In a stunning video, an unidentified man can be seen videotaping a Muslim woman dressed in a burqa loading cases of soda pop in her luxury Lexus SUV. In the video taken by the man who identifies himself as a “lawyer,” he can be heard explaining how he just witnessed the woman purchasing several cases of soda pop with food stamps. The burqa-wearing woman, who is loading the grocery cart filled with cases of soda pop into the back of her SUV doesn’t dispute his claim that she used food stamps to purchase the soda pop. She actually confirms that the cases of soda pop were purchased with taxpayer-funded welfare money, and tells the man videotaping her, “Mind your own f**king business!”
The man with the camera continues to videotape her, claiming, “You take our tax money, then you buy a bunch of pop and then you sell it at a gas station.” The woman tells the man, “You don’t even know us. Our store got shut down!” The man asks, “So what are you doing with that then?” The Muslim woman tells him to mind his own business, “It’s our food stamps, you can’t tell me what do with it.” He replies, “It’s fraud!” The Muslim woman then accuses him of “stereotyping” her because he accused her of fraud.
The man asks her, “What’s your name?” to which she replies, “My name is f*ck America!” He tells her she should go back to where she came from if she hates America. She tells him that she was born in Detroit and that he should go back to where he came from. She can be heard mumbling something about Americans bringing slaves over and other anti-American ramblings that are typical talking points of anti-American liberals.
The man with the camera identifies himself as a lawyer who works for the state and warns her that he’s going to report her. The woman continues to aggressively defend herself, as the man who accompanies her remains mostly silent.
“The Real Catia” tweeted the unbelievable video:
Welfare fraud on full display in New York. Who drives a Lexus & needs free food on my tax? Another successful
#Democrat program…teaching people how to game the rest of us. #Democrats are the enemy of #America. Shame on them. It’s disgusting!
Watch the unbelievable exchange here (strong language warning):
Welfare fraud on full display in New York. Who drives a Lexus & needs free food on my tax 💵? Another successful #Democrat program…teaching people how to game the rest of us. #Democrats are the enemy of #America. Shame on them. It’s disgusting!pic.twitter.com/5nYlt5TIpI
— 🇺🇸The Real Catia 🇮🇹 (@CB618444) January 1, 2019
The burden of immigrants on the American taxpayer is stunning.
Taxpayer-funded welfare is used by 10.3 million non-citizens.
Over 54 percent of teens and children receive some form of public welfare and nearly half of adults.
On November 28, 2018, the Washington Post reported that the city of Baltimore filed what advocates call a first-in-the-nation lawsuit challenging President Trump’s efforts to curtail legal immigration by penalizing people who use public benefits.
The lawsuit alleges that the Trump administration’s expanded definition of “public charges” has had a chilling effect on the city’s immigrant community, which Baltimore officials see as key to its revival.
Legal immigrants have stopped using school programs, food subsidies, housing vouchers and health clinics for which they are eligible, the lawsuit says, hurting the city’s mission to welcome immigrants and creating long-term expenses as Baltimore deals with a sicker and less-educated community.
“They’re giving up government-supported health care, they’re giving up free school lunches, they’re giving up food stamps, they’re not applying for housing,” said City Solicitor Andre M. Davis, a former federal judge. “It’s a noncash public benefit that people are abandoning so they don’t lose the opportunity for themselves or their family to get a visa.”
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, challenges a change to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual that took effect in January. The shift tells State Department workers evaluating visa applications abroad to consider whether applicants, their families or their sponsors have used a public benefit in the United States or might in the future.
The change in the manual is similar to but separate from a pending policy change announced in September by the Department of Homeland Security, which also would limit immigration visas on the basis of whether immigrants or the families who sponsor them have used public benefits. The DHS rule is open for public comment, and agency officials have said they expect it to be challenged in court.
Foreigners before American citizens…it’s the Democrat way.
What are your thoughts? Should Americans dole out full benefits to anyone who wants to become an American citizen, or should a certain percentage of immigrants be forced to be able to support themselves?
We’d love to hear what you think in the comment section below.