Obama’s Hate Of The Union

by Ben Crystal
ManBearPig catches a bad cold. The State of the Union scores Obama-style ratings. And: the Democrat Channel can’t help it. All this, plus — cleanup in Waxman’s office! Presented in 1080 hi-def, FOR FREE! It’s the Great Eight, from the Personal Liberty Digest^™!

Corrupt Oregon Judge Assisting Perverse Prosecution In Case

[Attorney General Ellen F. Rosenblum] 

oped: Here we go again...another no amnesty  argument! 

by US~Observer Staff    

Albany, Ore. (US~Observer) — A travesty and mockery of justice is currently occurring in the racketeering case against Randy Gray of Albany, Ore. Circuit Judge Thomas McHill has teamed with a prosecution right out of the “Pit of Hell” to attempt to successfully prosecute the innocent Gray.
Gray, who is the father of six children and who has an exemplary wife, is — without question — honest, ethical and, above all: innocent! On the other hand, McHill and the prosecution, condoned and promoted by corrupt Oregon Attorney General Ellen F. Rosenblum, are nothing more or less than hypocritical thieves, keeping all pertinent defense evidence from the jury.
To me, McHill can be described only as a perverse, filthy whore, standing on a street corner, infecting unsuspecting clients with AIDS. In my opinion, Rosenblum is — without question — his pimp. McHill’s black robe is totally appropriate!
Why in the world would a court and prosecution order Gray’s defense not to mention the fact that he didn’t believe he was involved in selling securities? This is exactly like accusing someone of murder and then refusing to allow that person to state that they didn’t commit murder. This is a pure police state, fascist action.
Why would the court refuse to allow the jury to know that co-defendant and career criminal Derek Dunmyer staged the crimes without Gray’s knowledge? Shouldn’t the jury know that Dunmyer was given a plea bargain by Oregon’s corrupt Attorney General’s Office, wherein he simply had to plead guilty to a misdemeanor crime, with no jail time? Shouldn’t the jury be informed that the factually dangerous criminal, Dunmyer, has been allowed to keep his real estate license, issued by the State of Oregon, and is currently selling property? Shouldn’t the jury know that this is all part of the agreement, just to get Dunmyer on the witness stand and commit perjury in front of them, against Gray?

Shouldn’t the jury know that the court is not allowing the defense to call Gray’s prior attorneys as witnesses — that the attorneys had been paid to make sure that the dealings between Gray, Whitney and Dunmyer were all legal and aboveboard? Shouldn’t the jury know that Dunmyer went to a prestigious Portland, Ore., law firm at the time he was scamming Gray and the investors? That this firm told Dunmyer that the transactions were securities and that he kept this from Gray? Why in the world would McHill and the prosecution want to keep all of this highly relevant truth from the jury?
Shouldn’t the jury know that during the time Dunmyer was scamming Gray and numerous investors, Dunmyer was bringing in illegal aliens to provide dirt-cheap labor on the homes that he was building; that Dunmyer was using other people’s bank accounts for payroll, in order to commit tax evasion; that Dunmyer squandered hundreds of thousands of investor’s dollars on gambling trips to Las Vegas, expensive vehicles, Rolex watches and a multimillion-dollar home?
Should the jury know that this investigative reporter received a call two weeks ago from one of the State’s witnesses claiming that prosecutor Daniel Wendel had called him and threatened him, “scaring the hell out of him.” According to this witness, if he refused to allow Wendel to instruct him on what he should say in front of the jury, that it would be “the worst mistake of his life.”
Wouldn’t the jury want to know that if it convicts Gray, he will spend years in prison, his family will be completely destroyed and his life will virtually be over? I have investigated thousands of cases during my career, and I have never witnessed a more vile, corrupt, “Star Chamber” trial than the one Gray is being forced to endure.

The legal system, McHill, the prosecution and even Rosenblum call all of this justice. Hardly. I call it pure evil.
One of the greatest evils will be if Gray is convicted, and the jurors discover the truth. Can you imagine the guilt they will feel when they discover they aided in Gray’s false conviction? How will they sleep at night?
You, my readers, have just read the unadulterated truth about the attempted false conviction of Randy Gray of Albany, Ore. Now, read the “politically correct” version (in part) of this tragic story…
Judge Tom McHill, Circuit Court of Linn County, is currently presiding over the case State of Oregon v. Randy Gray. The defendant was charged in August 2011 with one count of racketeering involving securities fraud and selling of unregistered securities, to wit: an investment contract; 16 counts of selling an unregistered securities (investment contract); and 16 counts of theft. Prosecuting the case are Assistant Attorneys General Daniel Wendel and Simon Whang. Securities law itself is intentionally vague and unclear to prevent unscrupulous members of society from evading securities law and is designed to catch and imprison any unwary violators. Because of an Oregon court ruling, State v. Jacobs, 55 Or App 406, 413 (1981), securities violators are not subject to mens rea, or the common law test of criminal liability requiring intent to commit the crime. Additionally, a defendant’s good faith belief and consultation with legal counsel are not relevant defenses and are inadmissible at trial, including in the trial of Gray.
At issue, McHill has ruled on a number of motions that should cause concern to the public that justice and consistency are not at the forefront of this judge’s mind or practice. In a motion in limine submitted by the State in early 2013, the State moved to not allow Gray to testify that he intended to and did repay lenders for their lost “investment” funds out of his own pocket. McHill ruled that the crime took place on Aug. 29, 2008, and nothing that happened afterward was relevant. He likened the scenario to someone taking a candy bar from a store, then turning around and taking it back; the crime was committed when taking the candy bar. The problem with that example is that the judge assumed a crime was committed before determining there was a crime committed.

Additionally, McHill ruled in a pretrial motion that expert witnesses would not be allowed to testify as to the interpretation of law. On the first day of Gray’s trial, McHill reversed his ruling and allowing the testimony of expert witnesses. Reversing rulings demonstrates inconsistency, changing the rules of the game favoring one party over the other and causing hardship on the defense to find an expert witness with no notice.
Finally, in the pretrial ruling based on the State v. Jacobs (1981), the case that prevented Gray from testifying that he didn’t know he was selling a securities or that he relied on legal counsel, McHill broadened his pretrial ruling to include the co-defendants and witnesses. These inconsistencies and mid-trial rule changes pervert justice and draw into question whether defendants are truly innocent until proven guilty. Thus, it seems that Gray has already been convicted of theft and selling unregistered securities and securities fraud in the case State of Oregon v. Randy Gray, a clear perversion of justice.
I ask any of my readers who believe in God to pray that Gray is acquitted. Pray that McHill and the prosecution are promptly punished for what they are doing. And, equally important, pray that God will forgive the jury if they are deceived and convict an innocent man.
Read the first article here.

Gallup: Americans Want Less Strict Gun Control

by Sam Rolley 
The results of a new poll from Gallup indicate that President Barack Obama’s push for stricter gun control may have actually led more Americans to feel that the Nation needs less strict gun laws.


According to the polling agency, 55 percent of Americans are unhappy with gun laws in the United States because they would like them to be either stricter or more lenient.
Via Gallup:

Americans may be dissatisfied with gun laws because they believe they should be stricter, or because they believe the laws are too strict as they are. Therefore, Gallup asks those who are dissatisfied with gun laws to choose among explanations for their dissatisfaction. Those who are dissatisfied have historically leaned heavily in the direction of wanting stricter rather than less strict laws.
But this year, the gap between those wanting stricter gun laws and those wanting less strict laws narrowed as a result of a sharp increase in the percentage of Americans who want less strict laws, now at 16% up from 5% a year ago. Support for making gun laws stricter fell to 31% from 38% last January. The January 2013 poll was conducted shortly after the December 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting tragedy, which sparked some state governments to consider new gun laws and a robust national discussion about the issue.

Democratic Representatives Alan Lowenthal (Calif.), Mike Thompson (Calif.), and Elizabeth Esty (Conn.) introduced a House resolution Wednesday to renew the Congressional push to increase gun control in the United States.
The resolution states:

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that gun violence is a public health issue and Congress should enact by the end of the 113th Congress comprehensive Federal legislation that protects the Second Amendment and keeps communities safe and healthy, including expanding enforceable background checks for all commercial gun sales, improving the mental health system in the United States, and making gun trafficking and straw purchasing a Federal crime.

