Border Patrol agents insist that completed new sections of border barriers are helping them to secure the border and making the agents safer in the process. This comes on the heels of media reports inaccurately asserting that no new barriers have been constructed during the Trump Administration.

Border Patrol Agent Mike Matzke told Breitbart News, “New sections of Trump’s wall have been built and anyone claiming that a 30-foot barrier that replaced a 10-foot high sheet metal fence isn’t new barrier doesn’t know what they are talking about. The old legacy landing mat fence in our sector wasn’t effective and really bad people were jumping all day and night.”

Agent Matzke spoke with Breitbart News in his role as president of the National Border Patrol Council’s Local 2554 in El Centro, California.

“We’ve had people throw Molotov cocktails over the old landing mat fence and it was dangerous because we couldn’t see through it like we can with Trump’s new border barrier. Here in El Centro, we have the highest stretch of border wall on the entire Southwest border. Trump’s new wall section is 30-feet high,” Agent Matzke said.

Other Border Patrol agents discussing the matter said that the new Trump wall segment was 2.25 miles long and described it as being in the most needed area. Agent Matzke confirmed this and said the stretch is just to the west of the downtown area of Calexico, California. “It starts at the New River and goes west. Assaults on agents were very common in the area prior to Trump’s new wall. Assaults on Border Patrol agents in the area have dropped 65 percent since Trump built it. Illegal entries in the area are down 75 percent since Trump built it.”

The New River crosses from Mexico into California in the area, so Border Patrol agents have expressed that crossing will never be at zero percent due to environmental restrictions. The river is highly polluted and agents are prone to avoid entering the water.

“Agents will still go in to apprehend aliens, but this is only after they cross. We have two fences in the river that influence the routes of aliens, but it doesn’t stop them from crossing,” said Agent Matzke.

Border Patrol agents are unable to speak directly with news media so the National Border Patrol Council serves as their public voice so that the agents’ concerns and perspectives can be made known. Agent Matzke said a number of Border Patrol agents were dismayed by media reports claiming that no new segments of border barrier had been completed.

“A couple-mile stretch of Trump’s wall might not seem like a lot to some people, but it sure makes all the difference in the world to us. We are safer and our objectives are much easier to meet,” said Agent Matzke. He said Trump is building another approximate 11 miles of wall, but groups are slowing the construction with court injunctions.

(Disclosure: Breitbart News has worked closely with the National Border Patrol Council to help bring a voice to Border Patrol agents, funded the funeral of a slain agent through the Council, and helped to start a podcast for the agents. The author, Brandon Darby, has received an award from the Council for his work on behalf of Border Patrol Patrol agents and has worked with the Council on a number of projects.)

 

TOKYO — Nissan Motor is expected to report a more than 90% plunge in first-quarter operating profit on Thursday, Nikkei has learned, and will cut up to 7% of its global workforce as it braces for one of the worst years in a decade.

Operating profit in the April to June period will come in at less than 10 billion yen, down from 109.1 billion yen ($1 billion) for the same period a year earlier.

The Japanese automaker issued a statement saying that it expects the result “to be close to the figure reported” in the Nikkei article, which it described as “speculative.”

Sales in the U.S., one of Nissan’s biggest markets, continue to fall, while the costs of developing electric vehicles and autonomous driving technologies are weighing heavily on profits.

The company is now scrambling to reduce production capacity and intends to increase the planned 4,800 job cuts announced in May to more than 10,000 out of a 139,000-strong workforce.

Data from QUICK FactSet shows the automaker’s operating profit also fell below 10 billion yen for January to March. The last time Nissan’s operating performance dropped so sharply was in January-March 2009, when the company recorded a loss of 200 billion yen.

Nissan is scheduled formally to announce the first-quarter results on Thursday afternoon.

The carmaker is expected to show a significant decrease in overall sales from the same quarter of 2018, when it recorded turnover of 2.7 trillion yen. Autodata, a market research firm, estimates the company sold around 350,000 units in the U.S., down 4% on the year and greater than the 2% average decline across the American market.

Nissan is trying to wean itself off discounting as a means to boost sales in the U.S., and in April-June it decreased dealership incentives — in effect, raising prices. Yet the automaker is pushing a number of ageing models that have not had major revamps in years, making it harder to persuade drivers to swallow price hikes.

