Monday, November 30, 2015

IS PAUL RYAN MEXICO'S SUCCESSOR TO THE OBAMA AMNESTY HOAX TO LEGALIZE MEXICO'S LOOTING?


Oversight of the Administration’s Criminal Alien Removal Policies

2:30 p.m., Wednesday, December 2, 2015


Senate Committee on the Judiciary Committee
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 226
Washington, D.C. 20510-6050


http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/oversight-of-the-administrations-criminal-alien-removal-policies

Witnesses:

Panel I

Sarah Saldaña, Director
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Washington, DC

Panel II

Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies
Center for Immigration Studies
Washington, DC

Jonathan F. Thompson, Executive Director
National Sheriff's Association
Alexandria, VA

Marc R. Rosenblum, Deputy Director, U.S. Immigration Policy Program
Migration Policy Institute
Washington, DC

 

 

 

 

About Paul Ryan’s ‘No Amnesty’ Pledge

By: Daniel Horowitz | October 27th, 2015
  •                
Earlier today, in response to growing concerns that Ryan would continue his work on open borders legislation with Democrats, the anointed Speaker-in-waiting pledged to conservatives he would not push an amnesty bill before 2017.

First, it’s important to remember that no issue is built upon a longer train of lies and deceptions than our immigration policies.  From the 1965 Kennedy bill and the 1980 refugee bill to the 1986 amnesty and all of the recent efforts to promote amnesty and open borders, the zealot open borders advocates, of which Ryan is a prominent member, have done everything in their power to lie about their proposals.
There’s one problem with this assumption: Obama has moved beyond the need for legislative amnesty. He is implementing his agenda via administrative fiat. As we’ve chronicled on a
However, let’s take Ryan’s word as sacred for the time being.  He won’t push amnesty until the next administration. 

There’s one problem with this assumption: Obama has moved beyond the need for legislative amnesty.  He is implementing his agenda via administrative fiat.  As we’ve chronicled on a number

of occasions, Obama has essentially suspended all deportations, including those of violent

criminal aliens.  In the waning months of his presidency, he likely has some more tricks up his

sleeve – and will use both immigration policy and “criminal justice” policy to release thousands

of dangerous illegal aliens into our population.  And this doesn’t even touch on Obama’s plans to

bring in thousands of security risks from Syria and Somalia and the potential for him to abuse the

parole system in an attempt to bust the caps on refugees. 

Doing nothing and ignoring the issue for his final year in office is not an option.  Forget about debating legislative amnesty, we need a leader who is willing to use legislation, budget bills, and common sense messaging to put out the fires.  Yet, there is no way someone like Ryan can or will actively fight Obama on what is likely to be the most volatile issue of his final year.  Just wait until he starts with the mass clemencies.
Republicans have the right to demand a leader who will help douse the flames with water, not just promise to abstain from pouring lighter fluid on the fire.
Concurrently, Ryan has completely enabled the budget betrayal that will “clear the barn” of any leverage for the remainder of Obama’s presidency.  Republicans will no longer have the budget hanging over Obama’s head as leverage against any insidious effort to implement his amnesty agenda without Congress.

Republicans have the right to demand a leader who will help douse the flames with water, not just promise to abstain from pouring lighter fluid on the fire.

Daniel Horowitz is a Senior Editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/10/paul-ryans-no-amnesty-pledge#sthash.ZyZJDxLJ.dpuf


Number of Unaccompanied Kids Crossing Border Has Doubled in Last Year

 By Joel Gehrke

 National Review Online, November 25, 2015
. . .
About 3,400 people cleared to receive the children “have later been determined to have criminal convictions including re-entry after deportation, DUI, burglary, distribution of narcotics, domestic violence, homicide, child molestation, and sexual assault,” Senate majority whip John Cornyn and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley wrote in a Monday letter to HHS and the Department of Homeland Security.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427651/border-crisis-unaccompanied-kids-crossing-doubled-last-year


Sen. Sessions Wants to Defund Refugee Admissions Program

 By Warren Mass

 The New American, November 24, 2015
. . .
With the rise of the refugee crisis stemming from the turmoil in Iraq and Syria, and especially since the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris in which ISIS is suspected of playing an important role, Sessions and many others concerned about our nation’s weak or non-existent security screening of aliens have shared their concerns. In his speech, Sessions addressed the matter of security as follows:

The President persists in this plan even though his own officials, testifying before my Immigration Subcommittee, conceded there is no database in Syria with which to vet refugees…. The FBI director tells us there are now active ISIS investigations in all 50 U.S. states.

