An NBC/WSJ poll released Thursday reveals that more Republican voters consider themselves a “supporter of Donald Trump” rather than a “supporter of the Republican Party.”
A whopping 58 percent of respondents indicated they considered themselves Trump supporters, while only 38 percent indicated they considered themselves supporters of the Republican party. 2 percent see themselves as both, while 1 percent said they were neither.
After watching the Republican “majority” being held hostage by the thoroughly loathsome John McCain for the last two months this shouldn’t surprise anyone.
Despite the Republican domination at the federal and state level, the party is a bit adrift. It is nigh impossible to quickly state what the GOP stands for anymore.
Are they the small government party? No, they simply favor a slightly less bloated federal bureaucracy than do the Democrats.
Are they the party of lower taxes? As I mentioned in this video earlier, they are the party that likes to talk about lower taxes. A lot.
If pressed, most Republicans would probably just say that the Republicans are “not the Democrats” when trying to describe their own party. The Democrats are even more adrift after Barack Obama left the party’s cupboard bare, so that is enough for a lot of people.
The people voting Republican all over America these last few years have very little in common with the Republicans in Washington and the latter group is almost completely unaware of that. They better get a grip on that soon.”
Tucker Carlson Destroys Leftie Hollywood Hack Rob Reiner Over Crazy Russia War Ad
“Tucker Carlson invited Hollywood director Rob Reiner tonight to discuss his latest Russia War video ad he released with Morgan Freeman and a group of leftie and anti-Trump RINOs.
Morgan Freeman told Americans this week in the latest anti-Trump Hollywood production, “We are at war with Russia.”
The Committee to Investigate Russia produced the video this week. The committee includes Rob Reiner, James Clapper, and Max Boot.
Tucker Carlson had Rob Reiner on his show and destroyed him over this Hollywood conspiracy.
Tucker Carlson: I agree with you we are very divided. And maybe this is one of the reasons. A lot of this is disingenuous. Anyone who looks at cyber warfare will tell you, any honest person, will tell you the Chinese military is the primary culprit in the United States, hacked into the White House not too long ago… Nobody said anything. You guys in Hollywood sell your movies in China. You bow to the imperatives of their propaganda and censorship office. You change your movies to suit them. And yet no one says we’re at war with China.”
“China has never been shy about its desire to acquire “soft power” – the kind of cultural and economic influence that can’t be wielded by military might. And Hollywood has often been a partner in its project.
China’s bid for soft power was on show this week, as Sony Pictures Entertainment formed an alliance with Dalian Wanda, a Chinese company that has become one of the world’s largest media empires, in a deal announced Friday. While the partnership was smaller than some of Dalian Wanda’s previous acquisitions, it attracted attention as the Chinese company’s third major deal in Hollywood this year.
These deals have sparked concern over whether China’s expanding influence in Hollywood could lead to more pro-Chinese propaganda in U.S. films. The Chinese government tightly controls media content, and Hollywood studios have been known to alter films to feature China or the Chinese government in a more flattering light to gain access to the country’s lucrative film market.
For Hollywood, China provides the blockbuster combination of a huge movie market and cash-rich equity funds that are eager to invest in films and companies. The Chinese box office is on pace to soon surpass the U.S. as the world’s biggest market, perhaps next year.
On Sept. 15, 16 members of Congress mentioned the Chinese company by name in a letter that called for greater scrutiny of foreign investments. The 14 Republicans and two Democrats said that Dalian Wanda’s acquisitions have raised concerns “about China’s efforts to censor topics and exert propaganda controls on American media.”
The partnership — in which the Chinese company will help promote Sony films in China and co-finance some of Sony’s biggest China movie releases — comes on the heels of two major acquisitions. In January, Dalian Wanda announced the acquisition of Legendary Entertainment, the Hollywood production company behind such blockbusters as “Jurassic World” and “The Dark Knight.” In March, AMC Entertainment, a U.S. cinema chain previously acquired by Dalian Wanda, made a bid for Carmike Cinemas that would make Dalian Wanda Group the owner of the biggest cinema chain in the United States.