With Gallup’s data showing that Americans are increasingly irritated by strict gun laws, Democrats who take up the President’s anti-gun agenda could risk hurting the Party’s chances in the 2014 midterms.

Stockman Mulls Impeaching Obama

by Sam Rolley 
Representative Steve Stockman (R-Texas) was so disgusted by President Barack Obama’s State of the Union promise to sidestep Congress to further the White House agenda that he walked out midway through the President’s speech on Tuesday. Now the Representative says he is seriously considering filing Articles of Impeachment against the President.
In a statement to supporters, Stockman explained that he walked out of the State of the Union address because the President was essentially laying out a plan to violate the Constitution.
“I could not bear to watch as he continued to cross the clearly-defined boundaries of the Constitutional separation of powers,” Stockman said a statement. “Needless to say, I am deeply disappointed in the tone and content of tonight’s address.”
According to Stockman, the President’s assertion that the White House will not wait on Congress to achieve many of its goals was a public announcement that Obama will “break his oath of office and begin enacting his own brand of law through executive decree.”
“Obama defiantly vowed not only to radically expand the reach of government from cradle to grave, but to smash the Constitution’s restrictions on government power while doing it,” Stockman said. “His goal is to eliminate our Constitutional republic.”

“Last year I said I would consider impeachment as a last resort to stop Obama’s abuse of power,” Stockman continued. “And, quite frankly, we’re running out of options.”
The lawmaker, who is currently mounting a Senate campaign for Senator John Cornyn’s (R-Texas) seat, is asking supporters to sign a petition that will help him gauge support for initiating the impeachment process against the President.
Stockman isn’t the only one calling for Obama’s impeachment on the heels of the State of the Union address. Jeff Steinberg, senior editor at the Executive Intelligence Review, said that all conservative members of Congress should now be seriously considering impeachment.
“The main message that Obama delivered during his State of the Union is that he intends to use executive dictatorial powers to bypass Congress,” he said on Wednesday.
“If I was in the Congress, I would have gone immediately this morning and filed impeachment proceedings against him because he’s stated publicly that he intends to violate the most sacred principles of the Constitution which is the separation of power between the executive and legislative branches and the courts,” he added.

Holder Can’t Answer Mike Lee’s Question: Where Does The President’s Authority To Act Unilaterally Come From?

oped: amazing eh' how Eric Holder and Barack Obama graduated from colleges with Law degrees and went up the ladder...how the hell does that work? hmmm maybe upward mobility etc etc etc...or foolin' round with the proverbial perverted professors after class?...dunno but they sure as hell don't impress me!

by Ben Bullard
Attorney General Eric Holder didn’t have a ready answer when questioned by Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) Wednesday on the Constitutional basis for the President’s use of executive orders. That’s partly because he’s not up to date on all the lawyering that’s been done to justify modern Presidents’ ongoing reliance on executive orders, and partly because the authorization for executive orders to modify standing legislation is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.
Lee initiated this exchange Wednesday during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee:






LEE: I heard you mention a few minutes ago, in response to some of the questions asked by Senator Grassley, that it’s the President’s preference to work with Congress; that, wherever possible, he’d like to get Congress to agree with him to pass legislation that he would like. But, of course, the other side of that coin is something that the President referred to repeatedly last night in his State of the Union address, which is that, if he can’t get Congress to act, he’ll go it alone — if Congress won’t act the way he wants Congress to act, then he’ll issue an executive order anytime he gets the chance.
This brings to mind a concern that I’ve had as to whether or not sufficient analysis is being undertaken when these executive orders are issued.
As you know, the Supreme Court has… tended to separate out executive orders into three categories, you know: In category one, you have a situation where Congress [sic; Lee surely meant to say “the President”] acts pursuant to authorization by Congress, and that’s where his authority to act with an executive order is at its strongest.
Category two is where you have the President acting in the absence of either a Congressional authorization or a Congressional prohibition. Justice [Robert] Jackson [in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)] described this as sort of a “twilight zone” where it’s a little unclear; it’s a little murky.
Category three is where you have the President taking measures that are incompatible with Congressional command.
And so I would ask, number one — is this analysis undertaken each time the President issues an executive order? And, number two, was that kind of analysis undertaken when the President, for example, announced on July 2^nd of 2013 that he would not be enforcing the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act throughout the duration of 2014? Even though, by law, the employer mandate was set to take effect as of January 1^st, 2014.

HOLDER: … Those kinds of activities are done by the President after consultation with the Justice Department, and an analysis is done to make sure that the President is acting in an appropriate; in a Constitutional way. And those three categories that you talked about — that we all studied in law school — from Justice Jackson, are among the things that, obviously, are a part of the analysis: where the President’s authority is greatest, the “twilight zone,” and then where the President’s authority is weakest.
LEE: So, in which of those three categories would you put the President’s decision to delay the enforcement of the employer mandate? Is that category one, two or three?
HOLDER: I’ll be honest with you, I have not seen — I don’t remember looking at or having seen the analysis in some time, so I’m not sure where along the spectrum that would come –
LEE: How about the executive order that he proposed last night, with regard to minimum wage; would that be category one, category two or category three?
HOLDER: Again, without having delved into this with any great degree –
LEE: But you’re the Attorney General. I assume he consulted you?
HOLDER: Well, there have been consultations done with the Justice Department. From my perspective, I think that would put us in category one, given the Congressional involvement in the matter. The ability of the President to regulate things that involve the Executive Branch and how contracting is done seems to me that the President is probably at the height of his Constitutional power in that regard.

Lee knew Holder was trapped, because the Senator’s line of questioning was bound either to paint Holder as ignorant of precedent law (if Holder, in fact, had the nerve to call Obama’s flagrantly unilateral delay of the employer mandate a “category one” executive order) or as an outright liar (which Holder veered close to admitting, when he first declared that the President had worked closely with the DoJ before issuing recent executive orders — but then confessed it had been “some time” since he had reviewed the analysis established by the Supreme Court in Youngstown).
The Constitution says nothing about the President’s power to amend Congressional law or to act unilaterally to create legislation that Congress has declined to take up. Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 simply states, “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows…”
That’s followed up later in Article II (Section 3, Clause 5): “…he [the President] shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.”
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson’s concurring opinion in the 1952 Youngstown case, in which he broke down the spirit of a President’s executive actions into the three categories Lee referenced, set a precedent for judicial interpretation of whether future Presidents’ executive actions could be litigated according to their adherence to, or divergence from, the intent of Congress in passing — or declining to pass — legislation.

Corporatists Calling Shots On Amnesty

Oped: They just don't get it...we the people want Mexico's Immigration Laws ! : http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2014/01/reform-us-immigration-lawi-think.html

by Bob Livingston 
Because their corporate masters want millions of legal workers they can pay slave wages to, House Republicans are about to ignore the will of about two-thirds of their base and grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
It was a sickening display during Tuesday’s State of the Union speech when House Republicans jumped to their feet en masse to applaud Obama’s call for an amnesty bill. There are now at least 84 Republicans who support an amnesty bill for illegals, meaning that with Democrat support, an amnesty bill is very likely to pass. You can read the rogues gallery here.
Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan warns that an immigration push will create a “Balkan war” in the Republican Party and that House Weeper John Boehner will lose his speakership over it. That, of course, will simply consign him and his tan to a lucrative seven-figure K Street career.

Conservative gadfly Ann Coulter gained a copy of an embargoed report by Phyllis Schlafly that shows how immigration is changing the country and will spell doom for the Republican Party, in addition to driving down wages and sending more Americans to the unemployment lines. The report shows immigrants have little in common economically, culturally or historically with Americans; that they overwhelming support big government social programs, gun control, affirmative action, gun registration and Obamacare; and that they have a negative view of free-market capitalism. In other words, they’re progressives.
But the Republican establishment doesn’t care, as long as their corporate masters are happy.
It’s past time that Americans who support the Republican Party understand the party’s elite give only lip service to small-government and conservative principals and that they are truly interested only in feathering their own nests and those of their sugar daddies.

