Local Inaction Creates National, Negative Impact

Impact of Open Borders and Bad Policy

Local Inaction Creates National, Negative Impact

You often hear the adage that local action begets national impact—a truism that holds considerable weight. Yet, what often escapes our collective discourse is the national repercussions of local inaction, which can be profoundly detrimental. A dearth of local initiative fosters pernicious habits—habits that inhibit citizens from holding governmental agencies to account. When transparency and oversight are lacking in the administration of federal agencies, the consequences are dire, particularly for our most vulnerable populations: our children and our senior citizens.

While the plight of senior citizens is a topic for another discussion, today we focus on the children. This includes not just our own offspring but all young individuals who find themselves within our borders. Shockingly, the United States ranks first in child sex trafficking—a statistic that is not just appalling but a veritable affront to our national ethos. We purport to be the world's beacon of freedom, yet we are marred by such abhorrent malevolence.

The path to rectification lies in galvanizing action at the local level. Contrary to what one might assume, the atrocities we are about to examine occur not in some distant land but right here, in our own communities.

Impact of Open Borders and Bad Policy

Ineffective or unenforced immigration policy and open borders in the United States can pose national security risks by potentially allowing individuals with malicious intentions to enter the country, leading to an increase in criminal activities like human trafficking, drug smuggling, and terrorism.

Economically, these situations could drive down wages and job opportunities for native workers due to an influx of low-skilled labor, although it might fill labor gaps in certain sectors. It could also increase the cost of public services such as healthcare, education, and social services, impacting taxpayers. Socially and culturally, rapid demographic changes, language barriers, and cultural differences could challenge social cohesion, possibly fueling anti-immigrant sentiments and discrimination against immigrant populations.

Legally, courts and administrative bodies might face overwhelming caseloads, and the lack of a well-enforced immigration policy could undermine the rule of law and encourage illegal immigration. Humanitarian concerns may arise from human rights abuses, poor living conditions, and exploitation of vulnerable populations including refugees and asylum-seekers. Health wise, the lack of proper health screenings and healthcare access for immigrants could pose public health risks through the spread of infectious diseases and other health issues.

The federal policy framework for refugee admissions and resettlement in the United States is a collaborative effort involving multiple federal agencies under the guidance of the Executive Branch. Here's a simplified outline of the hierarchy and key players involved:

1. The President:

   • The President sets the annual ceiling on refugee admissions and provides broad policy direction on refugee resettlement.

2. U.S. Congress:

   • Congress plays a role through its oversight functions and by appropriating funds for refugee programs. It also sets the legal framework through legislation such as the Refugee Act of 1980.

3. Executive Agencies:

   U.S. Department of State (DOS):

   • Oversees initial refugee processing and admissions through its Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM).

   Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):

   • Specifically, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within HHS is responsible for refugee resettlement and integration once refugees arrive in the U.S.

   Department of Homeland Security (DHS):

   • Particularly the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), is involved in the security screening and adjudication of refugee status.

4. Inter-Agency Coordination:

   The Refugee Processing Center (RPC):

   • Managed by the DOS, it serves as a hub for inter-agency coordination, ensuring that the necessary data is shared among DOS, HHS, and DHS.

   Other Federal Agencies:

   • Other agencies may also be involved depending on the specific needs and circumstances, such as the Department of Education for school enrollment, the Department of Labor for employment issues, etc.

5. State and Local Governments:

   • State and local refugee coordinators, along with health departments, serve as indispensable pillars in the architecture of refugee resettlement at the community level.

6. on-Governmental Organizations (NGOs):

   • Frequently financed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) grants, NGOs extend a range of direct services to refugees. These encompass housing, job training, English language courses, and cultural orientation.

7. Resettlement Agencies:

   • Operating under cooperative agreements with the Department of State (DOS), these agencies are entrusted with the task of furnishing initial resettlement services to refugees.

In this intricate web of governance and humanitarian aid, each entity plays a nuanced role, contributing to the larger tapestry of refugee resettlement and integration.

Executive Order 13993 Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities

Each of these Executive Orders (EOs) and the accompanying proclamation exhibit significant weaknesses and flaws. We intend to scrutinize these vulnerabilities, as well as their implications for organizations that may be entangled in corrupt activities. While we are aware of a few such organizations, the true extent remains unknown. The only avenue to enlightenment is through meticulous citizen-led investigation.

