Friday, March 23, 2018

Up to Two-Thirds of Sub-Saharan Africa’s 1.1 Billion People Want to Migrate to the EU, U.S.

Up to two-thirds of sub-Saharan Africa’s 1.1 billion population want to migrate to Europe or to the United States, with millions planning to make the move in the next five years.

Around half of people in Kenya, Tanzania, Senegal, and South Africa, and three quarters of those questioned in Ghana and Nigeria, want to immigrate to the U.S. or Europe, according to a study by Pew Research Centre published Thursday.Around 40 per cent of those in Senegal, Ghana, and Nigeria who want to leave said they intend to do so in the next five years.
At least one million sub-Saharan Africans have already migrated to Europe between 2010 and 2017. The majority, 970,000, were asylum seekers; the rest is comprised of Africans who have arrived as students, resettled refugees, and through family reunification.In terms of destination, Pew found that just four countries represent nearly three-quarters (72 per cent) of Europe’s current sub-Saharan immigrant population: the UK comes out on top at 1.27 million, followed by France (980,000), Italy (370,000), and Portugal (360,000).

Researchers found that it is not just poverty or terror (notably committed by Boko Haram [Islamic State] in Nigeria and al-Qaeda in West Africa) that is driving mass migration, but because Africans want to imitate their friends and relatives who have already successfully illegally immigrated to Europe.
Migrants from Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal, and Ghana, included pregnant women, the young, and single men, on their way to Europe told German newspaper Die Welt: “We do everything we can to go to paradise.”
There are an estimated 50,000 migrants in Morocco and between 400,000 and one million in Libya who are preparing to illegally cross the Mediterranean to Spain and Italy, and likely northwards to wealthier nations in the European Union.

With birth rates of up to seven children per woman, by 2050 Africa’s population is expected to double.
“The demographic development is a ticking time bomb,” the EU’s ambassador to Niger, Raul Mateus Paula, told Die Welt. “If this development is not stopped, it could lead to a disaster,” he said, noting that all attempts to deter African migration have not caught on.
The EU is already plugging funds into the continent to prevent what the German newspaper referred to as the ‘second phase of migration’, with 600 million euros being made available to Niger alone by 2020.
Ambassador Paula called the preventative measures “a drop in the ocean”, saying that every impoverished country in Africa would need financial support and, besides the political instability and institutionalised corruption of many of these nations, it would take years for the measures to stem the tide of mass migration out of the continent.

Sex Attacks Continue to Rise in Austria in Wake of Migrant Crisis

The number of sex attacks in Austria has increased for the second straight year following the 2015 migrant crisis with 2017 seeing close to 5,000 sexual assault and rape cases.

The Austrian Interior Ministry released new figures on the number of sex attack cases that occurred in the country in 2017, showing yet another rise since 2015 to 4,700 cases in a country of less than nine million people, Kronen Zeitung reports.Interior Minister Herbert Kickl, a leading member of the anti-mass migration Freedom Party (FPÖ), commented on the newly released statistics, saying: “Since the migration wave in 2015, there has been a massive increase in sex offences. This is an alarm signal for me, so it is right and important that the penalties are tightened.”
Since 2014, the nationalities of foreign suspects has also dramatically shifted with Turks making up the majority of foreigners involved in sex attacks while Afghans topped the list in 2017.
Afghans accounted for only 64 suspects in 2014, a number which grew to 306 in 2016 and fell only slightly to 263 in 2017. Syrian migrant suspects have also seen a dramatic rise with Syrians accounting for only 3 suspects in 2011 and 63 in 2017.

Sex attacks have also grown more violent on average since the height of the migrant crisis. In 2014, the ministry recorded only four sex attacks involving weapons like knives, while in 2017 the number of cases jumped to 17.
The statistics come only a week after Interior Minister Kickl pledged to look into potential changes to the asylum laws in Austria following a series of violent attacks by asylum seekers in Vienna. The Interior Minister, known in Austria as a firebrand speaker, said he was already trying to increase deportations but faced heavy resistance from left-wing activist groups.
Kickl and the Interior Ministry also provided figures earlier this year showing that foreigners now account for almost half of the total criminal suspects in the country.
Last year, a report from the previous government showed that asylum seekers were also straining the Austrian welfare system with 90 per cent of asylum seekers ending up on benefits, according to former Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka.

Strong Majority of Brits Want to ‘Get on with’ Brexit, Support Across All Regions, Classes, and Parties

Almost 60 per cent of Brits think the government should respect the referendum result and “get on” with delivering Brexit.