Obama on being sued by Congress: ‘I am not particularly worried about it’

oped: You should be, you just haven't grasped the concept that your 15 minutes of fame has expired! Pack yo bags FOOL! *Bottoms Up* enjoy cause when ya put on the proverbial 'Orange Jump Suit' all ya gets is a Oscar Meyer Bologna Sandwich and water! Coffee on a good day...lol

by: Alex Pappas 

Asked about a Republican-led effort to sue him for executive overreach, President Obama said Thursday: “I am not particularly worried about it.”
House Republicans — led by South Carolina Rep. Tom Rice — have introduced what they call the STOP Act, which stands for Stop This Overreaching Presidency. It aims to take the president to court over the White House taking unilateral action on everything from Obamacare to immigration.
In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Obama made clear he plans to use executive orders to enact policies he cannot get passed in Congress.
CNN host Jake Tapper — during an interview on Thursday in Waukesha, Wisconsin — asked Obama about the The Stop Act.  “They want to rein in what you’re trying to do,” Tapper said. “How do you respond to that?”
“Well, I don’t think that’s very serious,” Obama replied. “I mean, the truth of the matter is, is that every president engages in executive actions.  In fact, we’ve been very disciplined and sparing in terms of the executive actions that we have taken.”

“We make sure that we’re doing it within the authority that we have under statute,” Obama said. “But I am not going to make an apology for saying that if I can help middle class families and folks who are working hard to try to get in the middle class do a little bit better, then I’m going to do it.”
Pressed by Tapper if the Stop Act is “not something you take seriously,” Obama responded: “I am not particularly worried about it.”
During a recent floor speech, Rice made the case for the STOP Act.
“The Legislative branch makes the laws and the Executive Branch enforces our laws,” he said. “They did this to protect our very, very fragile freedom and we cannot allow those separations to be eroded.”

Boehner Releases Immigration Deform Proposal

Oped: Once again they just don't get it: http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2014/01/reform-us-immigration-lawi-think.html

By: Daniel Horowitz 
Drum roll…..the long awaited GOP principles on illegal immigration were presented today to the House GOP Conference at their annual [aptly-named] retreat.  Sorry to disappoint you but there is nothing new under the sun.  Their framework is a mirror image of the Senate “Gang of 8” bill, albeit cloaked in even more deceptive and disingenuous language in order to distract conservatives with shiny objects.  Let’s go through some of the text:

• After proposing broad amnesty, the document says that” none of this can happen before specific enforcement triggers have been implemented.”  That might sound like it was written by the Tea Party, but in reality every GOP leader has made it clear that enforcement triggers mean something ambiguous after the “probationary” legal status is granted.
• Legalization before amnesty is the key point.  Everything else is window dressing.  Once they are legalized there is no turning back.  There will never be any leverage to implement the universally agreed-upon security measures thereafter.  This is beyond Lucy and the football already.
• “There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws – that would be unfair to those immigrants who have played by the rules and harmful to promoting the rule of law.”  This is the big lie.  Once legal status is granted before the enforcement is in place and the magnets are removed, they will get citizenship.  If there is this much pressure to legalize them when they are totally illegal, there is no way they will permanently reside here without citizenship for more than a year.  At that point, Chuck Schumer will push for citizenship.  Furthermore, the notion that this is not a special pathway is nonsense.  The traditional pathway is in the country of origin.  Staying in the country is the special pathway.
• The Dream Act is full amnesty, a disaster and a farce. It is particularly irresponsible to push that without asking for changes to birthright citizenship and the welfare state in exchange.  They will be eligible for immediate legal status and citizenship shortly thereafter.  These people are largely poor and low-skilled.  They would be eligible for the entire array of welfare programs. Moreover, once you have amnesty for “Dreamers” it is defacto amnesty for everyone else because A) they can bring in family members and B) anyone can potentially be eligible, so ICE would have to suspend all deportations to allow illegals a reasonable opportunity to present their case.  Sans a proposal to change birthright citizenship first, the Dream Act would expand our anchor baby magnet to an “anchor teenager” phenomenon.
• “One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents.”  Here is another big lie.  They claim that we can’t “punish” children nor could we withhold legal status from anyone because it is not humane.  Yet, they proceed to claim “we must ensure now that when immigration reform is enacted, there will be a zero tolerance policy for those who cross the border illegally or overstay their visas in the future. “  This is internally incoherent.  Once you telegraph the message that as soon as someone successfully comes here illegally and puts down roots, we will not have the stomach to deport them, why would that change during the next cycle? If amnesty for illegal children is a “founding principle,” then we have to have a perpetual amnesty for such children in perpetuity.  The reality is that unless we implement all enforcement long before any amnesty, we will continue the perennial cycle of open borders and sympathy-driven amnesty.  And that is exactly how they want it.
• The best way to solve a problem is to first honestly admit there is a problem.  By refusing to call them illegals, and instead opting for euphemisms like “Individuals Living Outside the Rule of Law,” they are showing that there is no commitment to clamp down on illegal immigration in the future.
• There is no mention of a border fence.  A physical fence is the only thing proven to work.  Also, it is not subject to manipulation or “prosecutorial discretion.”  It actually works, and that is why they don’t want it.
• There is no mention of the 800-pound gorilla – the magnets of welfare and unqualified birthright citizenship.  The only way to offer an amnesty [after enforcement] without repeating the mistakes of the past is to finally cut off the incentives to come here illegally in the future.  All they have to do is come here and drop a baby on American soil.  At that point, the baby is an American citizen and can secure welfare on behalf of the family.  Additionally, this is the same flaw with any temporary worker program.  If they have kids, these workers will never be temporary.  Also, the whole idea of a guest worker program is so the special interest lobbies can secure slave wages on behalf of agribusiness.  With American-born children they would have the need and the ability to secure welfare payments.
• Finally, it is dangerous and irresponsible to begin pushing any of this before Obama begins to follow the current laws.  We are ostensibly advertising for people to come here from across the border and overstay their visas.  If there is a long period of time when legal status is offered before the Fence is built and Exit-Entry is put into place, millions more will flood our country.  Once deportations are ostensibly halted, there will be no way or desire to sort out those who came later, and God-forbid, actually deport those who came for the free ride.
•  
•  

 

The Speaker Reaps What the Speaker Sows

 
oped: Ok John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and Paul Ryan I assume y'all have a IQ above 90 [dull normal] and are capable of understanding reading comprehension 101... so fyi please read how we the people feel about Immigration Laws and your rediculous plan to enable the Obama administration on this fiasco!: http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2014/01/reform-us-immigration-lawi-think.html

by: Erick Erickson 

Less than twelve hours into the Republican retreat and the leaks and attacks came fast and furious. John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and Paul Ryan intend to push immigration through the United States House of Representatives.

The bulk of the House Republicans thus far seem opposed, but Boehner and his lieutenants intend to find a path forward. They will start bid and grandiose and whittle their way down into something, anything, to show they intend to move the ball forward.

Conservatives inside and outside the retreat began preemptively crying foul. The bill is going to suck. We all know it will suck. But we only have a few digestible nuggets.

John Boehner is reaping what he sowed.  . . . please click here for the rest of the post →

Re visiting Injustice in Perugia,Italy Amanda Knox et al

Meredith Kercher 


Raffaele Sollecito 


Amanda Knox 

I'm sorry but the Italian Justice system is as corrupt as Obama's Justice system under Barack Obama and AG Eric Holder...it is all political /Self serving and lacks any comprehensive investigative skills...lacking even basic Criminal Justice 101 training  that any LE officer receives in any accredited LE Academy in the US 

Once again Italy has embarrassed itself with lack of evidence and caving to the perversion of a corrupt prosecutor in the Italian Justice system!

This case is so dis proven by Criminal Justice 101 that it makes any true investigator just shake his or her proverbial head in disbelief..