The company also suffered sales declines in Europe, where it was hit by tighter environmental regulations. In Japan, the Nissan brand has taken a major hit from the arrest of former chairman Carlos Ghosn for alleged financial misconduct. The executive denies any wrongdoing.

But in China, Nissan sales turned upward in June after year-on-year declines in the previous two months. Japanese brands have fared relatively well as the world’s biggest auto market has slowed. Chinese operations had no net impact on Nissan’s quarterly profit.

While sales are under pressure, Nissan is also being forced to invest more to meet new regulations and to develop next generation technology — connected, autonomous, shared and electric cars. The costs are eating into profit.

Higher costs of rare metals and other raw materials, as a result of the U.S.-China conflict, have also hurt the company, along with the impact of a stronger yen against the dollar.

Nissan in May had forecast a 230 billion yen operating profit for the fiscal year through March 2020, down 28% from a year earlier. Net profit was expected to come in at 170 billion yen, down 47%.

Along with the plunge in earnings, Nissan is expected tomorrow to announce a restructuring plan centered on job cuts and output capacity reductions. Management aims to free up resources — rendered scarce by Ghosn’s expansion drive — to concentrate on next-generation technology.

In May, Nissan announced 19 reform steps designed to reduce annual costs by 30 billion yen, including 4,800 job cuts in North America and other regions. The plan is to accelerate the layoffs by promoting early retirement and other measures. Capacity, mainly in emerging countries, is to be slashed by around 10%.

Nissan had a workforce of 139,000 as of March 2018, with 33 plants around the world. Annual production capacity stood at about 6 million vehicles, but its sales of 5.5 million vehicles in 2018 came in well below that.

The new restructuring plan is expected to include capacity cuts at around 10 plants worldwide.

When a Colorado school district forced schoolgirls to wear religious head coverings, angry parents unleashed their rage.

With the growth of Islam in the West, many are wondering how the public education system should approach the subject of religion. Some argue that religion must be taught in schools in order for students to understand the cultural and ideological differences in our melting-pot society while others insist that such a delicate social subject should be left up to the parents.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, many American schools are implementing curricula that touch on the subject of religious theology, including Islam and its tenets. Just how certain schools are teaching this controversial topic has some parents passionately voicing their concerns.

In an effort to educate students on major religions, the Douglas County School District of Colorado informed parents that students would be attending a field trip to the Colorado Muslim Society’s Majid Abu Bakar as well as a synagogue and Greek Orthodox cathedral.

What sparked the parents’ outrage was the dress code outlined in a letter sent home students, which required that while every student was expected to wear “appropriate long pants,” the female students “must bring scarves or hooded sweatshirts for the mosque,” according to The Daily Caller.

While many were upset that students were expected to dress in accordance with Islam’s religious customs, others felt that forcing the girls to cover their hair with hijabs was sexist. Voicing this concern was KNUS 710 radio host Peter Boyles, who stated that the school district is “holding these girls to a different standard.”

Hoping to get some answers, Boyles reached out to Rocky Heights Middle School principal Mike Loitz, who confirmed that the school did ask its students to comply with the religion-inspired dress code. It was because of this, and not the fact that students were learning about Islam, that Boyles believes that parents were concerned.

“Islam dictates many, I believe – personal belief – repressive practices against women and Islamophobia will trump women’s rights,” Boyles said. “Animal rights every time, and the environment. That’s their belief – that’s wonderful. But don’t apply it to public school kids.”

Some maintain that students should be taught to respect every religion and its customs. However, others believe that the district has gone too far and actually forced students to obey certain religious tenets.

In response to the backlash, the school district released a statement defending its decision and clarifying the requirements. Officials explained that although the dress code was mandatory, participating in the field trip was optional, according to WND.

“If the decision is made to not participate in a field trip, alternative educational opportunities are provided,” the district said. “This is true for any DCSD field trip, including the RHMS world religion field trip.”

The district concluded that they are merely trying to educate students on the basic tenets of major world religions and will leave the formation of their personal beliefs up to them and their parents. Still, many feel skeptical about what their children would be learning.

However you feel about religion, it’s undeniable that parents will be protective over what their children are taught on the subject. Faith is a powerful aspect of humanity, and most just aren’t convinced that our government is the best teacher for future generations on this deeply complicated issue. Religion is a course that’s better taught at home.