The Chinese company is expanding elsewhere, acquiring cinema chains in Australia and Europe in steps toward its goal of controlling 20 percent of the global film market by 2020. It is also heavily investing in China’s domestic industry, including a 400-acre film studio slated to open in 2017 that will have 30 soundstages, an underwater stage, and a permanent set of a New York City street.”
The NFL Is Dying As Middle Class Americans Say “TURN IT OFF”
“The first two weeks of ratings for the NFL were down twelve and then fifteen percent respectively.
That’s a huge drop and a downward trend that has owners and the league worried as advertising profits are certain to slide as well.
The timing of the decline in ratings is clear – as some players chose to use their platform to push an anti-American/anti-police/anti-military/anti-Trump agenda, millions of fans responded with a collective HELL NO and found other things to occupy their free time.
Last season then San Francisco QB Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance as it played before the game. His protest was a Black Lives Matter inspired gesture – the same Black Lives Matter group that has on more than one occasion called for the killing of police and white people.
Kaepernick now finds himself on the outside of the NFL looking in. He was dropped by the 49er’s for his poor play. Other players this season are now staging similar protests even as an increasing number of fans would clearly rather those players focus on playing football for which they are paid millions of dollars per season for doing so.
And so the ratings continue to drop by double-digits. A New York Post report indicated a ten percent drop in ratings will cost the major networks of CBS, Fox, ESPN, and NBC $200 million in lost operating income.
That’s real money.
Should ratings decline by twenty percent the league would experience a full-blown fiscal crisis that could threaten the very viability of the league itself. Players are protesting themselves right out of a job. A handful of spoiled millionaire athletes taking on the traditional values of millions of Middle Class Americans isn’t good for business.”
Amazon appears to delete over 900 critical reviews of Hillary Clinton’s book
|| Telegraph UK
“Amazon has apparently deleted over 900reviews of Hillary Clinton’s book in the first 24 hours since it went on sale, after the publisher raised concern that the reviewers had not actually read the book.
Mrs Clinton’s book, What Happened, went on sale on Tuesday. By Wednesday there were 1,600 reviews – many of which did not discuss the book, but instead offered high praise or scathing criticism of Mrs Clinton.
The website Quartz analysed the data from the reviews and found that of the book’s 1,600 or so reviews as of Wednesday morning, only 338 were from users with verified purchases of the book – that is, those who actually bought the item on Amazon.com. They could, of course, have bought the book somewhere else and then logged onto Amazon to post a review, but the majority of Amazon’s reviews are from people who bought the book on their site.
Jonathan Karp, president and publisher of Simon & Schuster, saidhe believed many of the reviews were not from people who read the book.
“It seems highly unlikely that approximately 1,500 people read Hillary Clinton’s book overnight and came to the stark conclusion that it is either brilliant or awful,” he said.
He said Simon & Schuster hoped the online commentary would reflect opinions of people who have actually read the book.
“It’s pathetic and immature that Clinton can’t accept personal responsibility for her loss. She was a terrible candidate and had a hard time defeating Bernie,” wrote R.J. Parker.”
|| Note:The actual reviews still left on the Amazon site are quite interesting, and revealing of the obvious blatant attempt at censorship. / CJ
Twitter Blows Up Over Leaked Tape of Lawrence O’Donnell Going Nuts: ‘STOP THE HAMMERING’
“This afternoon, Mediaite posted a leaked eight-minute video of outtakes from a broadcast featuring MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell. The clip obtained by Mediaiteshows O’Donnell absolutely losing it during what appears to be commercial breaks of The Last Word‘s Aug. 29 telecast.
At one point in the video, O’Donnell goes on a tirade over what appears to be someone hammering in the background, leading to this unforgettable rant:
“STOP THE HAMMERING UP THERE. WHO’S GOT A HAMMER? WHERE IS IT? WHERE’S THE HAMMER? GO UP ON THE OTHER FLOOR. SOMEBODY GO UP THERE AND STOP THE HAMMERING. STOP THE HAMMERING. I’LL GO DOWN TO THE GODDAMNED FLOOR MYSELF AND STOP IT, KEEP THE GODDAMNED COMMERCIAL BREAK GOING. CALL FUCKING PHIL GRIFFIN, I DON’T CARE WHO THE FUCK YOU HAVE TO CALL. STOP THE HAMMERING. EMPTY OUT THE GODDAMNED CONTROL ROOM AND FIND OUT WHERE THIS IS GOING ON.”