See : http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/FBI2.html

Reform US Immigration Law...I think not,however hmmmm

First and Foremost a lil humor to start the diatribe which will follow:


Alrighty then now that I have your attention ...on with my diatribe on the subject!
I for one am sick and tired of politicians producing bills and laws just for the sake of changing laws to justify their existence...our immigration laws are by no means antiquated as our ridiculous politicians claim [Nor is our US Constitution/Bill of Rights]...they are just fine, fair and protect our SOVEREIGNTY 

Since Mexico wants to stick their nose into our business and demand we change our laws to suit their needs/wants ok I suggest we take their example on Mexican Immigration Laws and model ours after theirs...let them try to bitch about it then! 


The article that follows by Dr. J. Michael Waller should be an eye opener to liberals who believe in open borders and loose immigration enforcement.
Mind you, this is the law of the land in Mexico, the third-world nation that has encouraged millions of its citizens to invade America.
It is also the same country that threatened to take the U.S. to the UN for building a fence on American soil!

Mexico's Immigration Law:

Let's Try It Here at Home By J. Michael Waller, Citizens for a Constitutional Republic
Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven't been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.
That's too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.
At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it's noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

in the country legally; have the means to sustain themselves economically; not destined to be burdens on society; of economic and social benefit to society; of good character and have no criminal records; and contributors to the general well-being of the nation.The law also ensures that: immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor; foreign visitors do not violate their visa status; foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics; foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported; foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported; those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens -- and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Poblacion, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country's immigration policy. It is an interesting law -- and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico. If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry. We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. [1] Now let's look at Mexico's main immigration law. Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society: Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32) Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34) Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37) The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country: Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73) A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86) A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned: Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116) Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)  Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons: Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117) Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118) Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says, "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123) Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125) Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law: A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127) Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico's immigration practices versus its American immigration preachings is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government's agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States Let's call Mexico's bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let's propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico's own law as a model.

Arrest of billionaire highlights political divisions in Iran

By Babak Dehghanpisheh 

BEIRUT (Reuters) - While international sanctions have made life a struggle for many Iranians, they were a big break for businessman Babak Zanjani, who made a fortune helping the government evade the restrictions on oil sales. He also made enemies.

A $40,000 watch on his wrist and a Tehran football club for a plaything, Zanjani shuttled to meetings on private jets, arranging billions of dollars of oil deals through a network of companies that stretched from Turkey to Malaysia, Tajikistan and the United Arab Emirates, he said last autumn.

"This is my work - sanctions-busting operations," he told Iranian current affairs magazine Aseman.

Under the conservative presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the 39-year-old Zanjani was good enough at his work to amass a fortune of $10 billion - along with debts of a similar scale, he told Aseman - until he was arrested late last month. 

He is being held in Tehran's notorious Evin prison, accused of owing the government, under moderate new President Hassan Rouhani since August, more than $2.7 billion for oil sold on behalf of the oil ministry.

Rouhani's government, which has struck a preliminary deal with the West to ease some sanctions in return for curbs on its nuclear activities, has not said what specific charges are being investigated. But two days before Zanjani's arrest, Rouhani had written to his first deputy demanding action against sanctions profiteers.

When announcing the arrest, a judicial spokesman said "he received funds from certain bodies ... and received oil and other shipments and now has not returned the funds" and that any violations would be addressed after the investigation.

Zanjani has always denied any wrongdoing and says he only tried to do a service for the country. His office did not immediately return requests for comment.

Analysts say Zanjani's connections with senior officials in Ahmadinejad's administration and in the Revolutionary Guards - a powerful branch of Iran's military with extensive business interests - have made him a political target. 

"The arrival of the new government played a big role in the downfall of Zanjani," said Fereydoun Khavand, an Iran expert and economist at the Paris Descartes University.

"The issue of Zanjani and the broader issue of corruption has become a factional war between the reformists on one side and the conservatives on the other side."

RAGS TO RICHES

Zanjani's rise from market trader to billionaire middleman has become for many ordinary Iranians not a rags-to-riches inspiration but evidence of cronyism.

"This is not about an individual. This is a collective where Babak Zanjani is the facade," said a factory owner in Tehran, to explain what he called the businessman's "unnatural growth".

The collective that gave Zanjani his big opportunity was the Revolutionary Guards, which expanded its social, political and economic influence under Ahmadinejad, playing a major role during the 2009 presidential election and the suppression of protests after two defeated moderate candidates claimed the vote was rigged. The two have been under house arrest since 2011. 

In 2010, Zanjani began helping Khatam al Anbia, one of the largest companies controlled by the Guards, to evade financial sanctions. Zanjani says that the following year, when Rostam Qassemi, a former senior commander in the Guards, became oil minister, he asked Zanjani to sell oil and transfer money back to Iran.

"Zanjani solved the problems of the Revolutionary Guards and Khatam al Anbia to a degree," said Esmail Gerami-Moghaddam, a reformist former member of parliament.

If his proximity to the Guards discomfited the moderates, a political tussle in February last year made outright enemies of some of them when Ahmadinejad accused the brother of the Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani, a long-time rival, of offering political favors in exchange for an introduction to Zanjani for business ventures.

The brother denied the charges, and Ahmadinejad's rivals accused Zanjani of complicity in trying to smear Larijani and his family.

In late December, with Ahmadinejad out of office, a dozen parliamentarians, most of them critics of the previous government, wrote a letter to Rouhani, Larijani and the head of the judiciary, accusing Zanjani of initiating an illegal $5.4 billion business deal, hanging on to money from oil sales to the oil ministry and demanding that corruption charges be pursued against him. 

Zanjani was arrested days later, and within a week a senior aide was also arrested.

"Zanjani's arrest will probably be used as a vehicle by the faction supporting the Rouhani government to expose files against their opponents," Khavand said.

That could explain why Zanjani's erstwhile supporters have kept their heads down since his arrest.

"The hardline politicians and those affiliated with the former government who supported him behind the scenes cut their support," said Gerami-Moghaddam.

If Zanjani has become a political target, he is also now a lightning rod for anger at the perceived corruption and economic mismanagement of the previous administration.

But Zanjani is a symptom of a wider, systemic problem, said Khavand.

"That we want to summarize the issue of corruption in the Islamic Republic to Zanjani or people like Zanjani is wrong," Khavand said. "The economic structure of Iran, along with its political structure and the lack of a free press, have allowed for the roots of extensive corruption to spread."

(Reporting By Babak Dehghanpisheh, Editing by William Maclean and Will Waterman)

Beretta to build new firearms plant in Tenn.

[ Franco Gussalli Beretta, a director of Beretta USA Corp., speaks during a ceremony at the state Capi …]

oped: The East Coast is Hemorrhaging jobs and companies...now who is to blame?...oh yeah Obama's progressive ideology [Anti-Constitution /Bill of Rights]...2014 and 2016 should prove to be very interesting watching Blue Dog Democrats attempt to take back their party to avoid being placed on Obama's un-employment rolls!

By LUCAS L. JOHNSON II 

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Italian gun maker Beretta said Wednesday that Tennessee's support for gun rights was a major factor in its decision to build a manufacturing and research facility in the Nashville suburb of Gallatin.

The $45 million plant is projected to be complete this year and create 300 new jobs.

Gun rights were "the first criteria for deciding to even consider a state," said Jeff Reh, a member of Beretta USA Corp.'s board of directors.

Reh spoke to reporters after a press conference that included Gov. Bill Haslam and Franco Gussalli Beretta, the company's executive vice president and director, as well as lawmakers and city officials.

Reh, who led the site search, said there were some states considered that "respect Second Amendment rights," but they "didn't have the type of support that we saw in Tennessee." 

Several states began wooing Beretta from Maryland after the company raised objections to a wide-ranging gun control measure enacted there last year. Company officials said Wednesday that they have reached capacity in Maryland, requiring the expansion elsewhere.

Franco Gussalli Beretta, a director of Beretta USA Corp., speaks during a ceremony

"We look forward to building operations here and being part of your community for many years to come," Beretta said.