Posting reviews has become second nature for many consumers nowadays – 82 percent of adults say they read online reviews at least some of the time, according to a Pew Research Center Study – so when they have a bad experience with a business, up goes a review, to share it with others.  But for one man in Florida, what he thought was a simple review turned into a year-long battle in court. “I never thought I’d be sued over anything that I write. There’s no reason to say anything but the truth,” said Tom Lloyd, of DeLand, Florida. But Lloyd said telling the truth got him in trouble.  His ordeal began when his 10-year-old poodle Rembrandt suddenly fell ill last year.  Lloyd rushed him to nearby DeLand Animal Hospital, where he says he was told the dog needed immediate surgery for what was probably a ruptured spleen.

“I said, ‘You’re going to do this right now?’ And he said, ‘Yeah,’” Lloyd recalled.

But six hours later, he says, the clinic told him to come pick Rembrandt up: that they’d been unable to find a surgeon. He took the dog to a second clinic but says he was told it was too late – Rembrandt would need to be euthanized. “It isn’t like there’s a closure,” Lloyd said. “He deserved a chance and they didn’t give him a chance. If he would have died on the operating table, I would have understood.” Afterwards, he posted a review on Yelp, writing “The staff had wasted six hours of Rembrandt’s life and destroyed whatever chance he may have had to live. Our Rembrandt deserved a better last day.” Weeks later, DeLand Animal Hospital and veterinarian Thomas MacPhail sued Lloyd for defamation, alleging his statements were “false” and “published maliciously and recklessly.” Lloyd said, “I’m finding out that isn’t always cheap to give an honest review, because if the other person has money, they can drive you in the ground.”

When “CBS This Morning” spoke with him in May, Lloyd owed $26,000 in legal bills, more than his $20,000 yearly Social Security income. And he’s not the only person who’s been sued. Last year, a New York woman was sued by her doctor for $1 million for posting negative online reviews. A man in Kansas was sued over a three-star Trip Advisor review of a theme park, and a South Carolina woman was sued by a restaurant she claimed refused to honor a coupon. “We’re seeing a rise in individuals being sued for speaking out online,” said Evan Mascagni, who works for the Public Participation Project. He says many lawsuits are designed simply to intimidate. They’re called “SLAPP” lawsuits (for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). “A SLAPP filer doesn’t go to court to seek justice; they are just trying to silence or harass or intimidate a critic of theirs,” Mascagni said. Some states have laws against SLAPP lawsuits, but there is no federal anti-SLAPP statute.

Earlier this year, the Federal Trade Commission began cracking down on businesses that put gag clauses in their consumer contracts in violation of the Consumer Review Fairness Act. “CBS This Morning” consumer investigative correspondent Anna Werner asked Carl Settlemyer, of the FTC’s Division of Advertising Practices, “Why is it important enough that the government feels like, ‘Hey we have to step in sometimes’?” “The online review medium has really exploded over the past decade or so, and people’s reliance on the ability to learn from online reviews has really grown in proportion to that,” Settlemyer said. “People have stories to tell, and they’re not able to get them out because they feel like they’re going to be threatened.” Thomas Lloyd stuck to his guns, and countersued: Earlier this year, two former veterinarians from DeLand gave sworn affidavits saying even though they lacked experience doing the emergency surgery Lloyd’s dog needed, veterinarian MacPhail had declined to do the surgery and instead left for vacation. After the animal hospital’s attorneys learned of our interview with Lloyd, the case was quickly settled. Lloyd told Werner, “They shouldn’t be able to try to financially break somebody just because they don’t like what you say.” DeLand Animal Hospital, which is now under new ownership, did not respond to CBS News’ request for comment.  Neither did veterinarian Thomas MacPhail, who DeLand told us last week is no longer working at the animal hospital.

VIEW

Enlistment of 18 years and older immigrants maybe a better idea that looking to our 16 year olds to fight.  What better way to prove your loyalty and earn your place in America.  No, they do not need to be at the front lines, maybe more the kitchen helper, laundry, and other support lines.  However, 16 year olds have plenty of energy and anger to go to the front line.  The mix would be interesting!  What better way to understand politics that to fight for it. The video games they work on all day may have a practical application after all.

The best way to fix the U.S. armed forces’ recruiting challenges may involve dipping further into the nation’s high schools.

