Nebraska gov, Illinois senator say White House sending illegal immigrant children to their states without notice

Elected officials in two states far from the U.S.-Mexico border have claimed that the Obama administration has resettled hundreds of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children without adequate notice and has refused to detail the exact locations where the children are being kept. 
Fox News has learned that 748 unaccompanied minors have been transferred from areas near the border to the Chicago area. Of the original group of 748 kids, 319 have been placed with family members or sponsors while they await an immigration hearing. The other 429 have been placed in facilities run by the Heartland Alliance, a nonprofit organization that receives grants from the Department of Health and Human Services. 
Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., told Fox News Friday that he did not know the exact locations of the facilities where the children were being kept, and stated his belief that the White House did not want the children's living conditions to be made public. 
"My worry is the administration doesn’t want people to know what the condition of these place are or how these kids are being treated in detention," Kirk said. "Kids can sometimes to be pretty cruel to each other, they don’t want those stories to get out and they don’t want us to know what is going on in these detention facilities. These detention facilities should be completely open to the press and to the American people so that we know how what conditions are, we should be able to talk to the kids who are there.  
"I can’t explain the incompetence of the Obama administration," Kirk said later. "This is a tremendous self-inflicted political wound ... This narrative, [that] this is Obama’s Katrina, [is] sticking really hard."
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman told the Wall Street Journal Saturday that 200 children were sent to his state without warning, and added that federal officials had refused to give him their names and locations. 
"Governors and mayors have the right to know when the federal government is transporting a large group of individuals, in this case illegal immigrants, into your state," Heineman, a Republican, told The  Journal. "We need to know who they are, and so far, they are saying they're not going to give us that information."
A White House official told the Journal that the Nebraska children were all being held with family and sponsors pending the outcome of immigration proceedings, and none were placed at a central facility. The official also told the paper that while some of the children arrived in the U.S. during the recent border surge, others crossed earlier in the year. 
Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Will Jenkins told The Journal that HHS is required by law to keep the personal information of unaccompanied children confidential. 
The Journal also reported Saturday that the White House has reached out to other states asking if they had any "big facilities" suitable for housing large numbers of unaccompanied children. Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, a Democrat, said his state was one of those approached, and told The Journal that the U.S. "should take a hard look at ... what we can do to be sure that as these kids get sent back they're going back to places that are going to be safer."
"This looks like permanent resettlement in the United States," Kirk told Fox News Friday, "which only encourage more people to join the 'coyotes', or the criminal trafficking networks.
Federal law requires that illegal immigrant children from countries other than Canada and Mexico have their cases heard in immigration courts, which can take years to resolve a case. In the meantime, the minors are permitted to stay in the U.S. 
Fox News' Chad Pergram and Garrett Tenney contributed to this report.