The other site finalists were Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

Last year, lawmakers in Tennessee passed and the governor signed a measure that allows people with handgun carry permits to store firearms in their vehicles no matter where they are parked, including company parking lots.

When asked by a reporter if Beretta will allow its employees to keep guns in their cars at work, Reh responded, "if that's allowed by state law, yes." 

Earlier this week, a proposal that seeks to do away with local government's power to decide whether to allow firearms in public parks advanced to a full Senate vote despite opposition from Haslam.

View gallery

Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam speaks during a ceremony at the state Capitol in Nashville, Tenn., on Wed …

The Legislature in 2009 gave city and county governments the ability to opt out of a new law that allowed firearms in public parks, playgrounds and sports fields.

Under the current proposal, permit holders would be allowed to carry, unless there's a school function.

Haslam has expressed major concerns with the legislation, and reiterated that to reporters on Wednesday.

"My concern ... is this isn't just a Second Amendment right," he said. "It's also a question about how we determine what the owner's voice is and what happens to that property. In this case, cities and counties have bought those properties with their own tax dollars. And I think that's the proper place for a decision to be made, is according to who actually owns the property." 

Reh said he's heard about the legislation, but hasn't had a chance to study it.

Beretta has operated in Italy since 1526. The family-owned company makes a variety of firearms, ranging from hunting shotguns to the U.S. Armed Forces M-9 pistol.

Egypt Presses Terrorist Charges Against Al Jazeera Staff

oped: Well at least Egypt knows how to deal with terrorist...unlike our enabler POTUS/CIC who staffed the WH with Muslim Brotherhood buddies!

By Salma El Wardany 

Egypt’s authorities pressed charges of joining a terrorist group against 20 staff members of the Arab television channel Al Jazeera, including an Australian, two Britons and a Dutch citizen.
The defendants, the rest of whom are Egyptian, are also charged with spreading false news that endangers national security and harms Egypt’s image, according to a faxed statement from the prosecution yesterday. It said they used two suites in a luxury hotel in Cairo as a media center to pursue those aims.
The prosecutors said the defendants “fabricated footage” to create “unreal scenes” and give the impression to the outside world that “the country is witnessing a civil war.” It said their efforts were intended to serve the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was declared a terrorist group by Egyptian authorities last month.

The Brotherhood has been the target of an unprecedented crackdown since Egypt’s army toppled elected Islamist President Mohamed Mursi in July. Many of its top leaders are on trial, including Mursi, and hundreds of supporters have been killed by security forces as they protested the military intervention.
Al Jazeera is owned by Qatar’s ruling family, who are among the main supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood in the region, and backed Egypt with financial aid during Mursi’s one-year presidency.
The channel said the allegations against its journalists are “absurd, baseless and false.”
“This is a challenge to free speech, to the right of journalists to report on all aspects of events, and to the right of people to know what is going on,” it said in an e-mailed statement.
Al Jazeera said five of its journalists are in detention, and it hasn’t been notified about developments in the case. It said it now has no journalists reporting in Egypt.
To contact the reporter on this story: Salma El Wardany in Cairo at selwardany@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Andrew J. Barden at barden@bloomberg.net

It’s Established Law

by Bob Livingston 
The illegal usurper currently occupying the people’s house Tuesday night gave us yet another of his vacuous speeches filled with collectivist claptrap. The only notable thing he did say is that he intends to continue his imperial Presidency and ruling by fiat. And one of his aims is more gun control.

oped:
All I have to say about this http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2014/01/tremors-iii-back-to-perfection.html

Last January, President Barack Obama and his fellow gun grabbers were buoyed by the massacre of 27 teachers and students at Sandy Hook Elementary School — an event that may or may not have occurred — and in the State of the Union address he mentioned guns and gun control seven times. For the gun grabbers, some kind of gun law seemed inevitable. But the American people had other ideas. They snapped up weapons and ammunition in record amounts and leaned on Congress to defeat all attempts at unConstitutional 2^nd Amendment-restricting legislation.
This year, the word “gun” appeared only once in his 7,000 words of nonsense. But Obama made note of the fact that he has a pen and is ready to use it. And in the past year, he’s already issued a couple dozen executive orders that have chipped away at the 2^nd Amendment.
Obamacare is tons of unintelligible verbiage on thousands of pages and is causing chaos and hardship across the country. During his State of the Union address, Obama took the House to task for its 40 attempts to repeal Obamacare. It is established law, he said, and America needs to accept it.
But the right to own a weapon is a natural right. That right is codified in the 2^nd Amendment which is only 27 words long, is written quite clearly and has stood (somewhat) for almost 223 years. It’s time — in fact, it’s past time — the gun grabbers accepted it as established law and left it alone.

Obama’s State Of The Union: Lies And Theft

by Wayne Allyn Root 
I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. My, how the mighty have fallen. I was going to report on all the lies in Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech. But it appears he’s more than a pathetic liar; he’s actually a thief, too. Obama started out his career at the Brandenburg Gate in Germany with thousands watching. Now, he plagiarizes George W. Bush’s speeches? That’s a pretty long fall.
Large swaths of this speech appear to have been lifted directly from Bush’s 2007 State of the Union. So says Bush’s speechwriter — and he should know his own words.
Now from plagiarism, we move to the original lies of Obama. The question is: Does he believe this stuff? Obama actually reported the U.S. economy is in “recovery.” Bernie Madoff has nothing on this guy. In Obama’s economy the food stamp rolls are growing 75 times faster than the job rolls!
Obama said there are 8 million new jobs. Maybe he’s counting people who have stopped looking for work forever, as “getting a job.”
I have news for you, Mr. President: They didn’t get a job. They went on disability, food stamps or welfare… probably all three. There are almost 100 million working-age Americans not working. That’s almost exactly how many Americans are on entitlements. Coincidence?
Obama said the unemployment is the lowest in five years. Another whopper. The fact is the number of working-age Americans without a job has increased by almost 10 million in Obama’s first five years as President. That means each and every year of Obama’s Presidency, 2 million more Americans just disappear from the workforce. That’s a neat trick. I’m sure David Copperfield is impressed.

Obama says every business owner should give a big raise to our employees. With what? The economy is in freefall. Business is dramatically down for every business owner I know. We can’t make payroll. We can no longer afford health insurance. Inflation is running rampant. Our gas bills have doubled. Electricity is at all-time highs.
Because of you, Mr. President, our health insurance bills have doubled or tripled.
And he wants us to give our employees a raise? We’re lucky if we can keep the doors open.
Obama introduced some pizza parlor owner who gave his employees a raise.
I don’t know where you found him. Perhaps he’s an actor you rented for the day. But I know a pizza parlor owner, too. His four sons work for him. He paid $800 per month for health insurance for his family until Obamacare came along. His new bill? $2,400 per month. He’s dropping all his insurance. I guess he didn’t make the cut to be introduced at the State of the Union.
Of course, your Obamacare law helped a few people that you introduced in the audience. It wasn’t easy finding them, was it? But for each person your healthcare law has helped, thousands have been hurt or ruined. They’ve lost their policies, doctors, lifesaving drugs, or had their cost raised to unaffordable levels, or had their deductibles raised dramatically. It wouldn’t have been hard to find one of those victims. Senator Tom Coburn was sitting in the audience. He has cancer. He just lost his doctor because of Obamacare.

You said you “saved” the auto industry. Another whopper. You stole tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to save auto union pensions. It was pure theft. Anyone could “save” any industry by stealing billions of dollars from taxpayers and handing the money to your biggest campaign donors.
Obama said he is ordering Treasury to create some new savings bond IRA for working-class people. Great. Where will they get the money? Will they cash in their food stamps for the savings? Even if working class Americans did have any extra money, this is just a new scheme to steal their retirement money. Now instead of throwing your Social Security money away to a program going broke, working people can give the government even more retirement money to steal. Obama will “borrow” it to pay more food stamps and welfare bills and leave you with another worthless IOU.
Obama said that the National Security Agency is not violating the privacy of ordinary Americans. Of course not, the NSA is only violating the rights of Republicans and leading critics of the President. The rest of you can go about your business.
Obama says we support Ukrainian citizens’ fight for free speech. Unfortunately, he doesn’t support Dinesh D’Souza’s right to free speech here in America. He’s the conservative filmmaker who created the documentary “2016: Obama’s America.” He was just indicted.
In Obama’s America, critics are either persecuted, intimidated or indicted.
But perhaps the biggest lie of all was Obama’s crooning about solar power. Spain is the green energy capital of Europe. Their whole economy is based on green energy. The result is more than 27 percent unemployment and more than 56 percent youth unemployment. I can’t wait to replicate the Spanish economy!