As the Army, Navy and other services contend with a thriving economy and a directive to expand their ranks, there is a growing debate over whether the military should consider lowering the minimum enlistment age from 17 to 16. More than a dozen countries, including the United Kingdom, already have adopted the policy. Neither the military nor lawmakers have given any indication that they are entertaining the idea, but some analysts say that opening the ranks to younger Americans could provide unique benefits and may be the kind of fundamental overhaul the recruiting system needs for the 21st century. “For one, many of the factors that disqualify older youths from joining — like criminal records — are not as present in younger teens,” said Shane McCarthy, chief marketing officer of Sandboxx, a leading technology platform that connects military members stationed abroad with families and friends at home. Mr. McCarthy also has advised military commands on how to better target recruits.

“Currently, of the 75% of 17- to 24-year-olds who are ineligible to serve, for example, 10% are ineligible due to criminal records,” he wrote in a recent piece for the Military Times. “And, according to the Department of Justice, there are twice as many arrests of 18- to 20-year-olds as there are arrests of 15- to 17-year-olds.” Mr. McCarthy’s argument touched off a firestorm, with skeptics saying the move could create more problems than it would solve. Peter Warren Singer, a senior fellow at the Washington think tank New America, countered that lowering the enlistment age to 16 would undermine combat effectiveness and unit cohesion and create other problems.Mr. Singer, author of the book “Children at War,” also said the very idea shows a “misunderstanding [of] the different brain chemistry of youths and their ability to make informed judgment” and would destroy “the day-to-day lives of the poor drill instructors and commanders of these teens’ first unit.”

He made his case in a piece for the military-focused website Task & Purpose. Despite those and other concerns, the notion certainly isn’t new. At least 13 nations allow enlistees younger than 17, according to the CIA World Factbook. They include major powers such as the United Kingdom and smaller countries with much less capable militaries, such as Tonga, Bolivia and Papua New Guinea.In the U.S., analysts say, there is a lack of data about the issue and it’s unclear exactly what effects military services would encounter if they begin admitting younger teens. “I think the broader answer about all of this is we really don’t know,” said Beth J. Asch, a senior economist at the Rand Corp. who studies military recruiting. “There’s no current research on what the effects would be, how would it expand the market, their qualifications. We don’t know.”

Like other analysts, Ms. Asch said she believes the idea of signing up 16-year-olds has been off the table for decades and remains so today. But the discussion underscores the armed forces’ systemic recruiting challenges. Last year, the Army fell short of its recruiting goal for the first time in a decade. The Army had set a goal of 76,500 recruits and pulled in just under 70,000, according to Defense Department figures. The Army and all other branches of the military expect to meet this year’s targets, but officials readily acknowledge that the recruiting environment is as difficult as ever, largely because of a soaring economy, a consistently low unemployment rate and more economic opportunities in the private sector for young Americans who otherwise might consider military service. Analysts say that recruiting 16-year-olds doesn’t seem to be the right solution, but they stress that the military can and must improve its outreach to younger teenagers. “You have to compete and be in the marketplace, and that’s something the military doesn’t do very well,” said Rebecca Burgess, a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies military and veterans issues. “It tells the story of itself that’s very traditional: ‘We’re freedom fighters doing good throughout the world; be part of our team.’ And it expects people to kind of come to them.”

That, she said, is why recruiting offices too often are found in dying shopping malls or other low-traffic sites rather than out in the community. The military has taken serious steps in recent years to increase its visibility and engagement in the nation’s communities. The Army has launched a comprehensive recruiting program in major cities and said the approach already has paid huge dividends in the number of recruits from urban centers such as Baltimore and Minneapolis. But analysts say the military’s past tack of using marketing slogans such as the Army’s “Be all you can be” mantra no longer works. Instead, they say, the branches should craft multiple appeals centering on the host of benefits that come from military service, including educational assistance, patriotism, career benefits, and the host of jobs a man or woman can perform in the military outside of a combat zone.

“I think what’s happening now — and it’s not that messages aren’t important — but I think there’s a realization that different people are interested in different things,” said Ms. Asch. “It’s not one message. People want to join for a variety of reasons, so the message has to be somewhat tailored. The trick is to communicate all of that so people get the message they need to hear,” she said.

view

 

Have you ever tried to talk someone who just wants to yell at you?  It is impossible!  This victim did even try to help the operator help her.  This operator is a professional and was asking questions to help police identify the victim and maybe get her to identify the guy in the car who was harassing her.  The victim is the road rage if you ask me, and is taking it out on this poor operator.

