Concertina wire is installed along the banks of the Rio Grande River as part of “Operation Lone Star,” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s border security mission.

From The Center Square

By Bethany Blankley

Nine months after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General expressed alarm that under the Biden administration, DHS agencies couldn’t locate where illegal foreign nationals were after they released them into the U.S., ongoing problems persist and terrorism threats are heightened.

Last September, the DHS OIG released a redacted report stating that DHS “does not have assurance that all migrants can be located once they are released into the United States.”

It conducted an audit over a 17-month period when DHS released more than 1.3 million foreign nationals into the U.S. after they illegally entered through the southwest border.

Of the 981,671 Border Patrol records evaluated from March 2021 through August 2022, addresses for more than 177,000 foreign nationals, or nearly 20%, “were either missing, invalid for delivery, or not legitimate residential locations,” it found.

The OIG also found that during this period, Border Patrol agents released 430,000 illegal foreign nationals into the U.S. on their own recognizance with Notice to Appear documents to go before an immigration judge. They released nearly 95,000 with Notice to Report documents to go to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office and more than 318,000 through a new Parole Plus Alternatives to Detention (Parole + ATD) program.

Under the Biden administration, instead of being processed for removal, foreign nationals deemed inadmissible were granted Parole + ATD and released into the U.S. They were also tracked with electronic devices either through wearing ankle bracelets or being given smartphones “intended to ensure compliance with release conditions, court hearings, and final orders of removal,” the report notes.

Prior to releasing them, federal agents are required to vet them to ensure they don’t have a criminal record and aren’t connected to countries of foreign concern or terrorist organizations. Federal agents are also required to obtain an address of where they are going in order to enforce federal immigration law.

The OIG found that DHS agencies had “limited ability” to accurately and effectively track them. Border Patrol “cannot always obtain and does not always record migrant addresses” and ICE “does not always validate migrant addresses prior to their release.”

Border Patrol agents didn’t accurately and effectively capture valid addresses, the report notes, because they were inundated with large influxes of people arriving at the border and because of “limited coordination with ICE and its limited authority to administer compliance with address requirements.” The audit found that “ICE also did not have adequate resources to validate and analyze migrants’ post-release addresses.”

ICE is statutorily required to enforce federal immigration law, specifically detaining and removing inadmissibles. “ICE must be able to locate migrants to enforce immigration laws, including to arrest or remove individuals who are considered potential threats to national security,” the OIG said. “The notable percentage of missing, invalid for delivery, or duplicate addresses on file means DHS may not be able to locate migrants following their release into the United States. As the Department continues to apprehend and release tens of thousands of migrants each month, valid post-release addresses are essential.”

Prior to this audit, the OIG found that DHS processes allowed known or suspected terrorist to illegally enter the U.S. and “potentially threaten national security and public safety.”

The report was released nearly 22 years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The terrorist attacks prompted the creation of DHS, consolidating several federal agencies all mandated to protect Americans and prevent another terrorist attack from occurring.

Within the last nine months, the OIG continued to report on DHS failures and authorities nationwide have issued heightened terrorist warnings.

One OIG audit found that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) weren’t effectively screening asylum seekers – meaning they didn’t know who they were releasing into the country.

Another OIG report found that CBP and ICE weren’t detaining and removing inadmissables arriving at a major international airport – with 44% flagged for removal not showing up for their removal flights because federal agents had released them.

Another OIG audit found that DHS, CBP, USCIS and ICE agents didn’t properly vet or resolve derogatory information for tens of thousands of Afghans released into the U.S. After the Biden administration pulled U.S. forces out of Afghanistan in August 2021, 97,000 Afghans were brought to the U.S. Among them, 77,000, or 79%, were granted humanitarian parole into the U.S. allowing them to stay for two years.

The OIG expressed alarm about DHS not having a process “for monitoring parole expiration” after the two-year period ended in August 2023, meaning no plans were in place to remove them.

As numerous officials have warned a terrorist attack on U.S. soil is imminent and members of Congress have demanded answers, an unprecedented estimated 12 million people from over 150 countries have illegally entered the U.S. since the president has been in office.

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By NICK POPE

The environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) movement is undermining U.S. energy security by artificially sapping demand for new refining projects, even though demand for fossil fuels and petrochemicals remains strong and could grow stronger in the event of a prolonged military conflict.

America’s energy systems and infrastructure may be currently unprepared to sustain a wartime economy in the event of a hot war with China, thanks in part to the Biden administration’s green policies, according to a new report published by the Heritage Foundation.