Finally, Obama ended with a sweet tribute to an injured war vet. Obama loves and honors our vets while he purges the military of any officer who disagrees with him. And he cuts pensions for military vets so he can spend more on food stamps, disability, welfare and, of course, give a billion dollars to foreign companies to build and fix the defective Obamacare website.
But the highlight of the night was Obama’s getting a standing ovation from Democrats for promising to violate the Constitution; ignore checks and balances; and bypass the people, Congress and the law of the land to pass radical and extreme parts of his agenda by executive orders. Save that video of Democrats cheering wildly for Obama to break the law; it will make for one heck of a GOP television advertising campaign this fall. I’d be sure to show them cheering in slow motion.
This, folks, is the state of our union… and the state of delusion and deception in Obama’s America. Disgusting. Embarassing. Misleading. Criminal. And even a little plagiarism thrown in for good measure.
I guess outside of the nonstop lies and fraud, Obama just didn’t have any original material.

Mark Murray Was Right. Just Not How He Meant It.

 [SSG Cory Remsburg] 



[Some Do Give All]


[Some Act]

By: Erick Erickson
I have long thought that most members of the Washington Press Corps go home at night to a cardboard box full of wine and lip print stained press clippings of Barack Obama. Mark Murray, the senior political editor for NBC News, reinforces that image.
After the State of the Union address on Tuesday night, Mark Murray tweeted:

Obama’s ending on Remsburg wasn’t just a story about America — it also was a story about Obama. Nothing has ever come easy

The President honored Sgt. First Class Cory Remsburg for his heroism in Afghanistan. Remsburg, on his tenth tour in Afghanistan, nearly died when a roadside bomb exploded. He suffered brain damage, paralysis on his left side, is partially blind, and has difficulty talking.
And Mark Murray of NBC News thought Barack Obama was telling Cory Remsburg’s story to tell his own story. And you know what? Mark Murray was right.

To be clear, Murray heard that story and connected it to Barack Obama’s heroic struggles against the GOP. People were not at first sure, but Murray expanded on his tweet at NBC and revealed what an utterly vapid courtier of the Obama Administration he really is. In fact, Mark Murray really is a courtier of the Obama Administration. He is married to Sasha Johnson, who is Chief of Staff at the FAA, and formerly of CNN. This is just another bit of the incestuousness of politics and press in Barack Obama’s America.
He, like so many others in his demographic, comes from the lightweight background of deficit running left-of-center publications where world view is more important than real world. From the Washington Monthly and Washingtonian he moved to National Journal and then to NBC. Comfortably established with no need to really connect further to his native Texas, he can join the ranks of left-of-center shallow purveyors of conventional wisdom who run in a self-congratulatory herd. But hey, he roots for the Longhorns so HASHTAG AUTHENTIC!

Sen. Mike Lee Delivers Official Tea Party Response to Obama’s State of the Union Address

oped: FoxNews did not cover Mike Lee's response...instead chose the Middle of the road Moderate female GOP Rep from Washington State...which in fact was akin to Obama's State of the Union address...just rhetoric and platitudes no resolve and just plain boring and annoying!

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee was the face of the national tea party Tuesday night, delivering the movement’s response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech.

Lee pinned the widening wealth gap on the president’s policies and tout the ideas of a new generation of leaders including himself and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

“Americans know in their hearts that something is wrong. Much of what is wrong relates to the sense that the `American Dream’ is falling out of reach for far too many of us,” Lee said in his prepared remarks. “We are facing an inequality crisis – one to which the president has paid lip-service, but seems uninterested in truly confronting or correcting.” 

At various points in his response, Lee kindly mentioned fellow Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Obama plans to use the State of the Union to announce executive actions to raise the minimum wage for new federal contracts, help the long-term unemployed find work and expand job-training programs.

Lee, an attorney who is halfway through his first term, was chosen by Tea Party Express because he is a recognized leader who is popular among the GOP base because of the message he delivers about improving the economy and reducing the size, cost and intrusiveness of the federal government, said Sal Russo, co-founder of the organization. Tea Party Express is a national group representing the movement.

Watch the entire response below: 

Attention House and Senate #NoAmnesty

Conservatives are Starting to FIGHT BACK Against Congressional Plans for AMNESTY for Illegals -- Select Here to DEMAND Congress Say NO to "Amnesty First"!

ALERT: We've got GOOD NEWS about the fight against AMNESTY for Illegal Aliens in Congress: media outlets are now reporting that conservative Congressmen are finally fighting back against the pro-amnesty forces in their own leadership:

"As House Republican leaders prepare an immigration proposal that could go much further towards amnesty than their prior public stances, conservative lawmakers are quietly plotting to push back... Officials close to the matter say conservative critics of Speaker John Boehner's planned immigration push are working to issue their own rival immigration principles to vie with the document Boehner is drafting... The building backlash could create for a tumultuous three-day retreat next week as Republicans gather in Maryland to plan the party's future."

IT'S ABOUT TIME conservatives started to STAND UP -- and it's all thanks to the pressure YOU AND I have been applying! What did they expect us to do, after reading headlines like: "Republican Ideas on Immigration Could Legalize Up to 6.5 Million, Study Says"! And that headline came from a LIBERAL paper -- the New York Times:

"Between 4.4 million and 6.5 million immigrants illegally in the United States could gain an eventual pathway to citizenship under proposals being discussed by Republicans in the House of Representatives, according to an estimate published Tuesday by the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonpartisan research group in Washington."

DID YOU READ THAT? The Senate amnesty bill, passed by Democrats and some turncoat Republicans, would grant amnesty to 8 million illegal aliens -- so the House Republican "leadership" response is to push amnesty for six and a half million illegals? These are the "principles" they promised to "stand strong" on?

This "new" plan is almost as bad as the one we've been fighting so hard to stop! But we're finally starting to see some PUSH-BACK from conservatives, which means we need to keep up the pressure -- tell Congress AGAIN to SAY NO TO ANY AMNESTY!

As we recently told you, the New York Times has blown the lid off of the upcoming push for AMNESTY for illegal aliens in Congress:

"Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio has signaled he may embrace a series of limited changes to the nation's immigration laws in the coming months, giving advocates for change new hope that 2014 might be the year that a bitterly divided Congress reaches a political compromise to overhaul the sprawling system.

Mr. Boehner has in recent weeks hired Rebecca Tallent, a longtime immigration adviser to Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has long backed broad immigration changes. Advocates for an overhaul say the hiring, as well as angry comments by Mr. Boehner critical of Tea Party opposition to the recent budget deal in Congress, indicates that he is serious about revamping the immigration system despite deep reservations from conservative Republicans...

...immigration advocates say that Mr. Boehner's end-of-year rant against Tea Party groups -- in which he said they had "lost all credibility" -- is an indicator of what he will do this year on immigration. The groups are the same ones that hope to rally the Republican base against an immigration compromise, and while Mr. Boehner cannot say so publicly, he will have more room to maneuver on the issue if he feels free to disregard the arguments from those organizations."

This shouldn't surprise you -- we also already told you how Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) let slip some VERY DISTURBING news recently. As reported in the Las Vegas Sun:

"Although a minority of Republicans would have to join with Democrats to pass immigration reform legislation containing a pathway to citizenship for people in the United States illegally, Reid said Boehner is 'going to cave in.'"

YOU READ THAT RIGHT: The Democrat leader of the Senate says that the Republican leader of the House is going to CAVE IN on AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS -- and now we see WHY he believes that!

You didn't think that the liberal push for AMNESTY for illegal aliens was over, did you?