Executive Order One Three Nine Nine Three, titled "Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities," presents several potential weak points ripe for exploitation:

National Interest: The term remains ambiguously defined, opening the door for discretionary enforcement that could serve as a conduit for corrupt practices.

Lack of Detailed Guidelines: The absence of explicit criteria could pave the way for arbitrary decision-making, thereby creating an environment conducive to corruption. Oversight Gaps: While the EO mandates a cross-departmental review, it falls short on detailing oversight mechanisms, leaving room for corrupt activities to flourish unchecked.

Implications for Organizations Suspected of Corruption:

Border Security and Amtrak: The EO's emphasis on border security could indirectly implicate Amtrak in the transportation of unaccompanied alien children, particularly if oversight mechanisms are lax.

NGOs and Humanitarian Exploitation: The humanitarian focus of the EO could be manipulated by NGOs engaged in corrupt practices, particularly concerning the treatment of immigrants.

ORR and Oversight Loopholes: The EO's humanitarian lens could offer the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) opportunities for exploitation, especially in the absence of stringent oversight protocols. In this intricate landscape of policy and potential malfeasance, the onus falls upon us, the citizenry, to remain vigilant and proactive in our quest for transparency and integrity.

Executive Order 14010 - Creating a Comprehensive Regional Framework to Address the Causes of Migration, to Manage Migration

Potential Weak Points for Exploitation:

Broad Language: The order's expansive terminology could be twisted to permit entry for individuals who have not undergone rigorous vetting, thereby raising national security concerns.

Policy Inconsistencies: The shift in policy direction could result in uneven application, opening the door for various forms of corruption, including but not limited to human trafficking and financial malfeasance.

Implications for Organizations Suspected of Corruption:

NGO Exploitation: The policy pivot could provide fertile ground for Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) engaged in corrupt practices related to immigration.

Oversight Deficiencies: The absence of robust oversight mechanisms could enable corruption within the very government agencies tasked with safeguarding immigration and national security.

In this complex tapestry of policy and potential impropriety, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The Executive Order, while ostensibly aimed at addressing the root causes of migration, may inadvertently sow the seeds of corruption and compromise national security. It is incumbent upon us, as vigilant citizens, to scrutinize these policies and their ramifications, ever mindful of the ethical dimensions that underpin our Constitutional Republic society.

Executive Order 14011—Establishment of Inter-agency Task Force on the Reunification of Families

Potential Weak Points for Exploitation:

Inter-agency Coordination: The Executive Order (EO) calls for the establishment of an interagency task force, featuring representatives from diverse governmental departments. If not adeptly managed, this coordination could engender bureaucratic delays, communication fissures, and potential misinterpretations of the EO's mandates—each a vulnerability ripe for exploitation.

Security Vetting: While the EO emphasizes the noble goal of family reunification, it falls short of outlining specific security vetting protocols. This omission leaves a gap that could be exploited by individuals with malicious intent.

Implications for Organizations Suspected of Corruption:

Community Sponsorship: Although the EO does not explicitly address community sponsorship models, its implementation will likely engage various NGOs and local agencies in the resettlement process. This engagement creates opportunities for the misuse of funds or corrupt practices, particularly in the absence of rigorous monitoring and accountability.

Multi-Agency Involvement: The EO's expansive scope, encompassing multiple agencies like the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR)—which has previously raised concerns over unaccounted funds—creates a fertile environment for corruption to flourish. The lack of a centralized oversight mechanism not only jeopardizes the well-being of immigrants and unaccompanied alien children but also provides cover for corrupt activities within the participating agencies.

In this intricate framework of policy and potential pitfalls, the onus is on us, the vigilant citizenry, to scrutinize these initiatives and their broader implications. It is through such scrutiny that we can aspire to uphold the ethical standards that should guide our society.

Executive Order 14012 - Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans

Potential Weak Points for Exploitation

Multiple Agencies Involved: The involvement of multiple agencies could lead to a lack of centralized oversight, making it easier for corrupt practices to go unnoticed.

Vague Language: The EO's broad and somewhat vague language could be exploited to justify actions that are not in line with its intended purpose.

Review of Public Charge Policies: The EO calls for a review of public charge policies, which could be manipulated to unfairly target certain immigrant groups.

Naturalization Process: The EO aims to make the naturalization process more accessible, but without stringent checks, this could be exploited for fraudulent naturalization's.