Our subcommittee has identified dozens of examples of foreign-born immigrants committing and attempting acts of terror on U.S. soil. Preventing and responding to these acts is an effort encompassing thousands of federal agents and attorneys and billions of dollars: in effect, we are voluntarily admitting individuals at risk for terrorism and then, on the back end, trying to stop them from carrying out their violent designs.

Sessions quoted a warning made by the former head of the Citizenship and Immigration Services union (which represents immigration caseworkers) more than a year ago: “It is also essential to warn the public about the threat that ISIS will exploit our loose and lax visa policies to gain entry to the United States.”

And Sessions is not alone in the Senate in having such reservations about the Obama refugee plan. He continued:

Senator [Ted] Cruz [R-Texas] and I sent the Administration a list of 72 individuals charged or convicted of terrorism in just the last year. We asked for the immigration histories of each individual. Stunningly, the Administration refused to respond.

It would be unthinkable for Congress to acquiesce to the President’s refugee funding request when he refuses to even publicly disclose the immigration history of these 72 terrorists, many of whom are involved with ISIS.

Cruz, a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has had his own run-ins with the president concerning the administration's refugee plan. On November 16, his campaign released a video highlighting Cruz’s challenge to Obama for a debate on the administration’s proposed plan to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees. The description of the video on Cruz’s Senate website notes that FBI Director James Comey has acknowledged that these refugees cannot be properly vetted.
. . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/22022-sen-sessions-wants-to-defund-refugee-admissions-program?tmpl=component&print=1


Importing Terrorism and Other American Values By Ann Coulter
Human Events Online, November 25, 2015
. . .
Contrary to Obama’s laughable reference to “the universal values” that “all of humanity” share, most of the world does not share our values, at all. They barely seem to share our DNA. As indignantly explained by the lawyer representing two Iraqis accused of child rape in Nebraska, America’s views about women and children “put us in the minority position in the world.”

Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings — when will America grow up and join the 21st century? (A lot sooner if Marco Rubio has his way!)

The New York Times boasts about how amazingly painstaking the “vetting” of Syrian refugees will be, but I notice the main point the paper keeps stressing is how long it will take. Twenty-four months!

“Waiting” is not “vetting.” What is 24 months to people who can hold a grudge for a thousand years?

As we found out from Michael Steinbach, assistant director of the FBI, in congressional testimony last month, there are no Syrian computer databases for our investigators to use in their famed “vetting” of refugees.
. . .
http://humanevents.com/2015/11/25/importing-terrorism-and-other-american-values/


Syrian Leader: Impossible to Weed Terrorists Out of Migrants Coming to U.S.

By Selwyn Duke
The New American, November 23, 2015
. . .
It has now been confirmed: It is simply impossible to sufficiently vet the Muslim migrants entering our nation. Intelligence officials have said it. The Greek government has said it. And now a New York City Syrian community leader has this to say about Barack Obama’s claim that it is possible to distinguish between terrorists and other migrants: “Are you out of your mind?”

He is 57-year-old Aarafat “Ralph” Succar. Having arrived in the United States at age 10 and living in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, home of the Big Apple’s largest Syrian-immigrant enclave, Succar can straddle two very different worlds. One of them is a source of terrorists.

The other world is taking them in.

As the New York Post wrote late last week, “[Succar] told The Post on Wednesday that ISIS terrorists have ‘absolutely’ sneaked into America by posing as civil-war refugees — and joined sleeper cells just waiting to be activated. ‘I believe the terrorists from Syria have been coming into the United States, not only in the past few years, but way before that…. I think they’re already at work."