After the post went live, it didn’t take long for the internet to stand up and take notice. And folks on Twitter sure had a lot of fun with it.”
Trump Vindicated: Report Says Obama Government Illegally Wiretapped Trump Campaign
“U.S. investigators wiretapped President Trump’s campaign chairman Paul Manafort, according to a report by CNN that vindicates the president’s earlier claims, which were mocked as a conspiracy theory.
President Trump had tweeted on March 4: “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”
Breitbart News editor Joel Pollak had reported the day before Trump’s tweet that the Obama administration “sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign: continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found.”
Trump’s claim, and Breitbart News’s report, were mocked as a conspiracy theory, and other news outlets reported that there was no basis to the claims.
CNN itself at the time called the idea that Trump was wiretapped “incendiary.”
But a report Monday evening said U.S. investigators obtained a surveillance warrant on Manafort from a secret court and had monitored him before and after the election, including a “period when Manafort was known to talk to President Donald Trump.”
The report said the secret court that handles the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act had authorized a surveillance warrant against Manafort for an investigation that began in 2014, looking into his firm, the Podesta Group, and another firm’s lobbying work for Ukraine’s pro-Russian former ruling party.
“The surveillance was discontinued at some point last year for lack of evidence,” a source told CNN.
However, the FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a new FISA warrant that extended early into this year. The report notably does not say when the new warrant was obtained. Manafort joined the Trump campaign as its chairman in May 2016.
The new warrant was “part of the FBI’s efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives,” according to the report.
The report notes, “such warrants require the approval of top Justice Department and FBI officials” — but doesn’t specify which top Justice Department and FBI officials had approved it.
Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former FBI Director James Comey were leading the agencies, respectively, at the time.
The report said the first warrant had already expired when Manafort had become the chairman in May. Before he left in August, FBI investigators “noticed what counterintelligence agents thought was a series of odd connections between Trump associates in Russia.”
A some point, the FBI obtained the new FISA warrant and began monitoring Manafort again — who has a residence in Trump Tower. The story said it’s “unclear” whether the FBI surveillance took place there.
The Justice Department and the FBI denied that Trump was being wiretapped.
Comey later in March disputed Trump’s claims — in testimony that lawmakers could now find misleading.
He told the House intelligence committee, “With respect to the president’s tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration, I have no information that supports those tweets, and we have looked carefully inside the FBI.”
The New York Times also reported that Comey had said Trump’s claim was false, and that he had asked the Justice Department to publicly reject it, according to the BBC.
James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, also told Congress that intelligence agencies did not wiretap Trump, nor did the FBI obtain a court order to monitor Trump’s phones, according to the BBC report.”
Remember When James Clapper Categorically Denied Any Wiretap Against Trump Campaign?
“Why in the world would the mainstream media continue to take James Clapper seriously?
In March the former Director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama appeared on Meet the Press to respond to President Donald Trump‘s now-infamous tweets regarding a “wiretap” related to his campaign during the Obama Administration. Host Chuck Todd asked Clapper point-blank whether any wiretap had occurred:
But I will say that, for the part of the national security apparatus that I oversaw as DNI, there was no such wiretap activity mounted against– the president elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign. I can’t speak for other Title Three authorized entities in the government or a state or local entity.
Clapper’s answer appeared unequivocal, but there was still a little wiggle room. So Todd, to his credit, drilled down and asked a very specific question about a very specific scenario:
TODD: Yeah, I was just going to say, if the F.B.I., for instance, had a FISA court order of some sort for a surveillance, would that be information you would know or not know?
TODD: You would be told this?
CLAPPER: I would know that.
TODD: If there was a FISA court order–
TODD: –on something like this.
CLAPPER: Something like this, absolutely.
TODD: And at this point, you can’t confirm or deny whether that exists?
CLAPPER: I can deny it.