Implications for Organizations Involved in Corruption

Access to Benefits: NGOs involved in immigration services could manipulate the vague language to exploit loopholes for financial gain or other corrupt practices.

Internal Corruption: Agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could be susceptible to internal corruption, especially concerning the interpretation and enforcement of the proclamation.

Given the recent concerns about unaccounted funds in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), notably within the Administration for Family Services and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), as well as suspicious financial activities in Amtrak and NGOs linked to HHS programs, this EO's broad scope and involvement of multiple agencies could potentially create avenues for corruption and financial irregularities.

Executive Order 14013 - Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs to Resettle Refugees and Planning for the Impact of Climate Change on Migration

Potential Weak Points for Exploitation:

Discretionary Access to Humanitarian Programs: Section 1(e) states that access to U.S. humanitarian programs is generally discretionary. This could allow for subjective decision-making, potentially leading to favoritism or corruption.

Undefined "Global Need": Section 1(b) mentions that the USRAP should be expanded "commensurate with global need," but doesn't define what constitutes this need, leaving it open to interpretation and potential abuse.

Review of Iraqi and Afghan SIV Programs: Section 3 calls for a review of Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) programs for Iraqi and Afghan allies. The lack of a timeline for implementation could delay protections for these vulnerable groups and may be exploited by those wanting to undermine the program.

Climate Change and Migration: Section 6 introduces the concept of climate change as a factor in migration but does not outline how this will be quantified or qualified, potentially allowing for misuse of this provision for political or financial gain.

Implications for Organizations Suspected of Corruption:

Revocation of Previous Orders: Section 2 revokes previous EOs related to refugee admissions and vetting. Organizations that had adapted to the previous orders may find loopholes in the new system before it stabilizes.

Community Sponsorship: Section 4(k) talks about expanding the use of community sponsorship models by refugee resettlement agencies. This could be a new avenue for NGOs to siphon off funds if not properly regulated.

Technology and Data Experts: Section 4(a)(iv) mentions the involvement of the United States Digital Service to streamline application processing. If not properly overseen, tech contracts could be awarded in a corrupt manner.

Public-Private Partnerships: Mentioned in Section 4(k), these could be exploited for financial gains if the private entities involved are not adequately vetted for ethical compliance.

Proclamation 10149 - Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to the United States

Potential Weak Points for Exploitation

• The proclamation relies on public health data, which could be manipulated or misrepresented, leading to potential miscalculation or misuse of executive power.

• The proclamation uses terms like "certain additional persons," which could be exploited for discriminatory practices if not clearly defined.

Implications for Organizations Involved in Corruption

• NGOs involved in immigration services could manipulate the vague language to exploit loopholes for financial gain or other corrupt practices.

• Agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could be susceptible to internal corruption, especially concerning the interpretation and enforcement of the proclamation.

In light of the broad scope and multi-agency involvement outlined in Executive Order 14013, it's crucial to delve deeper into the specific organizations that play a role in its implementation. This is particularly important given the recent concerns about unaccounted funds and potential corruption within various agencies and NGOs. Next, we will examine each NGO involved with the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and the Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) programs to assess their potential for exploitation and corruption. As we delve into the realm of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) we will explore them as they are meant to be. As we listen to their descriptions, we will unveil the blueprint of how things should ideally function. Once we traverse the structural aspects and delve into the core grievances, we will discern the points of failure. It is our hope that this journey will illuminate the avenues where you can exercise your oversight over our elected representatives.

NGOs

The U.S. Department of State partners with national non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to facilitate the initial resettlement and placement of refugees in the United States. These national NGOs have a network of local affiliates that actually provide the on-the-ground services to refugees in communities across the country. Here's a bit more detail on how this relationship works:

1. National NGOs:

   • These organizations have cooperative agreements or contracts with the State Department to provide resettlement services. They are often referred to as "Voluntary Agencies" or "Volags."

   • They are responsible for providing a range of initial services to help refugees settle into their new communities, such as arranging for housing, providing basic necessities, and assisting with school enrollment and job search.

2. Local Affiliates:

   • Local affiliates are community-based organizations that operate under the umbrella of the national NGOs.

   • They are the ones who directly provide services to refugees, working closely with local service providers, schools, employers, and other community organizations.

   • They ensure that refugees receive the necessary support to become self-sufficient and integrated into their new communities.