In a new poll by BMG for Change Britain, respondents were asked if they agreed that “the government should get on with implementing the result of the referendum to take Britain out of the EU and in doing so take back control of our borders, laws, money and trade”.A strong 57 per cent agreed and less than a quarter – just 22 per cent – disagree with the statement, according to the results, seen by Guido Fawkes. Twenty-one per cent did not answer the question.
In fact, according to the poll, support for implementing the referendum result and taking back control is backed in every age group, class, British region, and among supporters of all major political parties.Those who voted to remain in the European Union (EU) were split, with 31 per cent agreeing, 39 per cent disagreeing, and 29 per cent not answering.
Those over 55 were the most enthusiastic, with 71 per cent behind leaving and 17 per cent disagreeing. In the 18 to 34 category, 40 per cent wanted to get on with Brexit and 29 per cent did not. Fifty-three per cent of 35 to 54-year-olds agreed with the statement and 29 per cent did not.

The region most supportive of implementing Brexit was the West Midlands, with 63 per cent wanting to get on with it. The least enthusiastic was Scotland, with 44 per cent; however, this was still more than those who disagreed that it should be implemented at 32 per cent.
There was also cross-party support for “get[ting] on” with Brexit, with more people agreeing with the statement than disagreeing among those backing every major party.
UKIP supporters were the most pro-Brexit, with 91 per cent agreeing with the statement, and those behind Plaid Cymru were second, with 69 wanting to get on with the divorce despite the Welsh party’s anti-Brexit stance.
Scottish National Party (SNP) supporters were the least supportive, with 36 per cent agreeing with implementing Brexit, but they still outnumbered the 35 per cent of SNP supporters who were against divorcing from the EU.

Thousands of ‘Soros puppets’ want to make Hungary’s government pro-immigration

Zoltán Kovács, spokesman of the Hungarian government, warned that financier George Soros is actively meddling in Hungary’s elections of 8 April.
Kovács claimed that Soros’ meddling in the country’s elections is part of his international plan ‘to make Hungary an immigrant country’.
“The Soros Network has been found out to another outrageous affair; it has transpired that at least two thousand of the network’s people are working against the Hungarian Prime Minister and against Hungary,” Kovács was quoted in a press release.
According to Kovács, Soros actively wants to remove Viktor Orban’s anti-immigration Fidesz Party and its coalition partner of 2014.
“They are doing so with an absolutely obvious goal, a political goal, and out of financial interest: they want to interfere in the Hungarian elections and want Hungary to have a pro-immigration government instead of the current government that strongly and decidedly rejects immigration,” he said.
Kovács added that “The Hungarian government will resist all attempts to politically influence the Cabinet’s immigration policy and turn Hungary into an immigrant country”.

De Blasio embroiled in bribery scandal

By Rick Moran

A donor to the campaigns of New York city Mayor Bill De Blasio testified under oath that he paid bribes to the mayor and others to receive favorable treatment from the city.
Harendra Singh, the owner of the restaurant Water’s Edge, said he steered money to de Blasio’s campaign to deal with property matters including better terms of his lease, the New York Times reports. Singh said that on many occasions they discussed his restaurant lease and donations to de Blasio in the same conversation and that they mayor was actively worked on the illegal activity.
"He made many phone calls," Singh said about de Blasio. "His office was working very hard, from his deputy mayor to his assistant to his intergovernmental affairs person. Everyone was working."
Singh's testimony came during the corruption trial of former Nassau County executive Edward Mangano and former Town of Oyster Bay supervisor John Venditto. The restauranteur has pleaded guilty to bribing both of them. Mangano and Venditto are on trial for charges that include extortion, honest services fraud, and conspiracy. They may face decades in prison.
Do you hear that sucking sound? That's the sound of De Blasio's chances going down the toilet to become the Democratic nominee for president in 2020.
According to Singh, de Blasio requested contributions from him and, when Singh mentioned the contribution limit, the mayor told him to find a way around it. De Blasio simply said, "Listen, I don’t want to know. Just do what you have to do," according to Singh.
Records show Singh, his family, and other associates donated tens of thousands of dollars to de Blasio, but Singh said he funneled much more to the mayor through "straw donors."
Singh was able to skirt the contribution limit, he said, by having others donate to de Blasio and receive reimbursement from Singh. De Blasio and Singh discussed these straw donors twice, the witness testified.
The mayor has said Singh is just trying to avoid jail time by accusing him.
"It was thoroughly looked at, and there’s a reason there were no charges brought, because there was nothing there," de Blasio said in January.
True, Singh is a convicted felon and there should be some doubt attached to his testimony for that reason. But in big city politics, this sort of thing happens. The problem is, Singh does not seem to be politically savvy, as he apparently didn't cover his tracks very well. But De Blasio would almost certainly have taken greater care with who he was doing business with. Would an experienced pol have spoken as portrayed by Singh? 
In a "he said, he said" controversy involving the mayor and a convicted felon, who do you think comes out on top?