Now we learn that there was, in fact, a FISA court order and it came from the FBI and Clapper, in his own words, claimed he would have known about that. And he denied it, unequivocally. Maybe he forgot all about the FISA order wiretapping Paul Manafort while he was in direct contact with Trump in his campaign and after the election.
Clapper also “forgot” that the NSA had a data collection program of every single American citizen when he testified before the Senate Intelligence committee and denied its existence.
James Clapper, former DNI chief and now, favorite guest of media outlets looking to attack President Trump, either has a terrible, terrible memory, or he was kept in the dark about a FISA order that occurred on his watch, or he’s just a liar. Can’t think of any other options here, can you?
I ask again, why in the world would the mainstream media continue to take James Clapper seriously? Or, for that matter, book him as a guest?”
LA TIMES COMPLAINS: DEPORTED ILLEGALS OVERLOADING MEXICAN GOVT
“Recently deported illegals are overloading the school systems in Mexico, the LA Times is reporting after ignoring the fact illegals were doing that in the US for years.
Additionally, the LA Times is complaining that the students are “struggling to integrate” in Mexico because many of them don’t speak Spanish.
“Mexico has not had the long history of immigration like the US and so has not had to grapple with how to accommodate non-Spanish-speaking students in their schools,” the LA Times’ Brittny Mejia claimed.
Well, that’s because Mexico always expected the US to take in the mass flow of illegals, many of whom are not from Central America but are rather from the Middle East and Asia.
Mexico, where illegal immigration is a felony punishable with years in prison, has always protected its borders better than the US and only welcomes immigrants “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.”
“The guards’ use of violence, rape, and extortion against those seeking to cross into Mexico has, in fact, managed the border so well that the country has only a minimal illegal-immigration problem,” reported DiscoverTheNetworks.org.
As a result, illegals transit through Mexico as quickly as possible to reach the States where they’re pampered like royalty in comparison.
But that treatment comes at a cost to American taxpayers who are burdened with the overflowing public schools, roads, emergency rooms and gang violence.
Of course, anyone who complained was ostracized by the LA Times and the rest of the mainstream media, and now they only seem to care when the same problem happens to MEXICO.
It’s ironic, yet expected: the mainstream media pushes a globalist agenda that runs contrary to America’s standing as an independent nation-state, and America was supposed to collapse from illegal immigration by design.
Mexico, in contrast, is already a failed state due to the cartel war with a death toll second only to war-torn Syria, so it’s easier to bring it under the control of unelected globalists who want to rule all the habitable regions of the world.
“To rule the world, you must first destroy national sovereignty,” wrote Joseph Plummer in his book Tragedy and Hope 101. “You must consolidate and control the real levers of power, regardless of the different forms of government that appear in each country.”
Nancy Pelosi’s Illegal-Alien Invaders Want Open Borders
“The little-known group which invaded a press conference by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is an alliance of four amnesty and open-borders organizations which are based in and near San Francisco.
The roughly 30 protestors broke up Pelosi’s press event, shouting amnesty for “All of us — or none of us.”
The left-wingers said they were protesting Pelosi’s claimed September 13 deal with President Donald Trump for a quick amnesty and citizenship for at least 3.3 million illegals. Nationwide, the population of illegal immigrants is at least 11 million,
The 30-minute invasion wrecked Pelosi’s orchestrated media event where she and several illegal immigrants were intended to present a reassuring and hopeful message on the claimed amnesty. Instead of a calm image of several middle-class ‘dreamer’ migrants, viewers saw a riotous demand for more uncontrolled mass immigration into the United States.
The “Immigration Liberation Movement” was formed by Faith in Action Bay Area, the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance, the East Bay Immigrant Youth Coalition, and a law firm which calls itself Pangea.
The groups try to combine peripheral factions of the left — socialists, illegal immigrants, gays, people trying to live as members of the opposite sex, children of illegal immigrants, Silicon Valley millionaires — to push for open borders, regardless of the huge damage it would cause to the core of the United States.
“We envision a world where the fundamental right to move is respected and appreciated by all,” according to Pangea’s website. “Our view is that all human beings are entitled to respect, documents, and a process through which to move, settle and resettle in the world.”