The victim of a dangerous road rage incident in the South Loop says she called 911 during the chaos, only to be told by the operator, “stop yelling at me.” The same operator then hung up on her during a second call. The woman, who asked not to be identified out of fear that the suspect could find her, said she was driving near 13th and Wabash on June 23. A man in a white van aggressively cut her off, she hit the horn and, according to a police report, the man got out of the van and started yelling racial and gender slurs at her. “The words started with an N and the other one starts with a B,” she told CBS 2. “He was a maniac.” She tried to drive away but the man got back in his van and started to follow her, so she called 911. “This car is following me. I’m on 13th and Wabash,” she told the operator. The woman, clearly frightened, went on to shout “he keeps trying to cut me off and he just threw something at my car.” The operator, apparently agitated, responded by emphatically saying “Okay, stop yelling at me. What kind of car you in?”

After a brief silence, the victim said “Are you going to help me or not? I’m scared.”

After a few seconds of unintelligible dialogue, the dispatcher said, “You’re yelling at me. What kind of car you in?”

The victim told the dispatcher “you’re no help,” and said she had to hang up because she feared for her life. She said the man then got out of his van again and started to approach her. At that moment, the operator called back. “Hello?” the victim said. “What kind of car are you in ma’am?” asked the operator. “Is this the same lady I just talked to?” the victim asked. “Yes, it is,” the operator said. The victim said, “I don’t want to talk to you. Put somebody else on.” It is unclear whether the operator heard the request for someone else. The operator is then heard saying “bye” and the call ends. “She hung up on me,” the victim said. She was able to speed away and got home physically unharmed. “So he might still be out there harassing people,” she said. The victim later filed a police report and complained to an Office of Emergency Management and Communications supervisor.

She says OEMC managers called her back the next day and apologized and said they had plans to discipline the operator.

“I think she should be disciplined,” the victim said. “I think termination, but at least some kind of probation.” In an email late Thursday afternoon, an OEMC spokeperson said disciplinary proceedings are underway for the employee. They said the employee will also be retrained, and the road rage call will be used for OEMC training purpose in the future. The email also stated that police were dispatched to 13th and Wabash for the call.

Wow!  Getting fired for trying to do your job!  Who does the operator call to complain about this woman?

view

 

A woman who allegedly caused two fighter jets to be scrambled to escort a plane she was traveling on has received an £85,000 ($106,000) bill by the airline. In a statement posted on its website, Jet2 said 25-year-old Chloe Haines had tried to open the door of a plane midway between London’s Stansted Airport and Dalaman in Turkey. The alleged incident on June 22 led to passengers and crew restraining Haines while pilots rerouted the plane back to Stansted. The airline accused Haines of “a catalogue of aggressive, abusive and dangerous behavior.” According to one media report a fellow passenger said that Haines then screamed: “get off me, I’m going to kill everyone.”′ Jet2, which said it has also banned Haines for life, said the U.K. Royal Air Force scrambled two Typhoon fighters to escort the aircraft. Jet2 added that the jet fighters caused a sonic boom in their rush to accompany the plane. In its statement, Jet2 added that airport police boarded at Stansted to arrest Haines on suspicion of assault and endangering an aircraft. Steve Heapy, CEO of Jet2.com and Jet2holidays said Wednesday that the airline would “vigorously pursue to recover the costs that we incurred as a result of this divert, as we do with all disruptive passengers.”

view

Trump tells Dem congresswomen: Go back where you came from

The president’s tweets seemed intended to exploit party tensions, but instead rallied the caucus against him.

President Donald Trump, jumping into the middle of a feud among House Democrats, called out progressive congresswomen in xenophobic terms on Sunday, saying, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

While he didn’t mention them by name in his series of tweets, Trump was presumably targeting some of the caucus’s best-known freshman women of color: Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.).

Story Continued Below

“So interesting to see ‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run,” the president wrote.

Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley were all born in the United States. Omar, a Somalian refugee, immigrated to the U.S. with her family in the early 1990s.

“Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came,” he added. “Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!”

Hours later, after dozens of assorted tweets and re-tweets, the president circled back to attack again.

“So sad to see the Democrats sticking up for people who speak so badly of our Country and who, in addition, hate Israel with a true and unbridled passion,” he wrote. “Whenever confronted, they call their adversaries, including Nancy Pelosi, ‘RACIST.’ Their disgusting language ….. and the many terrible things they say about the United States must not be allowed to go unchallenged.”

