Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By Citizen WElls (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Hillary Alicia Machado choice consistent with Clintons crime corruption and immigration policies, Clinton administration pushed rapid naturalization and allowing citizenship to criminals, Democrat David Schippers exposed pressure on INS for votes

Saturday, October 1, 2016 14:24
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Hillary Hillary Alicia Machado choice consistent with Clintons crime corruption and immigration policies, Clinton administration pushed rapid naturalization and allowing citizenship to criminals, Democrat David Schippers exposed pressure on INS for votes

“I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigration.”…Hillary Clinton, WABC 2003

On Hillary Clinton: “evil incarnate.”…David Schippers

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

Hillary Clinton believes that using Alicia Machado to taint Donald Trump in the eyes of women and voters is a good idea. That is because she is so used to acting like and associating with criminals and being involved in shady activities, she doesn’t think a thing of it.

For anyone paying attention this will backfire on her.

From American Action News September 28, 2016.

“Who is Alicia Machado? The Truth”

“Who is Alicia Machado and how did she become a US citizen?

As Hillary made her finals remarks in the first presidential debate, she proudly proclaimed that she stood with Trump bullying victim Alicia Machado. Personally, I find the notion of hurling insults at women (including Rosie O’Donnell) on the basis of their physical appearance distasteful.  When I heard Trump called Machado names like “Little Miss Piggy” I didn’t like it. Even though as a Miss Universe, Machado’s job was to maintain her weight and physical appearance, I will concede calling someone “Little Miss Piggy” or “Miss Housekeeping” is a little much. At the same time, time people within the pageant have claimed she was extremely difficult to deal with.

But that’s neither here nor there. After the debate, many news and media outlets such as NBC, CNN, and Inside Edition  produced “Who’s Alicia Machado?” pieces. In all of these stories, her bio went from winning Miss Universe and being bullied by Trump to becoming a US citizen. It was similar to their coverage of Barack Obama in 2008, where apparently he had nothing occur in his life between being President of the Harvard Law Review and giving a speech at the 2004 DNC. As I watched sympathetic piece after sympathetic piece, in my gut I knew there was something wrong with the name Alicia Machado. No, it was not implicit bias or racial profiling that caused me to feel this. It was an interview with Anderson Cooper.

Amazingly, overnight, Machado’s Wikipedia page was edited, so I had to do a little digging to research many of the things I had heard about her. According to Associated Press reports in January 1998, Machado was accused in court documents of driving her ex-boyfriend Juan Rodriguez Reggeti to shoot his brother-in-law, Francisco Antonio Sbert Mousko, outside the funeral of Mousko’s wife as she was being eulogized. In addition to being the victim’s wife, the dead woman was also Reggeti’s sister.

Machado was ordered to testify in court as her attorney’s claimed she was filming a soap opera. In February of 1998 the Associated Press published a report that a Venezuelan judge claimed Machado threatened to kill him after he indicted her boyfriend for attempted murder. Venezuelan beauty queen Alicia Machado threatened “to ruin my career as a judge and … kill me,” Judge Maximiliano Fuenmayor said on national television. There were also claims that Machado’s boyfriend snatched the shooting victim’s 11-year-old son, his nephew. Machado would avoid prosecution because witnesses could not be produced to testify against her. At the same time, her alibi was never corroborated by witnesses.

We don’t know if Machado is guilty of any crime, but considering all of this, Machado’s recent interview with Anderson Cooper is troubling. In contrast to many of his colleagues, Cooper apparently does his due diligence. During the interview Cooper asked Machado, “There are reports that Trump surrogates tonight have been referencing and pointing to on CNN and elsewhere about an incident in 1998 in Venezuela, where you were accused of driving a getaway car from a murder scene. You were never charged with this,” Cooper said. “The judge in the case also said you threatened to kill him after he indicted your boyfriend for the attempted murder. I just want to give you a chance to address these reports that the Trump surrogates are talking about,” Cooper continued. Machado’s response was, “You know, I have my past. Of course, everybody has a past. I’m not a saint girl. But that is not the point now.” Quite frankly, that is as perplexing as it is honest. The typical response of an innocent person when accused of being an accessory to murder would be to rebut or deny the allegations. Machado did neither; she essentially admitted her involvement in a case she was never even charged in.”