Israel expands bombing targets despite UN calls for cease-fire

Israel expanded its Gaza bombing targets Saturday to include civilian institutions with suspected Hamas ties, despite U.N. calls for a cease fire, and announced it would hit northern Gaza "with great force" to prevent rocket attacks from there on Israel.
In a statement Saturday, the Israeli military announced it was sending messages to Palestinians in the northern Gaza Strip to evacuate for their own safety. Brig. Gen. Motti Almoz, the chief military spokesman, said Israel planned to hit the area with heavy force in the next 24 hours as it steps up an offensive against Gaza militants as the area has been used to fire a barrage of rockets at Tel Aviv.
However, Gaza's Interior Ministry urged residents in the area to ignore Israel's warnings and to stay in their homes, saying the announcement was Israeli "psychological warfare" and an attempt to create confusion.
Shortly after the Israeli announcement, an Israeli warplane struck the home of the Gaza police chief, Taysir al-Batsh, killing at least 18 people and wounding 50, said Health Ministry official Ashraf al-Kidra. He said worshippers were leaving the mosque after evening prayers at the time of the strike and that some people are believed to be trapped under the rubble.
In New York, the U.N. Security Council called unanimously for a cease-fire, while Britain's foreign minister said he will discuss cease-fire efforts with his American, French and German counterparts on Sunday.
The press statement, which is not legally binding but reflects international opinion, is the first response by the U.N.'s most powerful body, which has been deeply divided on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
So far, neither Israel nor Gaza's Hamas leaders have signaled willingness to stop.
On Saturday, Israeli airstrikes targeting Hamas in Gaza hit a mosque and a center for the disabled where two women were killed.
The Israeli military said the mosque concealed rockets like those used in the barrage of nearly 700 fired by Gaza militants at Israel over the five-day offensive, while saying it was investigating claims about the other sites hit.
In a sign that the conflict might widen, Israel fired into Lebanon late Saturday in response to two rockets fired from there at northern Israel. There were no injuries or damage, but Israel fears militant groups in Lebanon may try to open a second front.
Israel has said it's acting in self-defense against rockets that have disrupted life across much of the country. It also accuses Hamas of using Gaza's civilians as human shields by firing rockets from there.
Critics said Israel's heavy bombardment of one of the most densely populated territories in the world is itself the main factor putting civilians at risk. Sarit Michaeli of the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said that while using human shields violates international humanitarian law, "this does not give Israel the excuse to violate international humanitarian law as well."
The United States, Israel's most important ally, has defended the Israeli attacks in response to the barrage of rockets fired into Israel from Hamas-controlled Gaza. But other council members have decried the Israeli attacks which Mansour said have killed or injured more than 1,000 Palestinians. There have been no fatalities in Israel from the continued rocket fire.
The Israeli military said it has targeted sites with links to Hamas, including command centers, and that it issues early warnings before attacking. But Michaeli said civilians have been killed when Israel bombed family homes of Hamas militants or when residents were unable to leave their homes quickly enough following the Israeli warnings.
Ahead of the U.N. statement, the offensive showed no signs of slowing down Saturday as Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon said his country should ready itself for several more days of fighting.
"We have accumulated achievements as far as the price Hamas is paying and we are continuing to destroy significant targets of it and other terror organizations," Yaalon said after a meeting with top security officials. "We will continue to punish it until quiet and security returns to southern Israel and the rest of the country."
An army statement said that from Friday morning to Saturday morning, Israel targeted 158 targets "affiliated with Hamas terrorism" in Gaza, including dozens of rocket launchers and a mosque where Hamas stored rockets and weapons.
Israel also targeted several civilian institutions with presumed ties to Hamas, widening its range of targets. Palestinian officials said this included a technical college, a media office, a small Kuwait-funded charity and a branch of an Islamic bank.
The Israeli military did not mention these institutions in its statement Saturday, saying only that in addition to the military targets, it struck "further sites."
The "Iron Dome," a U.S.-funded, Israel-developed rocket defense system, has intercepted more than 130 incoming rockets, preventing any Israeli fatalities so far. A handful of Israelis have been wounded by rockets that slipped through.
On Saturday, air raid sirens went off in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, Israel's two largest cities, both located nearly 50 miles (80 kilometers) from Gaza. Most of the rockets were intercepted or fell in open areas, though one landed near the Palestinian city of Hebron in the West Bank. A house was damaged but there were no injuries.
The frequent rocket fire has disrupted daily life in Israel, particularly in southern communities that have absorbed the brunt of it. Israelis mostly have stayed close to home. Television channels air non-stop coverage of the violence and radio broadcasts are interrupted live with every air raid siren warning of incoming rockets.
The frequent airstrikes have turned bustling Gaza City into a virtual ghost town during the normally festive monthlong Ramadan holiday, emptying streets, closing shops and keeping hundreds of thousands of people close to home where they feel safest from the bombs.
The offensive marks the heaviest fighting since a similar eight-day campaign in November 2012 to stop Gaza rocket fire. The outbreak of violence follows the kidnappings and killings of three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank, and the kidnapping and killing of a Palestinian teenager in an apparent revenge attack.
Israel has massed thousands of troops along the border in preparation for a possible ground invasion, with soldiers atop vehicles mobilized and ready to move if the order arrives.