The report, published Thursday and titled “Chinese Handcuffs: Don’t Allow the U.S. Military to Be Hooked on Green Energy from China,” examines the state of American energy security and resilience in a potential war with China, taking stock of markets at home and overseas. The paper emphasizes the need for American policymakers to get ahead of any possible conflict with China by ensuring that the U.S. military has a robust and secure supply of traditional energy available, rolling back certain environmental regulations and targets pushed by the Biden administration, building more strategic energy infrastructure and bolstering existing commercial relationships with friendly countries, all of which may heighten deterrence with an adversarial country considering escalation with the U.S.

“Due to a heavy reliance on foreign sources, poor policy choices, and constraints on the transport of fuels, the U.S. military could be vulnerable,” the report states. “The risk is for localized fuel shortages, global supply disruptions, and Chinese economic coercion during a conflict driving significantly increased energy demands.”

Brent Sadler, the report’s author and a 26-year U.S. Navy veteran who now works as a senior research fellow for naval warfare and advanced technology at the Heritage Foundation, further emphasized that while steps to heighten America’s energy security will be expensive and require political will, they are necessary measures to ensure that the U.S. can transition to and sustain a wartime footing against near-peer competitors like China. Numerous pundits and ex-military personnel have suggested that China is getting ready for a war to start in the coming years, whether in Taiwan or in the South China Sea.

“America’s energy network is brittle in some regions and unable to adjust easily to surges in demand,” the report states. “In wartime, the consequences of such weaknesses could be an inability to sustain military combat operations and the inability of wartime industry to keep America safe. On the other hand, readiness for this possibility could be a significant advantage, enabling the United States to deter China by confronting it with a foe that is able to wage a prolonged war backed by a resilient wartime economy.”

The insistence of some federal and state officials — particularly Democrats — on transitioning the American economy to reliance on green energy poses a major problem for American security, the report asserts. Additionally, the environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) movement is undermining U.S. energy security by artificially sapping demand for new refining projects, even though demand for fossil fuels and petrochemicals remains strong and could grow stronger in the event of a prolonged military conflict.

The Biden administration has pledged to invest at least $1 trillion over the next decade to advance its massive climate agenda, and federal agencies have pushed stringent regulations and taken other bureaucratic actions targeting the broader American energy sector. The administration is also looking to make the military a more climate-friendly organization, including by seeking to have the Department of Defense (DOD) transition its non-tactical vehicle fleet to electric models by 2030.

Additionally, the supply chains for many of the green energy technologies favored by the Biden administration are dominated by China, the report points out. Numerous energy and national security experts have highlighted that retiring existing energy infrastructure in favor of products reliant on China-dominated supply chains is likely to make America more vulnerable, particularly in the event of an acute geopolitical crisis.

One specific element of the American energy system in need of change is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), a de facto emergency supply of oil stored in underground caverns along the Gulf Coast established in the 1970s amid an energy crisis, according to the report. Sadler recommends that policymakers begin to treat the SPR as a key tool for the military to use in the event of war, given China’s rise, as well as improving energy transportation infrastructure to more easily get SPR supply to coastal regions where the military can use it expediently.

The Biden administration has used the SPR as a tool for manipulating markets, as officials decided to release approximately 180 million barrels from the stockpile to bring down spiking energy costs ahead of the 2022 midterm elections. Several million of those barrels were sold to Chinese entities, and the administration has subsequently floated the possibility of again tapping into the SPR ahead of the pivotal 2024 elections while the reserve remains at its lowest levels in about 40 years, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Stadler calculated that the SPR’s current inventory would need a boost of about 55 million more barrels in order to single-handedly supply the amount of oil that U.S. forces used in Operation Desert Storm in 1990.

Deliberate policy choices and infrastructure upgrades are needed to make sure that the U.S. is able to effectively fight China in a prolonged conflict, Stadler contends in the report. Making these adjustments would help to provide an advantage over potential adversaries like China that rely on energy imports, according to Stadler.

Beyond SPR-related adjustments, the report also identifies an urgent need to unleash refiners and build out more pipeline capacity in light of China’s possible ability to launch highly disruptive cyber attacks against key pipeline and shipping infrastructure.

Additionally, Stadler emphasizes the importance of strengthening relationships with energy-rich countries that could be key sources of energy for American forces around the world in the event of a hot war with China. While several memoranda of understanding are in place with such countries, Stadler suggests that U.S. officials should move to elevate these agreements to treaty status to enhance America’s standing with those countries and decrease China’s ability to pressure third-party countries against assisting American forces.

“This is especially true for scenarios in which a major war disrupts overseas energy markets and normal shipping methods. Under such conditions, the U.S. will need more diverse and reliable overseas suppliers for military operations,” the report states. “Given the global impact that a war with China would have, the U.S. urgently needs to ensure that it has enough fuel stocks and crude oil to allow it time to adjust to a wartime footing.”

Neither the White House nor DOD responded immediately to requests for comment.