Despite this, the Obama administration is still at work trying to convince our nation’s governors otherwise. As the Associated Press just reported, "‘In short, the security vetting for this population — the most vulnerable of individuals — is extraordinarily thorough and comprehensive,’ Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson write in letters sent to all state and territorial governors and to the mayor of Washington, D.C.” Furthermore, the administration claims migrants who arrive on our shores via “its resettlement program undergo a ‘rigorous security vetting process,’ particularly if they are fleeing from Syria,” writes the AP.
. . .
Succar echoes many who’ve warned that terrorist-spawning nations lack the databases necessary for vetting. As he put it, “Third World countries, particularly places like Syria, do not have the network of information the United States has,” reports the Post.

Yet Succar also mentions a factor that would render accurate databases, even if they existed, irrelevant: Bribes in Syria can get you official government documents stating you’re whoever you want to be. As the Post relates:

“You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” he said.

“These are not forged documents. These are written out by a government employee who needs money, whose family has no food.”
. . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/22007-syrian-leader-impossible-to-weed-terrorists-out-of-migrants-coming-to-u-s?tmpl=component&print=1




The Alien Nation on Its Way

 By Greg Richards
American Thinker, November 26, 2015
. . .
That is the result, but we still have to articulate the conservative argument: why is it a bad idea to welcome a migration of Muslims into America? Conservative resistance to this is characterized by liberals as bigotry. We know it isn't that. So what is it?

The problem is that Islam is a culture alien to the culture of America. Ours is a culture that has been built up:

* over 3,500 years in terms of Judaism – i.e., the Ten Commandments;
* over 2,000 years in terms of Christianity;
* over 500 years in terms of Protestantism;
* over 300 years in terms of the Scottish Enlightenment – i.e., the primacy of the individual over the state;
* over 250 years in terms of America itself, of liberty and constitutional republicanism, of the rights of minorities in the face of the majority.

We are the heirs:

* of very specific conceptions of mankind and our unalienable rights;
* of very specific relationships between the individual and the state;
* of very specific Christian ideas of what we owe each other and how we treat each other – the golden rule, love thy neighbor as thyself;
* of very specific ideas of the separation of church and state.

The Enlightenment split into two streams of thought. In the Scottish Enlightenment, to which the Founding Fathers were heirs, the individual comes before the state. In the French Enlightenment, the state is the highest expression of humanity and comes before the individual. This is the wellspring of fascism and, really, communism.

So, while America is part of Western civilization, we are a unique part. We have a distinct heritage and a distinct culture.

Islam is alien to that culture. It is based on dominance, not equality, within society and aggression toward and death for nonbelievers. It is a philosophy of constant war, of jihad against the infidel. It is a political philosophy that guides every aspect of society and the state. There is no right of the individual and no separation of church and state. Because it is based on a divine and perfect revelation – the Koran – organizing a society upon the desires of its members – democracy – is blasphemy.
. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/the_alien_nation_on_its_way.html




JUDICIAL WATCH:

DHS Knew Illegal Aliens Falsely Claimed “Credible Fear” to Stay in U.S.