3. Coordination with the State Department:

   • The State Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) oversees the national NGOs and their cooperative agreements.

   • PRM provides funding, guidance, and oversight to ensure that the NGOs and their local affiliates are effectively delivering the services required under the cooperative agreements.

   • The national NGOs report back to PRM on their activities, the services provided, and the outcomes achieved.

4. Refugee Processing Center (RPC):

   • The RPC, managed by the State Department, coordinates the assignment of refugees to the national NGOs and their local affiliates based on a range of factors, including family reunification needs, medical or other special conditions, and the availability of services in different communities.

5. Collaboration with Other Federal Agencies:

   • The national NGOs and their local affiliates also coordinate with other federal agencies, like the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services, to ensure that refugees have access to additional support and services as needed.

This structure allows for a coordinated and collaborative approach to refugee resettlement, leveraging the expertise and community connections of NGOs at both the national and local levels to support refugees as they build new lives in the U.S.

FUNDING

The funding for refugee resettlement in the United States comes from a combination of federal grants, state contributions, and private fundraising efforts. Here's how the financial aspect of this system operates:

1. Federal Funding:

   • The major source of funding for refugee resettlement comes from the federal government, particularly through the State Department's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

   • PRM provides funding to national NGOs through cooperative agreements or contracts for initial resettlement services.

   • ORR provides grants for longer-term integration services, such as job training, English language classes, and other forms of assistance to help refugees become self-sufficient.

2. National NGOs to Local Affiliates:

   • National NGOs receive federal funding and then allocate funds to their local affiliates to carry out the resettlement work on the ground.

   • The amount of funding that local affiliates receive from their national organizations may vary based on the number of refugees they are serving, the services they are providing, and other factors.

3. State Funding:

   • Some states may provide additional funding to support refugee resettlement and integration efforts within their borders.

   • The level of state funding and the mechanisms for distributing it can vary widely from state to state.

4. Private Fundraising:

   • Both national NGOs and their local affiliates often engage in private fundraising efforts to supplement the federal and state funding they receive.

   • They may solicit donations from individuals, foundations, corporations, and other sources to support their work.

5. Other Revenue Generating Activities:

   • Local affiliates may also engage in other revenue-generating activities, such as thrift stores, training programs, or other social enterprises to support their services.

6. Direct Funding to Local Affiliates:

   • In some cases, local affiliates may also be eligible to apply directly for federal, state, or private grants to support specific projects or programs.

7. In-Kind Contributions:

   • Local communities often contribute to refugee resettlement efforts through in-kind donations such as furniture, clothing, and household items.

UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN

Unaccompanied alien children (UAC) are indeed part of a related but distinct process within the United States' immigration and resettlement framework. Here's how UAC are handled within this framework:

1. Identification and Referral:

   • Unaccompanied alien children are typically identified when they are encountered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or other federal agencies upon arrival in the U.S. without a parent or legal guardian.

   • Once identified, they are referred to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for care and custody.

2. ORR Custody and Care:

   • ORR assumes responsibility for the care, custody, and placement of UAC while they go through immigration proceedings.

   • It provides a range of services including housing, medical care, legal services, educational services, and case management to ensure their well-being and safety.

3. Placement in Shelters or Other Settings:

   • ORR places UAC in a network of shelters or other care settings, which may be operated by state agencies or private organizations under contract with ORR.

   • These shelters provide a secure and humane environment for UAC while their immigration cases are being processed.

4. Family Reunification Efforts:

   • ORR works to identify and vet potential sponsors, usually family members, who can care for UAC while their immigration cases proceed.

   • The aim is to place UAC with sponsors who can provide a safe and stable environment.

5. Legal Proceedings:

   • UAC, like other migrants, are subject to immigration proceedings to determine their eligibility for various forms of immigration relief, such as asylum.

6. Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS):

   • Some UAC may be eligible for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), a pathway to lawful permanent residency for children who have been abused, abandoned, or neglected.

7. Funding:

   • Funding for the care and services provided to UAC comes primarily from federal appropriations to ORR, which in turn contracts with state agencies and private organizations to operate shelters and provide services.

8. Coordination with Other Entities:

   • ORR coordinates with other federal agencies, state and local governments, and non-governmental organizations to ensure that UAC receives the necessary support and services.