It's NOT. Congress is preparing to push HARD for it, AGAIN. The only problem is that this time, it's REPUBLICANS who are leading the charge. As reported at The Right Scoop, Mark Levin opened his show in recent weeks explaining how Republican "leaders" are now pushing for amnesty again, DESPITE their rhetoric that "we should just focus on Obamacare."

Just as the Washington Times is reporting:

"House Speaker John A. Boehner announced Tuesday that he has hired a longtime advocate of legalizing illegal immigrants to be an adviser, signaling that the Republican is still intent on trying to pass an immigration bill during this congressional session.

Immigrant rights advocates cheered the move as a sign of Mr. Boehner's dedication to action. Those who want a crackdown on illegal immigration said the top Republican in the House has moved closer to embracing amnesty by hiring Rebecca Tallent, a former staffer for Sen. John McCain and fellow Arizona Republican Jim Kolbe."

DID YOU GET THAT? Boehner IS actually about to CAVE IN! The headline of that article says it all: "HOLA: Boehner prepares to push amnesty bill through House"! And Harry Reid himself said, "I think there's going to be so much pressure on the House that they'll have to pass it!"

We CANNOT let this happen -- we MUST KEEP THE PRESSURE on Congress to SAY NO TO AMNESTY!

Have you ever heard of a "Disinformation Campaign," to mislead people into thinking that one thing is true, when just the opposite is true?

That's what's happening right now, with Republicans in Congress.

The news headlines were everywhere recently: "House Majority Whip McCarthy Says No Immigration Reform In 2013"; "Immigration reform is dead for the year, top GOP reformer says"; "No immigration reform vote in the House this year"... article after article, insisting that we don't have to worry about Congress passing any bills this year that would give Amnesty to illegal aliens. "Relax, don't worry, we aren't going to do that, move along, nothing to see here!"

There's just one problem with reports that "Immigration Reform Is Dead": Apparently, it's NOT TRUE.

This is what was all over the news before Boehner's hiring announcement: "The third-ranking House Republican told immigration advocates that lawmakers won't vote this year on the issue, confirming what many had long assumed" (FoxNews)... "In what will be seen as another blow to immigration reform's chances, a top pro-reform Republican in the House concedes House Republicans are not going to act on immigration reform this year" (Washington Post)... "A top Republican lawmaker told protesters he met with in his home district in California this week that the House of Representatives would not have time this year to vote on any immigration measure" (New York Times)...

But there have been others items in the news already, too -- and they contradict all of these hopeful headlines:

"Don't count Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus among those who believe comprehensive immigration reform is dead this Congress. Despite exasperation among reform advocates that the House has refused to vote on any major immigration bill -- particularly the Senate-passed legislation -- Priebus said that his 'gut' feeling is that the House will indeed pass an immigration overhaul in the next 14 months." -- Politico

"With a year to go until the midterm elections, immigration reform advocates hoping to jump-start debate on Capitol Hill are planning to target a handful of Republican lawmakers most likely to suffer political consequences next year if Congress fails to act on immigration reform... Organizers said the goal of the campaign is to pressure the lawmakers to match their public statements by lobbying colleagues and House Republican leaders to permit votes on a series of immigration bills introduced in recent months." -- Washington Post

"Let me set the record straight: Comprehensive immigration reform is not dead in the House... We are seeing a lot of action and momentum around comprehensive immigration reform." -- Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, on NBCLatino

Even the liberal Washington Post is admitting, "GOP leaders have not scheduled a vote on reform this year, but they haven't ruled one out." IN OTHER WORDS, WE STILL HAVE WORK TO DO!"

And that's not all: did you hear what Barack Hussein Obama said about the possibility of passing AMNESTY for ILLEGAL ALIENS in Congress? CBS News reported:

"In a meeting with business leaders to discuss immigration reform, President Obama predicted that there are enough votes in the House to pass the contentious issue... 'what's been encouraging is that there are a number of House Republicans who have said we think this is the right thing to do as well,' Mr. Obama said Tuesday at the White House. 'It's my estimation that we actually have the votes to get comprehensive immigration reform done in the House right now.'"

YOU READ THAT RIGHT: as the story's headline said, Obama believes that the "House has votes to pass immigration reform" -- in other words, they're preparing to ram AMNESTY for illegals down our throats!

WE HAVE TO STOP THEM!

Pressure is building on Republicans to push through a vote in Congress on a bill giving AMNESTY to millions of illegal aliens -- which means it's up to AVERAGE AMERICAN CITIZENS to fight back and STOP THE AMNESTY!

New media reports say that the pressure is coming from the combined forces of the radical left (no surprise there) AND big business groups like the Chamber of Commerce, who are willing to sell America out to get cheaper labor... while millions of our citizens are already out of work! According to an article in the Daily Caller:

"Business and progressive groups rallied at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Oct. 29 to reassure Speaker of the House John Boehner that he'll get their political support if he schedules a major vote on immigration. 'He's said in the press that the House should take up immigration reform and he plans to do it,' said Randel Johnson, the chamber's vice president for immigration. 'I think he want to get this done, but it is our job to show that there is support in the business community and the evangelical community and in other conservative Republican groups that they'll be there to back him up when he makes his decisions... We've got his back,' said Johnson, a former congressional staffer, who has known Boehner for 20 years."

THAT'S RIGHT -- IT'S "POLITICS AS USUAL" FOR THE PRO-AMNESTY CROWD -- AND THEY'RE PUSHING HARD FOR CONGRESS TO PASS AMNESTY, UNLESS WE STOP THEM! WE MUST TAKE ACTION NOW!

So now we know: "big business" is teaming up with "big socialists" to push AMNESTY! And it's no secret that they think they can win; the "cat is out of the bag" -- House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has told the media that she believes "there is a bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives ready to pass a comprehensive immigration overhaul bill" -- in other words, she thinks they have enough votes to pass the AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS bill that the Senate already rammed through!

But wait -- the Democrats are in charge of the Senate, so that's how liberals were able to pass their AMNESTY bill. So how could they pass it in the GOP-controlled House? Simple, says Pelosi: with "Republicans having publicly expressed support for a path to citizenship, we believe the votes are there on a bipartisan basis to pass a bill," she wrote on Facebook.

SHE'S RIGHT -- now we have PROOF that Republicans are ready to help them do it. Our friends at ALIPAC have now provided a list of 32 GOP members of Congress who have indicated they are willing to support granting amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens currently residing in the U.S. as part of a broader immigration "reform" package. Or, as ALIPAC put it, this is a "TRAITOR LIST with contact info and proof of amnesty stance"!

YOU READ THAT RIGHT -- REPUBLICANS ARE READY TO HELP PASS AMNESTY, UNLESS WE STOP THEM! THIS MAY BE OUR ONLY CHANCE, IF WE TAKE ACTION NOW!

Look, we all know that liberals in Congress are "chomping at the bit" to shove AMNESTY down our throats... but, as we figured would happen, Republican "leaders" are now starting to introduce their own "immigration reform" bills... that will give AMNESTY to ILLEGAL ALIENS. The Politico blog is reporting:

"Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is planning to release legislation next week that would provide legal status for six years to undocumented immigrants in the United States... 'It's halfway -- and it always has been -- halfway between full amnesty and simply rejecting people,' Issa told POLITICO on Wednesday... Issa's legislation would be the first bill this year released from House Republicans to provide legalization for the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants... other rank-and-file Republican lawmakers who could be vital to the reform effort in the House signaled some headway on other immigration measures that have been discussed but have yet to be introduced."

WE WARNED YOU ABOUT THIS! Do you remember, just a couple of months ago, when our "leaders" in Congress were trying to SNEAK AMNESTY for illegal immigrants through? They thought they could pull a fast one on the American people -- but thanks to the tireless efforts and sacrifices by YOU and many thousands of your fellow patriots across America, we were able to SLOW DOWN the push for so-called "immigration reform" in Congress!