“Hillary utilizing Machado as a political prop does not surprise me. Hillary is a low character individual who is desperate for the presidency. What concerns me about this situation is how someone like Alicia Machado was ever granted US citizenship. Becoming a United States citizen is a privilege; there’s a diverse pool of applicants, ranging from hard working laborers to highly educated scientists. Many are dying for a chance to become a citizen and live out the American Dream, and yet, we grant citizenship to someone with the baggage of Machado? Granting citizenship to a person of Machado’s character devalues what it means to became a naturalized citizen. In the end, Machado is no victim. She’s a reminder of how sick and twisted the Clintons are, and a poster child for why we need immigration reform.”

http://americanactionnews.com/articles/who-is-alicia-machado-the-truth#WHkGHRoPlScYohWl.99″;

From David Schippers book, “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment”.

“My staff and I agreed that we needed to focus on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), which appeared to be running out of control. By the time we came to the subject, investigations by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and congressional committees had already indicated that the White House used the INS to further its political agenda. A blatant politicization of the agency took place during the 1996 presidential campaign when the White House pressured the INS into expediting its “Citizenship USA” (CUSA) program to grant citizenship to thousands of aliens that the White House counted as likely Democratic voters. To ensure maximum impact, the INS concentrated on aliens in key states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and Texas — that hold a combined 181 electoral votes, just 89 short of the total needed to win the election.

The program was placed under the direction of Vice President Al Gore. We received from the GAO a few e-mails indicating Vice President Gore’s role in the plan (which are included in Appendix A at the back of the book). He was responsible for keeping the pressure on, to make sure the aliens were pushed through by September 1, the last day to register for the presidential election.

In our investigation we uncovered a case study evidencing what is pejoratively known in political science circles as “Chicago Politics.”

Back in the early years of the twentieth century, “Hinky Dink” Kenna and “Bathouse” John Coughlin were recognized as the very models of the unsavory Chicago politician. The two once fixed an aldermanic election in Chicago’s First Ward. To do so, they imported thousands of ward heelers, friends, associates, and city workers and had them registered to vote from every building in the ward — from homes (of which there were few) to taverns and cribs (of which there were many). On Election Day the recent arrivals stopped at Hinky Dink’s tavern, picked up fifty cents, ate a free lunch, and went out to vote their consciences. Guess who won that election?

Essentially, the same tactics were used during President Clinton’s reelection in 1996. Only this time the Democrats weren’t handing out sandwiches. Instead, through CUSA, they were circumventing normal procedures for naturalizing aliens — procedures that check backgrounds and weed out criminals — and consequently they were handing out citizenship papers to questionable characters.”

“The White House wanted any applicant for citizenship to be naturalized in time to register for the November election, so the pressure on the INS was constant. On March 21 Elaine Kamarck in the Vice President’s office sent an e-mail to Farbrother saying: “THE PRESIDENT IS SICK OF THIS AND WANTS ACTION. IF NOTHING MOVES TODAY WE’LL HAVE TO TAKE SOME PRETTY DRASTIC MEASURES.” Farbrother responded, “I favor drastic measures.” If he couldn’t get what he wanted from the INS, he wrote, he would “call for heavy artillery.””

“Federal regulations require that, for an alien to obtain citizenship, his application for naturalization (citizenship) must be accompanied by a complete set of the alien’s fingerprints. The fingerprint cards are then sent to the FBI to determine if the applicant has a criminal or arrest record. The law provides that an application may be denied if the alien has a serious criminal record or if he falsely denies ever having been arrested, even if he was never convicted.

In the INS district offices, the alien applicant for naturalization cannot be scheduled for a personal interview until at least 60 days after the application is submitted. This delay is specifically intended to allow sufficient time for an FBI fingerprint check. If the check reveals an arrest record identification, the arrest report is inserted in the alien’s file prior to the interview. An arrest record does not automatically result in a denial of citizenship, but it alerts an examiner to spend additional time questioning the applicant and to request that he furnish further information.

If there is no criminal arrest record in the file prior to the interview, the examiner will assume that none exists. For that reason, the INS has always considered the FBI fingerprint check to be the only practical way of preventing violent felons, dope peddlers, and the like from obtaining citizenship. Any breakdown in the collecting, checking, and reporting of the fingerprints can cause a breakdown of the entire process.

In our investigation we developed sources inside the INS with specific knowledge of the facts who revealed that FBI arrest records that were being sent to the Chicago INS office simply were not being inserted into the aliens’ files. As a result, aliens with criminal records were being granted citizenship.

Our sources also disclosed that, just prior to the 1996 voter registration deadline, a box was discovered in the Chicago INS office containing nearly five thousand FBI arrest reports — reports that had arrived in time but had been ignored.