NOVEMBER 23, 2015


The Obama administration let hundreds of illegal immigrants stay in the U.S. even though federal authorities knew in advance that an open borders group coached them to falsely claim “credible fear” to get asylum, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The operation was part of a scam conducted by an immigrant rights organization called the National Immigrant Youth Alliance (NITA), which in recent years has coordinated demonstrations along the Southwest border in Texas and Arizona. In mid-2014 the group orchestrated a racket seeking to bring 250 illegal aliens into the U.S. through the Otay Mesa Port of Entry in San Diego, California. To assure the migrants were allowed to stay in the U.S., the group had them falsely claim that they had a “credible fear” of returning to their native country. Foreigners can claim asylum under five categories, based on fear of persecution over race, religion, nationality, political opinions or membership in a specific social group
In this particular case, the DHS agency charged with guarding the border—Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—actually admits knowing about the ploy in advance but allows the illegal aliens to stay anyways. Here’s an excerpt from the records obtained by JW through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA): “BACKGROUND: The National Immigrant Youth Alliance (NITA) activists have coordinated previous demonstrations along the Southwest Border (Laredo, Texas and Nogales, Arizona). During this iteration, NIYA seek to bring 250 people to the Otay Mesa Port of Entry where they will request entry to the U.S. Previous CBP reporting of these events indicate the individuals applying for entry will have no entitlements to enter, pass through or remain in the United States and will summarily claim Credible Fear (CF).”
This is downright outrageous and has been going on for years, though we’ve never seen written evidence that the feds were complicit in a specific “credible fear” scam. In 2013 JW wrote about a San Diego news report that said droves of illegal aliens were flooding the Otay crossing claiming “credible fear” of Mexican drug cartels. In just one day 199 migrants had entered through Otay, the story revealed. The piece quoted a Border Patrol agent saying this: “They are being told if they come across, when they come up to the border and they say certain words, they will be allowed into the country.”
Credible fear asylum in the U.S. has become so popular that illegal aliens are hearing about it on Facebook and federal immigration authorities are overwhelmed with applications. In the last few years the number of foreigners, including large numbers from terrorist countries, asserting credible fear to gain asylum in this country has skyrocketed. During congressional testimony a few years ago, the heads of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and CBP confirmed that the percentage of individuals expressing a fear to remain in the U.S. has risen tremendously in the last few years.
The figures are incredibly alarming. In the last five years the number of “credible fear” asylum applications made at the border has increased sevenfold, from less than 5,000 to more than 36,000, a former Department of Justice (DOJ) and federal immigration official told Congress during a hearing earlier this year. Now a law professor at a prominent university, the official told lawmakers that statistics from USCIS Asylum Division show an approval rate of 92% for credible fear claims before the 2014 border surge. “Unfortunately the high approval rate for credible fear claims, and the resulting backlog in the immigration court system, have meant that in practice ‘credible fear’ has served to screen into the United States undocumented aliens wishing to make asylum claims,” the professor, Jan C. Ting told Congress. “That explains why many illegal border crossers don’t run from the U.S. Border Patrol, but instead seek them out to make asylum claims subject only to the low threshold of credible fear.”
Today, the backlog of credible fear cases pending in federal immigration courts is an astounding 450,000, according to a news report published this month. This could create huge national security risks because often asylum seekers are released from custody to await a court hearing. Just last week eight Syrian refugees turned themselves into U.S. immigration authorities along the U.S.-Mexico border. They are asking for asylum because they fear returning to their war-torn, terrorist-infested nation, but U.S. authorities have no reliable way to vet them.


JUDICIAL WATCH:
Terrorism Border Threat Update

NOVEMBER 20, 2015
Importing Terrorists

 Obama’s Citizenship Push for Immigrants the Focus of New Judicial Watch Lawsuit

 Judicial Watch Uncovers Email Describing Hillary Clinton as “Often Confused”

Importing Terrorists

Judicial Watch and a small band of patriots in Washington have been highlighting the existential threat to our nation caused by the lack of border security and the Obama administration’s lawless approach to immigration.  We have also exposed the dangerous pro-Islamist approach to counter-terrorism by the Obama administration that, for instance, saw Obama administration officials working with Islamists and terrorist fronts in putting forth the lie that an Internet video, rather than Islamic terrorists, were responsible for the attack on our facilities in Benghazi.
After last week’s terror attacks in France, likely assisted by at least one ISIS terrorist who posed as a Syrian refugee, it would be reasonable to think that good sense might prevail on the Islamist terrorist threat.  Unfortunately for the safety of America, the Obama administration doubled down on its dangerous and dishonest radicalism.
As the bodies of Islamic terrorist victims were still being identified in Paris, and as France went into a state of war in response to the carnage, the Obama administration’s first substantive move on Islamic terrorism was to use the focus on the Paris attacks to release five al Qaeda terrorists from our secure military facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  Obama, on a crusade to close Gitmo, is releasing terrorists from the facility on a regular basis, and is reportedly planning to try to move the terrorists into the United States despite a law absolutely prohibiting him from doing so.  With Obama, amnesty isn’t limited to illegal aliens – it includes the kinds of terrorists who murdered dozens in Paris and, just today, in Mali.
The release of terrorists isn’t enough for this administration; it imports terrorists, as well.  Or, in the case of alleged refugees from what we are supposed to believe is Syria, Barack Obama would admit thousands from the center of the terrorist storm in the Middle East without any serious security background checks.  Rather than listen to the American people, who oppose the refugee proposal in large and bipartisan numbers, Obama’s plan to spend your tax money to bring 10,000 refugees from Syria to the United States is moving full speed ahead.
Judicial Watch has long been monitoring this issue and reported over a month ago on how our national security officials confess they can’t vet these refugees for terrorist ties:

