,” describing Golsteyn as “a distinguished and well regarded Green Beret.”
Unrelated to the Golsteyn case, Hunter was indicted earlier this year by federal prosecutors who are alleging conspiracy, wire fraud, falsification of records and prohibited use of campaign contributions.
An 11-year-old boy known as “Desmond Is Amazing” danced on stage at a New York gay bar while grown men tossed dollar bills at him.
“The pre-adolescent boy, dressed in drag to imitate singer Gwen Stefani, pranced around the stage at Brooklyn’s 3 Dollar Bill, an LGBT bar described as ‘queer owned & operated,’ and ‘Brooklyn’s Premiere Queer Bar & Performance Venue,’” LifeSiteNews reports.
For reasons that suddenly make sense, the bar enforces a strict ban on cell phone usage.
One Yelp reviewer wrote that the bar makes you “put your phone into a locked magnet pouch at the door, so it can’t be used while there. You can slip it into your pocket but can’t get in the pouch.”
Below Good Morning America Praising Him
Another explained it this way: “The club put our phones in these locked sleeves, which we could [carry] around the club.”
The first to report this about the sexual exploitation of this child was a YouTuber named Yosef Ozia, who connected all these dots based on the Yelp reviews:
As you can see in the video, this 11-year-old boy is dressed in drag and prancing around wearing a tank top as grown men cheer and throw money.
In even creepier news, “Desmond Is Amazing” has been celebrated by the establishment media.
The Daily Beast and NBC News have both gushed over what can only be described as the sexual exploitation of a child.
According to LifeSite, “ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ (GMA) recently devoted a segment to the boy during which his cross-dressing was celebrated as an example of individuality, and his parents were praised for their support of his drag hobby.”
The Daily Wire reports that this exploitation has been going on for years: “When Desmond was just six years old, he was featured in a music video with drag queen and Season Six winner of RuPaul’s Drag Race Jinkx Monsoon. As a fourth-grader, the child was used to advance the LGBT agenda, giving a speech at New York City’s Pride in 2017.”
According to Desmond’s biography, he came out as a homosexual — when he was born:
Desmond was born in June 2007, during NYC Pride Week, at St. Vincent’s Hospital in Manhattan. As he tells it, this means that he “is a member of the Village People by default”. He has also claimed that he “came out of the closet when he was born”. Desmond has a loving family and lives in New York City with his father, mother, and many pets. He also has an older sister. Desmond’s nickname at home is Desi.
In this same write up, though, Desmond’s parents claim they are just letting him do what he wants — that a therapist told them this is healthy. In other words, if he enjoys dressing like a girl, being an LGBT icon, and performing in drag, let him.
But it also says this [emphasis added]:
Although he wants everyone to express themselves as genuinely as possible, he is concerned about the growing trend of young teen and child drag performers to dress or act overly sexy or provocatively, much like their adult counterparts. He feels that it sends the wrong message about all young drag performers and results in added aggression, bullying, and hatred, not only from society, but from within the LGBTQ community itself. Although an often controversial topic, he would personally like to see more young people discovering a drag style that speaks to their personal truth, but is at the same time, more age appropriate.
So, in public, Desmond is presented as a child just doing what he loves but in a healthy way that is not “overly sexual” or “provocative,” in a manner that is “age appropriate.”
But at gay bars where your phone’s recording devices are disabled upon entry, 11-year-old Desmond’s parents have him dancing around on stage in a tank top while grown men hoot, holler, and throw money.
According to my watch, the Second Coming is already ten minutes late.
When will these people get serious about the government corruption.
Democrats who are hoping that President Donald Trump will face harsh repercussions for paying settlements to women who allege relationships with him passed legislation on Thursday that requires them to make payments for sexual harassment with their own money.
Current law addressing sexual misconduct that was put in place in 1995 — ironically when Bill Clinton was in the White House — requires an accuser to get counseling, wait 30 days, and allowed accused lawmakers to use a slush fund of taxpayer money to pay off their accusers.
Part of the reason it took Congress all year to get this done is because the House wanted tougher punishments and more transparency when lawmakers sexually harass or discriminate against staff, while Senate Republicans, for some reason, insisted on watering down those provisions.
House lawmakers, for example, wanted to make members of Congress pay out of pocket for discrimination settlements too and wanted to provide legal representation to all accusers. But the Senate, which finally caved on requiring lawmakers to pay out of pocket for sexual harassment settlements, rejected both of those provisions and neither ended up in the final bill.
The passage of the bill, which President Donald Trump has to sign into law, is Congress’s response to the #MeToo movement launched last year, wherein women across the country accused men ranging from Hollywood moguls to media celebrities and members of the House and Senate of sexual harassment and worse.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) spearheaded the movement in Congress last year after announcing that she, too, had been the victim of sexual misconduct as a young congressional staffer. She was one of the main sponsors behind the House legislation, and she promised to push next session to put that chamber’s tougher terms back in place.
“Taxpayers should never foot the bill for Members’ misconduct,” Speier said in a statement provided to the Huffington Post. “And having spoken with many survivors, the process of going up against a lawyer for the institution and the harasser was as traumatic, if not more traumatic, than the abuse they suffered. … We are committed to offering victims the tools they need to pursue justice. We will address these issues in the next Congress.”
The law is not retroactive, so the members who have left their Congressional seats because of sexual misconduct charges will not be affected, including Blake Farenhold (R-TX), Patrick Meehan (R-PA), Trent Franks (R-AZ), John Conyers (D-MI), and Al Franken (D-MN).
The Daily Caller asked Speier why lawmakers paying off women who make accusations against them differs from what Trump is alleged to have done when his lawyer paid funds to women who claimed to have had a relationship with him.
“They’re totally unrelated,” Speier told The Daily Caller on Wednesday. She later explained, “One was to impact an election and the other was bad behavior within Congress.”
“When pressed further about the Congressional settlements being taxpayer money, as opposed to any money allegedly paid to Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen, Speier responded, “I’m the one who has carried the legislation to make sure that members are held accountable. These members are now gone. There’s no one left who was sexually harassing.”