While UAC and refugees are both part of the broader immigration framework, they are handled through separate processes with different procedures and services. Nonetheless, the overarching goal in both scenarios is to ensure the safety, well-being, and legal processing of individuals seeking protection or relief in the United States.

An astounding $3 billion funneled through 19 states, all within this year. The figures captivate, yet as one delves deeper, the reality of our fiscal contributions unfolds. Toward the end, the revelation of where our hard-earned tax dollars lead us is less than comforting; instead, it's a display of calamities, perhaps veiled financial misadventures like money laundering. The opacity surrounding the investigation into these entities, their structuring, and contractual engagements poses a challenge, casting a shadow of perplexity on the discerning inquirer.

Contracts and Grants

The system governing ORR contracts for UACs under HHS appears convoluted, seemingly designed for a specific group akin to an exclusive club. This complexity may deter capable organizations, possibly limiting the aid scope and effectiveness for UACs.Here's a breakdown of the information I found:

Direct ORR Grantee or Short-Term Contractor:

Organizations can become direct ORR grantees or short-term contractors to provide services to UACs.

Project Grants, Cooperative Agreements, or Contracts:

The Assistance Listing for the Unaccompanied Alien Children Program mentions project grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts as forms of assistance provided under CFDA Number 93.676 from the HHS.

Funding and Oversight to State-Licensed Shelters:

The ORR provides funding and oversight to state-licensed shelters across the United States for UACs referred to ORR by the Department of Homeland Security.

Post-Release Services (PRS):

ORR provides three levels of PRS: virtual check-ins, case management services, and intensive in-home engagements.

Residential Treatment Center Placements:

For UACs with serious medical or mental health issues, ORR consults with medical teams for placement in Residential Treatment Centers.

Contract Residential Beds for UACs:

There's a call for partners to support a humanitarian effort to swiftly place UACs into the care of safe, licensed, community-based providers that have open shelter beds.

Let us reflect upon the journey thus far, tracing the tapestry of narratives we have encountered. Our expedition commenced with the article titled, "From Home to Hell," published on September 23rd, 2023. This piece narrated the audacious whistle blowing of Terra Rodas and Carlos, who unveiled disconcerting occurrences befalling the unaccompanied alien children.

Within this narrative, we navigated through Terra Rojas' recounting, which laid bare the sinister imprints of MS-13, the 8th Street Gang, and other abominable experiences tormenting these young souls. This narrative further delved into the realm of inadequate stewardship, reflected in inexperienced caseworkers and the eerie silence surrounding 85,000 missing children. Despite the resistance, Terra's whistle blowing emerged as a clarion call a midst the cacophony of administrative indifference.

Our recollections traverse the times cape to last year, as we had delved into these narratives in September, unearthing the nefarious deeds itemized by these valiant whistle blowers. Among the disquieting revelations were the harrowing affiliations of approved sponsors, many of whom bore sinister affiliations with transnational organized crime syndicates, including high-ranking MS-13 gang members.

The whistle blowing saga of Terra and Carlos reflects an epitome of patriotic fervor, their voices piercing through the veil of oblivion, potentially safeguarding numerous innocent lives. Their endeavor elucidates the trans-formative power of vigilance, a virtue further magnified with collective engagement, as we stand at the precipice of uncovering further truths.

Transcending from empirical to speculative realms, we enlisted AI to conjure a speculative analysis on the program's infrastructure. The chilling accuracy of its prognostications mirrored the eerie realities unfolding in these shelters.

The protocols for this analysis were simple yet profound: envisage the fissures that might rend the fabric of such programs in the absence of vigilant oversight. The AI's prescience outlined a cascade of systemic disintegration:

1. Initial indicators:

   • Dismal facility conditions

   • Staff demeanor ranging from disinterest to hostility

   • Inappropriate staff conduct towards the children

   • Lack of proper identification

   • Inadequate staffing levels

2. Intermediate indicators:

   • Financial irregularities

   • Data privacy transgressions

   • Policy violations

   • An evident lack of oversight

3. Advanced indicators:

   • Unresolved incidents

   • Cases of abuse, neglect, and other forms of misconduct

   • Legal irregularities stemming from non-compliance with local, state, or federal laws

   • Public relations machinations aimed at suppressing dissent or manipulating narratives

The fate of Tara Rojas, entangled in a whirlpool of high managerial turnover, resonates as a stark emblem of these disquieting prognostications, prognostications that were elucidated by the AI back in September of 2023.