California Goes Full Sanctuary State With Sweeping Immigration Bill
|| Daily Caller
“California lawmakers punctuated the end of the 2017 legislative season by passing a comprehensive immigration bill that makes the state one of the nation’s most hostile to federal immigration authorities.
In a party line vote early Saturday morning, the state senate passed SB 54, a long-debated measure to shield illegal immigrants from the Trump administration’s strict immigration enforcement.
The bill sharply limits state and local law enforcement communication with federal immigration authorities, and prevents police officers from questioning or detaining people on civil immigration violations.
Entitled the “California Values Act,” the final version passed the Democratic-controlled Senate by a vote of 27-11. The bill, now headed to Gov. Jerry Brown, is a scaled-back revision of an earlier proposal that would have cut off communication and resource-sharing with federal immigration authorities except in cases backed by a criminal warrant.
Democratic lawmakers amended SB 54 after negotiations with Brown last week to allow immigration agents to keep working with state corrections officials. Legislators also agreed to allow state and local police to hand over criminal aliens to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) if the subject has been convicted of one or more of 800 crimes enumerated in a previous law, the California Trust Act.
California senate leader Kevin De Leon said the changes wouldn’t alter the fundamental objective of the law: preventing law enforcement from aiding the Trump administration’s deportation crackdown against supposedly non-violent illegal immigrants.
“These amendments do not mean to erode the core mission of this measure, which is to protect hardworking families that have contributed greatly to our culture and the economy,” he said according to the Los Angles Times. “This is a measure that reflects the values of who we are as a great state.”
De Leon introduced SB 54 in December in response to Trump’s victory in the 2016 election. The measure was one of several introduced by Democratic lawmakers to benefit California’s 2.3 million illegal immigrant residents. Other proposals included using public funds for immigrants’ legal defense and expanding employer protections against ICE operations at work sites.
The original draft of SB 54 drew protest from many of California’s law enforcement officials and some Democratic lawmakers, who worried its severe restrictions on cooperation with ICE would allow dangerous criminal aliens to avoid detention. De Leon’s compromise with Brown made the bill palatable for California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and moved the California Police Chiefs Association from opposed to neutral, reports the Los Angeles Times.
The amended version of SB 54 still has significant opposition in California’s law enforcement community. In a statement released in advance of Saturday’s vote, the California Sheriffs Association said the bill “goes too far in cutting off communications” with the federal government and prevents notification about the pending release of public safety threats such as repeat drunk drivers and hit-and-run suspects.
The passage of SB 54, which Brown is expected to sign in the coming weeks, will likely worsen tension between California and federal law enforcement officials. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has threatened to withhold certain federal grants from jurisdictions that refuse to honor immigration detention requests or give ICE agents access to local jails. He has singled out San Francisco and Los Angeles as cities whose sanctuary policies run afoul of new Department of Justice eligibility rules for criminal justice grants.
On Friday, a federal judge in Chicago gave California, and every other state, a temporary reprieve from Sessions’ crackdown. U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber issued a nationwide injunction that blocks the Department of Justice from implementing the new guidelines while Chicago’s lawsuit against the order is is evaluated by the courts.”
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
“The Supremacy Clause is that which derives from Constitutional law and sets forth that three distinct areas of legislation be at the forefront. It states that the Constitution, Federal statutes, and United States treaties encompass the “supreme law of the land”, therefore making them the highest areas of law possible within the legal system of America. The Supremacy Clause may be found in Article VI, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.
A landmark case representing one of the earliest examples of the use of the Supremacy Clause is that of McCulloch v. Maryland. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the State of Maryland had no legal right to tax the Second Bank of the United States as a Federal entity. This exhibited how the Supremacy Clause called into question the actions of the State, and therefore, made it so that the State could not legally tax the Federal Government.
Another case that made use of the Supremacy Clause in connection with Constitutional law was that of Missouri v. Holland. This Supreme Court case was conducted over the cause of international treaties. The Court ruled that the power of the Federal Government to enforce treaties overrode that of the State’s authority to voice concerns as to the violation of their local rights as prescribed from the 10th Amendment.
This Amendment was used by the Supreme Court following the Civil War and stated that states assumed the rights to powers not already set forth for the Federal Government. This did not last long, however, as everything was shifted to the Government to have vast national power, which meant that the Federal Government could not be subject to State law aside from by its own volition.