Immigration cartoon

Second federal judge tells IRS to explain lost Lerner emails

A second federal judge has now ordered the IRS to explain under oath how the agency lost emails from former division director Lois Lerner, the woman at the heart of the Tea Party targeting scandal. 
U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton told Obama administration lawyers on Friday he wants to see an affidavit explaining what happened with Lerner's hard drive. The IRS claims her computer suffered a crash in 2011 that wiped her email records at the time clean. 
But at a hearing examining a lawsuit against the IRS by conservative group True the Vote, Walton said he wants to know what happened to Lerner's hard drive, which allegedly was recycled. He asked for an affidavit from those involved in handling the crashed drive. 
Among other things, he said he wanted to know the serial number, if any, assigned to the hard drive and if that number is known, "why the computer hard drive cannot be identified and preserved."
The order is another boost for those questioning the agency's claims that many Lerner emails from that time period are not recoverable. 
A day earlier, in a separate case brought by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave the tax agency 30 days to file a declaration by an "appropriate official" to address the computer issues involving Lerner. 
In that case, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton alleged there "has been a cover-up that has been going on." 
After the True the Vote hearing, group counsel Cleta Mitchell accused the IRS of playing a "shell game," by arguing that the plaintiffs could not prove any emails were lost. 
True the Vote brought its case to court after facing multiple inquiries and extra scrutiny from the IRS, the FBI and other federal agencies. 
True the Vote is now seeking a motion to speed up discovery and "preserve and prevent further destruction" of IRS emails and missing documents. 
The group also wants a forensic expert to investigate how the emails were lost and examine whether the data is recoverable. 
"The fact that the IRS is statutorily required to preserve these records yet nevertheless publicly claimed that they have been 'lost' appears to evidence bad faith," Mitchell wrote in a letter last month to the tax-collecting agency. 
Lerner, who has since retired, headed the IRS unit that reviews applications for tax-exempt status, at the time when the agency was accused of subjecting conservative groups to additional scrutiny. 
Meanwhile, Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman took things a step further on Friday, filing a resolution directing the House sergeant-at-arms to arrest Lerner on charges of contempt of Congress.

Clinton critic's book bumps Hillary memoir from top of bestseller list

Ouch. 
Hillary Clinton's memoir, which the former secretary of State has promoted relentlessly on a rocky book tour, just got bumped from the top of the bestseller list -- by a lurid account written by one of her most outspoken critics. 
According to the latest rankings in The New York Times bestseller list, Edward Klein's "Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. the Obamas" has catapulted to the top of the charts, nudging his subject's memoir down to the second slot. 
"Blood Feud," as the title suggests, is a journey of sensational anecdotes about tensions between Bill and Hillary Clinton, and the current occupants of the White House. The 300-page book is replete with ugly name-calling (Michelle Obama, according to the book, refers to Hillary Clinton as "Hildebeest," while Clinton supposedly calls President Obama a "joke") and gossipy anecdotes befitting Bravo television. 
But while the contents have been called into question by Clinton allies and others, Klein has defended his reporting -- and the book sales suggest that, at the least, "Blood Feud" is a page-turner. 
By contrast, Clinton's memoir "Hard Choices" has been criticized as dry and not incredibly revealing. (The Economist, for instance described it as a "stodgy memoir" meant for surrogates.) 
"Hard Choices" still leads the list of Hardcover Nonfiction, but trails when print and e-books are combined. 
And on Amazon.com, Klein's book has shot up to #13 overall, while Clinton's has fallen out of the top 100. 
In another curious detail in the book wars, conservative commentator and neurosurgeon Ben Carson's book has crept into the Times' Top 10 list. According to The Daily Caller, the book's overall sales are also approaching Clinton's. 
Nielsen Bookscan figures reportedly show Carson has sold 162,000 books, while Clinton has sold 177,000.

Will Romney run? The 2016 rumor that won’t go away

Think Mitt Romney won't run again in 2016? 
For those dismissing the possibility of the two-time presidential candidate launching another bid -- and they may be wise to do so -- a recent poll at least shows the former GOP nominee still has a loyal following in parts of the country. 
First, the reality check. Romney, after two tiring presidential campaigns, consistently has said he is not running. 
But the University of New Hampshire/WMUR-TV poll in the first-in-the-nation primary state of New Hampshire recently showed Romney with 30 percent support -- blowing away a crowded field of potential 2016 Republican candidates who fail to even crack double digits. 
Despite the seemingly long odds of a Romney entry into this field, the buzz has been percolating for a long time, and has grown unchallenged by anyone in Romney's inner circle. 
If there is such thing as a Romney revival, it would have begun last August when the Republican National Committee held its summer meeting in Boston at the very same Westin Hotel and Convention Center where Romney watched his candidacy wither on Election Day 2012. At the meeting, several Romney insiders began to light-heartedly ruminate about the plausibility of a third Romney run with delegates, guests and even a few political reporters. 
Eleven months later, Utah Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz, a Romney friend and supporter, is publicly making pro-Romney mischief, arguing that the rest of the potential GOP field in 2016 doesn't cut it. 
"I don't see an emerging front-runner right now and to have somebody who's able to raise a billion dollars and convince the public, the majority of the public, that he's the right person for the job. If there is a void, I think Mitt Romney jumps into that or gets recruited to jump into that," Chaffetz said. 
After her husband's 2008 loss, Romney's wife Ann emphatically said: "never again." Romney, of course, did run in 2012 -- and on the night of that loss, before even leaving that hotel in Boston, he was the one saying no more. 
Now with the leadoff 2016 caucuses and primaries less than a year-and-a-half away, Romney's name keeps coming up despite the existence of a crowded GOP field of potential candidates already jockeying for position. 
Throughout the 2012 GOP primary campaign, Romney struggled to excite and unite conservatives. It was common to hear voters leaving his campaign rallies say it's not too late for somebody else to get in the race. 
Consultants, political operatives and supporters backing Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan and others tried mightily to get them to run, and it made Romney look like a weak front-runner. Now Romney is the object of some wishfully thinking Republicans, and the shoe is on the other foot. 
Comments from Republicans like Chaffetz, and polls like the one in New Hampshire, make Romney look longed-for and the current field somehow inadequate. 
Indeed, the UNH poll suggests the Granite State's notoriously engaged and demanding GOP primary voters are not that thrilled with the field and are looking for alternatives. 
When the UNH poll took Romney out of the equation and asked voters their primary preferences, "No potential Republican candidate has been able to separate from the tightly bunched field," according to UNH pollster Andy Smith. 
If the election were held today, 19 percent of likely Republican primary voters in the state say they would vote for Christie, 14 percent would vote for Paul, and 11 percent would vote for ex-Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. 
They are followed by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and a few others. 15 percent said they are undecided.   