Thus, as we traverse further into the labyrinth of administrative entanglements, we bear witness to the dichotomy of idealistic intents and stark realities, a journey that beckons a deeper understanding of the ethical essence and the collective conscience that guides our societal endeavors.

The text that follows is extracted from proceedings within the esteemed halls of the Supreme Court of Florida. Specifically, the document bears the identifier SC22796 and represents the fourth presentment by the 21st statewide grand jury. Dated the 20th day of October, 2023, the case delves into the intricate and morally fraught issue of how unaccompanied alien children are treated under the auspices of the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Executive Summary

This report outlines various concerns and criticisms regarding the Office of Refugee Resettlement's (ORR) handling of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC). It focuses on issues like vetting procedures, information sharing, and child safety, among others.

Main Concerns

Treatment and Oversight

Complaint: Allegations of maltreatment of UACs and a lack of oversight by ORR.

Key Quote:Maltreatment of UACs, including a fatality in ORR custody... Congress has been attempting to conduct proper oversight...yet Agency decision-makers have obstructed our constitutional mandate.

Policy and Public Comment

Complaint: Short public comment periods and avoidance of Congressional testimony by ORR leadership.

Key Quote: Short timeframe for public comment on new rules... Director of ORR declined to appear for testimony.

Vetting and Information Sharing

Complaint: Inadequate vetting processes and restrictions on information sharing with other agencies.

Key Quote: ORR is reluctant to take DNA samples but trusts less reliable evidence... refuses to let other agencies access that information.

Child Safety and Sponsorship

Complaint: Lack of safety measures in child placement and lax vetting for sponsorship.

Key Quote: ORR places children with individuals under deportation orders... All vetting measures are now optional.

Law Enforcement Engagement

Complaint: Policies discourage calling the police and undermine law enforcement's role.

Key Quote: ORR aims to punish contractors, grantees, and employees for calling the police... police should not be called 'only as a last resort in emergencies.

Additional Insights on Vetting and Sponsorship

HHS and ORR officials continue to publicly insist they "do everything we can" to ascertain the identity of sponsors. However, what happens in reality and practice, according to many witnesses who appeared before us, testimony before Congress, and multiple reports from watchdog agencies, including HHS' own Inspector General, is that case managers or others:

• May call a phone number in a foreign country to talk to a supposed parent of the child;

• May speak that person's language or may be forced to use a translator.

• Do not physically meet, or may not even see, whomever they speak to (parent or sponsor);

• To the extent they receive requested documents, they obtain them almost universally via "WhatsApp," their authenticity unverified.

• No longer demand any form of DNA testing, which would resolve any relationship questions very quickly; and

• Do not subject other residents of the proposed home to even the minimal level of scrutiny required of sponsor applicants.

As a result of ORR's obfuscations, we had to learn through other sources of the myriad of children trafficked into sexual bondage and indentured servitude. Whether it was the Mexican national in Texas who pled guilty to running a house of prostitution featuring underage foreign children;

• Multiple graphic accounts of children suffering crippling injuries working in slaughterhouses.

• MS-13 teens discovered posing as parts of a "family" crossing the border.

• The UAC who sodomized and murdered a girl with autism after being placed in her neighborhood.

• Five-year-old discovered by Texas troopers wandering between ports of entry in the desert; or

The hundreds of UAC who end up in Florida's foster-care and dependency systems after failed sponsorship's (just to name a very few of ORR-sponsored tragedies) it is time for the general public to know what is being done with taxpayer funds. Yet ORR and its kindred agencies do everything within their power including retaliating against whistle blowers and ignoring subpoenas from both Congress and this jury to keep this knowledge hidden, not to protect UAC, but to protect themselves from exposure.

Conclusion

The ORR faces substantial criticism for its handling of UAC, from both vetting procedures to child safety measures. Immediate attention and oversight are required to address these concerns effectively.

To conclude this video and article, I wish I could proclaim this as the final chapter, yet it is not. Every time we delve into specific facets of this expansive tapestry of conspiratorial knowledge, we continually uncover, if I may venture to say, pathways leading to uncharted territories. Please remain vigilant for our forthcoming article, which will delve deeper into the realm of non-governmental organizations. Are they truly the entities they profess to be, or do they harbor a different essence? Only time will unveil the truth.