In addition, the Supremacy Clause also maintains that State legislatures assume, in one way or another, the guidelines and procedures set forth by the Federal Government. This is due to the presentation of two issues that stem from State and Federal conflict. These include Congress’ surpassing of its original authority as well as its overall intent in going over that of State policy. In both cases, Congress may be acting with the express authority of creating uniformity of legislature. In such a way it may be attempting to enable the coexistence of Federal and State government.
A case that highlighted such issues of Federal law presuming power over State action is that of Pennsylvania v. Nelson. In this case, the Supreme Court instituted qualifications for when the Government does encroach upon the rule of states, even when absent of apparent intent. These include that the Federal law is so extensive that states may not be able to adequately supplement it, the fact of the “Federal interest’s dominance,” and whether “State law” is in so much of a contrast to the Federal administration that it may only do harm to it. Such cases represent the ways in which the Supremacy Clause has been employed.”
These Are The 9 Countries That Send The Most ‘Dreamers’
|| Daily Caller
“President Donald Trump’s order to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive amnesty has created uncertainty about the fate of the program’s beneficiaries.
Advocates for the DACA recipients, who are commonly known as Dreamers, say they could be forced to return to countries where they have no social ties. But where exactly would Dreamers go in the unlikely event that Congress doesn’t work out a deal to give them some kind of legal status?
A review of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services data on the DACA population shows that the vast majority are from Latin America, especially America’s southern neighbor. Mexico has contributed more Dreamers than any other country by a wide margin. That’s not particularly surprising, given the country’s deep economic and social ties to the U.S., especially along a 2,000 mile shared border.
Still, when compared to other countries, the number of Mexican nationals in the DACA program stands out. Of the nearly 790,000 Dreamers, about 618,000 — 78 percent — are originally from Mexico. In other words, about four out of every five illegal immigrants who received deferred status under DACA are Mexican nationals.
By comparison, the immigrants from the other countries on the list represent tiny fractions of the Dreamer population. Second place El Salvador has sent about 28,000 DACA recipients, or 3.5 percent of the total. Guatemala and Honduras, which along with El Salvador compose the violent “Northern Triangle” countries of Central America, each contribute 20,000 and 18,000 Dreamers, respectively.
South American countries round out the rest of the top nine, with the notable exception of South Korea, which is the only East Asian country that has sent more than 1,000 Dreamers. About 7,200 South Korean nationals are DACA recipients — just shy of 1 percent of the total.
Here are the top nine nationalities in the Dreamer population:
Trump Praises DACA Recipients Serving In Military, But Only One-Tenth Of A Percent Are In Service
|| Daily Caller
“President Donald Trump drew attention Thursday to the illegals currently serving in the military as a reason why they should perhaps not be deported, but just 0.11 percent of DACA recipients are actually in service.
In a series of tweets Thursday, Trump appeared to completely reverse his stance on DACA, tweeting: “Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!…..”
“…They have been in our country for many years through no fault of their own – brought in by parents at young age,” Trump added. “Plus BIG border security.”
Although Trump expressed astonishment that the American public would want to send DACA recipients back to their respective home countries because some serve in the military, the Pentagon recently told The Daily Caller News Foundation that fewer than 900 DACA recipients out of a total of 800,000 are currently serving in the military, which amounts to 0.11 percent. In other words, about a tenth of a percent of DACA recipients are serving.
“There are less than 900 individuals currently serving in the military, or have signed contracts to serve, who are recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA) authorization,” Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Paul Haverstick told The Daily Caller News Foundation in a statement last Wednesday. “These individuals are part of the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) Pilot Program. The Department of Defense is coordinating with the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security (DHS) regarding any impact a change in policy may have for DACA recipients. The Department defers to our colleagues at DHS on questions related to immigration, naturalization, or citizenship.”
The MAVNI program opened to DACA recipients in 2014. MAVNI was initiated in 2009 during the Obama administration, but was put on hold in September 2016 over security concerns. The program was suspended in part because reviews showed that some of the illegal enlistees represented “a significant counterintelligence threat.”