Later, when the office discovered that those reports had never been processed, the INS initially tried to blame the FBI, claiming that the Bureau had not provided the arrest records within the 60-day window. But the FBI had done its job in a timely manner. Then the INS tried to convince the public that the foul-up really hadn’t harmed the process much. The agency cited statistics showing that the rejection rate of 17 percent was just about what it had always been, so no harm, no foul. But the INS neglected to take into account the thousands of aliens with criminal arrest records who were not rejected, even though they would have been under the normal procedures. If the traditional process had been followed, the rejection rate in the summer of 1996 would have easily exceeded 30 percent and perhaps have been even higher.

The White House, the INS, and the Justice Department publicly denied any political motive in the CUSA program to expedite the citizenship procedure. What the United States got is undeniable:
More than 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied;

An additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable for various technical reasons and were never resubmitted; and

Another 61,000 people who were given citizenship with no fingerprints submitted at all.
Those numbers were developed by the accounting firm of KPMG Peat Marwick as a result of an audit of the 1996 CUSA program.

What we had here was a perfect example of the Clinton-Gore administration’s overarching political philosophy: “The ends justify the means,” coupled with “win at any cost.” It was a philosophy of governance that, as our investigations into other areas proceeded, we would find repeated again and again.

When the results of the KPMG Peat Marwick audit were made public, the INS and Justice vowed to remedy the situation, root out the felons, and revoke erroneously awarded citizenship. Everyone congratulated the administration for acting so quickly — and then promptly forgot about it.”

“We received no cooperation from either the Justice Department or the INS. Instead we received nothing but complaints about not going through the proper channels, investigating old news, being partisan — if not racist — and so on. But we reasoned that if criminals were given citizenship in 1996, at least some of them had probably continued their criminal activity in the two years since. We asked the GAO — an investigative agency that works for Congress and is therefore not subject to White House or Justice Department pressures — to give us FBI arrest records related to the CUSA program. We were given unquestioned cooperation and boxes of FBI reports.

We reviewed every document in those boxes, pulling out about a hundred of the most violent or serious crimes committed by aliens prior to naturalization and documented by arrest records. I specifically excluded minor immigration crimes, tax offenses, or white-collar crimes such as driving under the influence. I asked the staff to search for drug trafficking and violent crimes such as rape and child abuse. Those are the types of crimes that are most often repeated. A child abuser tends to abuse again, and a rapist tends to rape again.

After a few days — and going through only a few of the 20 or so boxes — we had our basic 100 heinous crimes, including one criminal who was actually in jail at the time he was naturalized.

We asked the FBI if it had arrest records for crimes committed by the same aliens in this country since 1996 and sent them our one hundred profiles.

Less than a week later, the FBI sent the updated arrest records to the Justice Department. (Per an agreement between the FBI and the Justice Department, all materials requested from the Bureau must go through Justice.) But when we inquired about them, the department claimed that it hadn’t yet received the records. An hour later, however, Justice called back to say that the “misplaced” reports had been located.

Of those 100 arrest records updated by the Bureau, some 20 percent showed arrests for serious crimes after the subject was given citizenship. Based on these random results, we asked for updates on every arrest record in our 20 boxes. Our plan was to update every report, using only FBI numbers and with the FBI redacting all identifying information to address the issue of privacy concerns. If, as we anticipated, anywhere near 20 percent came back with subsequent crimes, we would then confront the Justice Department, demand the identity and address of these known criminals, and point out that they had been given citizenship illegally and were still engaged in criminal activity. Unfortunately, before we could go further, the referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr arrived. Had we been given sufficient time to develop evidence and witnesses, the CUSA matter might have been included in the abuse of power impeachment article.

The 1996 arrest records are still available, and I am sure the FBI is still willing to update all of them. In the meantime, thousands of criminals are now citizens of the United States because it was assumed they would vote for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/BookReview-InsideStoryClintonImpeachment

From Reuters November 24, 2010.

“Concerned by North Korea’s artillery attack on a South Korean island, the 1996 beauty queen winner got muddled when tweeting for world peace via her @aliciamachado77 account.

“Tonight I want to ask you to join me in a prayer for peace, that these attacks between the Chinas do not make our situation worse,” she wrote late on Tuesday.

Her gaffe unleashed a rush of insulting posts, prompting her to go offline.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20140107091026/http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/24/oukoe-uk-korea-north-venezuela-idAFTRE6AN67020101124

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.