BUT now THEY'RE BACK, and we have a tough fight on our hands -- because since the Republicans CAVED on defunding Obamacare, the Democrats "smell blood in the water", and they're ready to try again to ram through AMNESTY for illegals! According to a report at Breitbart:

"On Thursday, President Obama took to the White House podium to triumphantly announce the end of the government shutdown. In doing so, he proclaimed that he wanted to push forward with other legislative priorities... 'We should finish the job of fixing our broken immigration system.' Naturally, he blamed the Republican House for stalling his preferred immigration bill... On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) echoed Obama, saying, 'I look forward to the next venture, which is making sure we do immigration reform.' On Thursday, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said that Obama wanted immigration reform 'more than anything else' during his second term. Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) said that he trusted that Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) would cave on immigration..."

THAT'S RIGHT -- Obama, Reid and Schumer are gloating over their funding of Obamacare and raising the debt ceiling... and they're ready to build on that, to shove AMNESTY for ILLEGALS down our throats... WITHOUT A SECURE BODER! WE MUST STOP THEM NOW -- BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!

Some political pundits are saying that they think Republicans won't pass Obama's "immigration reform" bill, because they're angry at him for not negotiating with the House during the recent partial government "shutdown". BUT, according to several media reports, "The House Judiciary Committee [has] discussed for the first time legalization for some undocumented immigrants," and "Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee are willing to give it consideration." ABC News reported that GOP leaders like Reps. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Trey Gowdy (R-SC), and Mike Coffman (R-CO) will "listen" to supporters of "immigration reform." And NBC News has reported that even top leaders like House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor "are working on legislation to address the issue of citizenship" -- in other words, AMNESTY -- for many illegal aliens!

As you probably remember, the "immigration reform" bill -- really, an AMNESTY bill for illegal aliens -- that liberals and RINOs in Congress have been trying to ram through... passed the U.S. Senate this summer, thanks to every Democrat and fourteen turncoat Republicans. This bill -- S. 744, the "Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act" -- is over one thousand pages long. But the worst thing about it is, S. 744 does NOT secure the border OR strengthen national security... IN ANY WAY! The bill would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants before ever implementing any border security measures. Furthermore, the new Hoeven-Corker amendment that was added gives the Secretary of Homeland Security unilateral discretion to ignore border security measurements and enforcement policies!

Did you GET that? This new bill does NOT guarantee a secure border, but will still grant AMNESTY to illegal aliens! IT PASSED IN THE SENATE -- BUT IT CAN STILL BE STOPPED IN THE HOUSE!

As our friends at the Tea Party Patriots have noted, "The bill provides amnesty and immediate access to welfare programs to illegal immigrants, including those who have committed serious crimes. Adding insult to injury, the bill offers NOTHING in the way of border security, which will guarantee that we will see future influxes of illegal immigrants, perpetuating the need for ANOTHER amnesty in a few decades."

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) introduced a so-called "border security" amendment, which received the support of Sen. Schumer and the GOP RINO establishment. But the amendment was nothing more than an attempt by the GOP establishment in DC to provide "cover" for their amnesty vote. Corker's amendment provides additional funding for border security, but does NOT have the necessary accountability measures to ensure the money will actually produce results! This is the Republicans' solution -- throw more money at a problem and hope for the best? The Corker Amendment, while hailed by establishment Republicans as the "answer" to our border security problems, actually WEAKENS our border security enforcement and controls!

No wonder the border patrol agents are so opposed to this bill! WE NEED TO STAND WITH THEM, AND STOP CONGRESS FROM PASSING ANY AMNESTY BILL!

By the way, while we were all looking the other way, Barack Hussein Obama has ONCE AGAIN snuck around Congress, and issued an Executive Order to keep THOUSANDS of ILLEGAL ALIENS here in America -- in effect, granting AMNESTY for illegals WITHOUT Congressional approval:

"Facing intense pressure from immigrant advocates who want the president to do more to limit deportations, the Obama administration has quietly issued a directive to help undocumented immigrants... The move follows a more sweeping decision by President Obama last year to defer deportation for some young immigrants who have lived in the United States illegally since they were children. With immigration reform having ground to a standstill in Congress, such executive-branch actions are seen as the only means for Obama to advance pro-immigrant policies, at least for now."

DID YOU GET THAT? Barack Obama is bowing to "intense pressure" from supporters of AMNESTY for ILLEGALS -- and he's doing everything he can to GIVE them that AMNESTY, with OR without Congressional action!

But DO NOT think that Congress isn't going to go along with this -- they're ready to do even MORE! The mainstream media KEEPS trying to convince us that AMNESTY for illegal aliens isn't going to happen -- but government "leaders" keep letting it slip that the the OPPOSITE is true. The latest headline from the Washington Times reads, "Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform" -- as they report, despite the media's "assurances" to the contrary:

"...that didn't stop Vice President Joseph R. Biden from guaranteeing Wednesday that, eventually, the Senate measure -- and its controversial pathway to citizenship provision -- will become the law of the land. 'We're going to pass this Senate bill that we're talking about here. It's going to happen,' Mr. Biden said during an online question-and-answer session, where he and Cecilia Munoz, the White House's director of domestic policy, took questions via Twitter and Skype."

The Republican "leaders" seem to be in agreement: Breitbart.com is reporting that House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) IS planning to push AMNESTY legislation through Congress -- but he's waiting until after the primary filing deadline for candidates, in order to prevent Tea Party candidates from challenging GOP lawmakers who support amnesty in 2014:

"Scott Braddock reported on Tuesday that 'in recent weeks, various Texas business interests have told Quorum Report that Boehner has been telling them that he will start holding immigration votes not long after the filing deadline has passed... what was made clear was that Boehner felt the need to protect House Republican incumbents who are otherwise seen as conservative but have expressed an openness to immigration reform that includes a robust guest worker program.'"

This means there has to be MORE pressure from patriotic Americans like US to STOP that from happening -- so it's once again up to YOU AND I to KEEP PRESSURE on Congress to SAY NO TO AMNESTY!

Remember when Nancy Pelosi infamously said, "We have to pass [Obamacare] so that you can find out what is in it"? IT'S HAPPENING AGAIN!

When Congress rammed through Obamacare in 2010, we WARNED them that there had NOT been enough time to analyze the bill. So what happened? You got it: In April, Sen. Max Baucus, one of the original authors of the Obamacare legislation, admitted that Obamacare is going to be a "TRAIN WRECK"!

Now, just like with Obamacare, the current immigration bill is a HUGE piece of legislation that will have permanent, detrimental ramifications. At OVER ONE THOUSAND PAGES, this amnesty bill is WAY too complex for Congress to be RUSHING to pass it -- which is exactly what the Senate did!

The fact is, the Senate amnesty bill will prove to be just as much of a "train wreck" as Obamacare -- because Congress is once again trying to "pass it so we can find out what's in it"! It's time for Congress to say NO to ANY "immigration reform" bill until we have a VERIFIED secure border. That's why we need to take immediate action, and we need YOUR help -- send your Blast Faxes to every single Member of Congress NOW!

Sincerely,
RightMarch.com

P.S. According to recent polls, more than 70% of Americans want the border to be completely secured before we even BEGIN to discuss any kind of "immigration reform". When the pro-Amnesty forces talk about the Senate bill, they keep claiming that it will enhance border security. But NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

The Senate bill WEAKENS existing security measures, does NOT require that any additional sections of the fence be built, and gives an ENORMOUS amount of discretion to unelected officials within the Department of Homeland Security -- which has already proven how incompetent it is with border security! Shouldn't Congress think about THAT before handing over our entire border security strategy to this department?

Americans deserve an immigration strategy that respects the rule of law and is mindful of our nation's complex border security needs. The current "immigration reform" bill accomplishes neither of those goals.

Because this AMNESTY bill falls so short on border security, we MUST do EVERYTHING we can to stop it... or ANY bill that doesn't put Border Security FIRST! You and I need to STAND UP and DEMAND that Congress TAKE ACTION NOW!

SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF CONGRESS, DEMANDING THEY SAY NO TO ANY VOTE ON "IMMIGRATION REFORM" -- DEMAND A SECURE BORDER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE IS EVEN DISCUSSED:
SEND YOUR MESSAGE NOW!