Tear Down This Wall (cartoon)

The Great Unknown: ObamaCare cost unclear amid changes to the law

President Obama’s health care law has been delayed and changed so many times that the official budget scorekeepers can no longer keep track of what the law costs.
The changes, and the overall uncertainty regarding the price tag, are raising concerns about whether the law even has enough revenue coming in to pay for the program.
“Right now the savings that was projected to pay for all this spending is not being collected as originally projected," said Charles Blahous, of the Mercatus Center. He estimated the law will eventually cost $200 billion a year by 2020.
The unilateral changes to the law – and specifically delays of the requirement that certain employers provide health coverage to workers – are the subject of a recently announced lawsuit by House Speaker John Boehner.
But apart from that, the changes have caused problems for the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which typically keeps track of what laws cost. Joe Antos, of the American Enterprise Institute, noted the office has said they won’t do “new estimates” of the law anymore.
"Their ability to say this was a benefit to the federal budget is going to become more and more dubious as the years pass,” said Jim Capretta, of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
In the case of the employer mandate, the provision was delayed from 2014 until 2016 for employers with fewer than 100 workers. For larger companies, it was delayed by one year, and they were allowed to only have to cover 70 percent of their workers.
Further, individuals were given until April 15 to enroll in a health plan through the ObamaCare exchanges, and many will likely be able to skirt the law’s prescribed fine for going three months without insurance. 
Antos said he thinks it would be "politically impossible for the IRS to come after those same people -- millions of people -- and say you owe us money because you didn't sign up in time to have insurance.”
The cost of just those two changes will likely cut into revenue.
"There was about $100 billion that was supposed to come in over the next 10 years from penalties on individuals, if they did not carry health insurance, penalties on employers, if they do not offer health insurance, and to date, those penalties have not been enforced,” Blahous said.
The law also counted on more than $700 billion in cuts to Medicare, including up to $150 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage, but the president set those aside at the behest of Senate Democrats who feared angering seniors in an election year.
Capretta said it is "very dubious that some of these Medicare cuts can be sustained over a long period of time."
He also noted that even more Medicare cuts are planned but wonders if the impact will cause some of them to be pulled back as well.
"In fact, the actuaries who look at the numbers for the Medicare program have said that this cut is so deep that about 15 percent of the hospitals will drop out of the Medicare program by the end of the decade," he said.
With 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day for the next 20 years or so, that might be politically impossible to sustain.
And a 40 percent tax on expensive health plans, like those unions enjoy, is set to take effect in 2018, and would raise another $80 billion or so -- if it survives. It is vehemently opposed by unions, and employers are steadily adjusting their health plans to avoid the tax, suggesting the $80 billion may never materialize.
Bob Rusbuldt, president of the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America, said, "No company is going to pay a 40 percent excise tax on that excess premium. They are just not going to do it."
So the question becomes, what happens when projected cuts to pay for the law don’t materialize?
"If one tax is eliminated … what takes its place?” Rusbuldt asked. “You either have to reduce benefits and services and administrative costs, or you have to put in a different tax."