A new podcast series from POLITICO.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If the posts were intended to exploit simmering tensions within the Democratic Party after weeks of messy public infighting, however, they instead gave embattled House Democrats a common opponent to rally against — the president himself.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has been at odds with some of the most liberal members of her caucus, and other top Democrats fired back.

Pelosi said the president’s “xenophobic comments” were reaffirming his plan to make “America white again.” Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), the No. 4 House Democrat, said the comments were “a racist tweet from a racist president.”

Other House Democrats also quickly weighed in, defending their colleagues, and Ocasio-Cortez turned the focus back on Trump’s immigration policies.

Democratic presidential candidates weighed in almost uniformly and just about universally in condemnation of the tweets. Republican congressional leadership did not address the subject.

The early-morning tweets also ignited frustrations inside the president’s reelection operation, where officials spent the last week relishing the dust-up between Pelosi and the four freshman progressives.

One person close to the campaign said Trump ruined weeks of messaging for his 2020 operation by uniting Democrats through their condemnation of his disparaging tweets. The infighting between party leaders and the four women — known as “the squad” — had “proved what we’ve been saying all along — that radical progressives are infiltrating the Democratic Party and pressuring their colleagues to embrace policies that are so far outside the mainstream no voter will entertain them,” this person said.

Trump’s remarks are the denouement after an acrimonious week for House Democrats in which members publicly turned on one another over generational, ideological and racial divides. Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez traded barbs during the week, forcing other members of the caucus to take sides in what became a dayslong spat.

Trump, who last week defended Pelosi after Ocasio-Cortez said the speaker was singling out women of color for criticism, seemed determined to exacerbate those intraparty strains on Sunday morning. But the speaker stood with the members of her caucus.

“When @realDonaldTrump tells four American Congresswomen to go back to their countries, he reaffirms his plan to ‘Make America Great Again’ has always been about making America white again. Our diversity is our strength and our unity is our power,” she wrote on Twitter.

The president did succeed in one way that Democrats themselves haven’t been able to figure out — how to tamp down the simmering party feud and come back together for what is expected to be a chaotic two weeks in the House before a lengthy August recess.

Returning to the Capitol after the July 4th holiday, tensions were still simmering over an emergency border bill that nearly ripped the caucus apart. That divide was further exacerbated when Pelosi openly questioned the influence of “the squad,” prompting a series of fiery comments from the quartet, including Ocasio-Cortez.

Pelosi then privately chided progressives, including taking a shot at Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, for tweeting criticism of their colleagues. Ocasio-Cortez then inflamed tensions by suggesting that Pelosi was purposefully singling out her and other women of color within the caucus to criticize.

Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks prompted a sharp rebuke from some members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who said it was actually her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, who was targeting people of color within the caucus.

Weeks earlier, during the fight over humanitarian funding to address the border crisis, Chakrabarti compared moderate Democrats to segregationists in a now-deleted tweet. He has also publicly endorsed primary challengers to sitting Democratic incumbents, including members of the CBC.

On Friday, things seemed to have at least publicly calmed down as members left the Capitol for the weekend. But the spat was seemingly reignited on Friday night after a House Democratic Caucus Twitter account run by staffers for Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) targeted Chakrabarti in a late-night tweet.

The four members of the self-described squad — Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley, Tlaib and Omar — have been some of the most vocal critics of both Trump and their own party on the issue of immigration.

Tlaib recently gave emotional testimony and characterized the Trump administration’s immigration agenda as governed by “a dangerous ideology.” She recounted stories of the migrants she met in custody and the conditions of the facilities at the U.S.-Mexico border. She was also joined by Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley and Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), who all toured border patrol facilities earlier this month.

Speaking on Saturday at Netroots Nation in Philadelphia, Omar responded to critics such as Trump and Fox News host Tucker Carlson who have assailed her as anti-American.

“I believe, as an immigrant, I probably love this country more than anyone that is naturally born,” the first-term congresswoman said.

His tweets on Sunday were far from the first time Trump, a native of New York, treated political opponents as outsiders of uncertain loyalty. He cast doubts on the legality of Barack Obama’s presidency, supporting conspiracy theorists who claimed without justification that Obama was not born in the United States. During the 2016 campaign, he repeatedly denounced Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel (born in Indiana but of Mexican origin) and suggested Curiel could not rule fairly in a case involving Trump.

 

Heather Caygle and Gabby Orr contributed to this report.