Bombshell reveal: A grand jury already is hearing evidence on DOJ and FBI scandals

By Thomas Lifson

We are on the verge of a huge political explosion. While there have been calls for a special counsel to investigate the DOJ and FBI scandals, and many conservatives have been outraged at the seeming passivity of “Gentleman Jeff” Sessions (aka, Sessionzzz in some quarters), it now is clear (as I have already figured) that a grand jury far outside the Beltway already is hearing evidence dug up by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, whose report is now believed to be coming in April. Following release of that report, expect heads to explode all over the media, Deep State, and NeverTrumps.  
The first hint that the wheels of justice already are turning came on March 7, when AG Sessions revealed to Shannon Bream:
I have appointed a person outside of Washington, many years in the Department of Justice to look at all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us; and we’re conducting that investigation.
When a federal prosecutor digs into an investigation, a grand jury is empaneled to issue subpoenas and hear testimony. And yesterday, in a response to a subpoena from House Judiciary Committee chairman Robert Goodlatte, the DOJ confirmed that a grand jury indeed exists to investigate the issues uncovered by IG Horowitz, who has been referring criminal matters to the DOJ for some time.
As so often in this labyrinth Sundance of Conservative Tree House is way ahead of the rest of the media in untangling the threads to reveal what is really going on. The first indication came less than a week ago:
Within the response letter from Michael Bromwich, the attorney representing fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, you might note the following (emphasis mine):
[…] The investigation described in the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report was cleaved off from the larger investigation of which it was a part, its completion expedited, and the disciplinary process completed in a little over a week. Mr. McCabe and his counsel were given limited access to a draft of the OIG report late last month, did not see the final report and the evidence on which it is based until a week ago, and were receiving relevant exculpatory evidence as recently as two days ago. (pdf link)
Within the Office of Professional Responsibility guidelines for Attorney Representation you might also note the following (again, emphasis mine):
The majority of OPR investigations are administrative in nature, and employees are not entitled to counsel as a matter of law. However, counsel may be permitted if counsel does not interfere with or delay the interview. Counsel must be actually retained by the employee as his legal representative, not as an observer. Counsel are not permitted access to certain confidential criminal investigative information and may not be permitted access to grand jury information.. (link)
That makes it pretty clear that information is being withheld, but technically, only says that it can be withheld in order to protect the secrecy of grand jury proceedings. But yesterday, came further confirmation. Sundance exults: Giddy up:
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) is one of the top three people throughout the entirety of congress with a comprehensive knowledge of the events surrounding the investigations of the FBI and DOJ. Chairman Goodlatte is one of only four people outside the DOJ who have read the full DOJ FISA application used for a Title-1 Surveillance warrant of Carter Page.
The House Judiciary Committee holds the primary statutory oversight over the U.S. Department of Justice. Additionally, Chairman Goodlatte is the congressional office working closest with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. In short, Goodlatte is the center of all ‘oversight’ information circling the investigations into the DOJ and FBI.
However, all of that said, even Chairman Bob Goodlatte doesn’t, and shouldn’t, know what criminal investigations are underway.  We’ve explained this dynamic of disconnect numerous times.  We really began emphasizing this when AG Jeff Sessions admitted he brought in a prosecutor from outside Washington DC to work with Inspector General Horowitz.
You can read the Goodlatte Subpoenas – HERE – along with the letter that accompanies his demand.   However, more important is the response from the DOJ as communicated by Fox News journalist Chad Pergram (emphasis mine):
Oh, what’s that?  Yes, the DOJ has to review the demand for evidence because release of those documents might conflict with ongoing Grand Jury information (evidence).  Yes, that means a Grand Jury is impaneled, exactly as we expected.
Yes, that also means there are “law enforcement actions” currently ongoing as a result of the prosecutor assigned to reviewing the evidence discovered by Inspector General Horowitz.
Our patience will be rewarded after the IG’s report is published. The federal prosecutor already has that evidence, thanks to the criminal referrals from Horowitz
As soon as the IG publishes his report, the prosecutor can begin subpoenaing witnesses.  And now we know there’s already a Grand Jury seated somewhere hearing the criminal evidence he/she has carved out from the overwhelming IG evidence as collected.
My own suspicion is that the grand jury already has quietly heard testimony from cooperating witnesses who have struck deals with the prosecutor because the evidence against them is so strong that their best strategy is to minimize their criminal liability and prison time. That list of possible witnesses would include Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, and Bruce Ohr, which would explain why they continue to draw salaries.
Lay in a supply of popcorn. This is going to make Watergate look like the petty burglary it was.