During a recent congressional hearing a director with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which operates under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), confirmed that the U.S. has no method of vetting the new refugees because the Syrian government doesn’t have an intelligence database to run checks against. It’s actually embarrassing to watch the footage of the DHS director, Matthew Emrich, getting grilled by the senator who chairs the committee that conducted the hearing a few days ago. The session was held to address the fiscal and security implications of the Obama administration’s refugee resettlement program. 
Under questioning from Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, Emrich admits that there is no reliable way to assure that individuals coming from Syria are properly checked. The exchange lasts about seven minutes and Emrich sounds desperate when he says “we check everything that we are aware of” and that “we are in the process of overturning every stone.” The bottom line is that there is no way to verify the identity of Syrians so the defeated Homeland Security official proceeds to say that “in many countries of the world from which we have traditionally accepted refugees over the years the United States government did not have extensive data holdings.”
Obama’s own FBI Director reconfirmed that there is no reliable way to “certify” these refugees will not pose a threat to national security.
Obama’s reaction to efforts to either slow down or, most appropriately, stop this refugee madness has been venomous.  As is typical in Washington, the extremist Obama opposes modest (and likely ineffective efforts) to slow his refugee program down.  Republicans (and many Democrats) are now defending a bill that, some suggest, would do little to stop Obama from pursuing his plans to increase the flow of refugees from Syria here by a factor of 20 times!  I suppose a fake debate over a piece of legislation that would do nothing to address a serious problem is better than what typically goes on in Washington, D.C., as at least border security and the terrorist threat are under debate here.
Once again, Judicial Watch is in the middle of this debate – exposing the facts, exploding the corrupt lies, and educating Americans about this core national security issue.
We helped get the ball rolling on the refugee issue on Fox News this past Sunday.  At the end of that interview, I suggested citizens ask their local leaders whether they were going to allow Syrian refugees to settle in their towns.  We predicted that would be the issue over the next few weeks.  Well, the American people needed no prodding as governors from across the nation immediately revolted and said their states would not allow Obama to settle refugees from Syria, for now, in their states (to see if your state is on the list of objectors, click here for a map.)
In addition, as the refugee debated heated up in Congress this week, it was Judicial Watch’s Pulitzer Prize-deserving reporting on the border terror threat that helped drive the argument for the pausing of the refugee program.  Key House members pushing for tough border security cited our work, noting our April 2015 report that “ISIS was operating training bases in close proximity of the U.S. Southern border.”  Last year, our Corruption Chronicles first broke the news of Islamic terrorists on the border, including the fact they have already entered the United States through the Mexican border. Moreover, Homeland Security sources have told JW that four terrorists were apprehended by federal authorities and the Texas Department of Public Safety in McAllen and Pharr.  We alerted Americans that ISIS is operating in a Mexican border town just eight miles from El Paso, Texas.
Let me close with a point that you won’t hear anywhere else but may well know as a Judicial Watch supporter:  the Benghazi scandal and the ISIS disaster are connected.
We proved this beyond all doubt in documents we forced out of the Obama gang thanks a court order issued in a May 15, 2014, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit we filed against the Defense and State Departments.  The headlines from our May press release tell it best:

Administration knew three months before the November 2012 presidential election of ISIS plans to establish a caliphate in Iraq 
Administration knew of arms being shipped from Benghazi to Syria
That material provided the first official confirmation that the U.S. government was aware of arms shipments from Benghazi to Syria.  The documents also included an incredibly important August 2012 analysis, warning of the rise of ISIS and the predicted failure of the Obama policy of regime change in Syria.  The August 2012 document, from the Defense Intelligence Agency, deserves careful review by anyone interested in the ISIS threat and how it could have been prevented.  As our release noted:

[T]he opposition in Syria was driven by al Qaeda and other extremist Muslim groups: “the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.” The growing sectarian direction of the war was predicted to have dire consequences for Iraq, which included the “grave danger” of the rise of ISIS:
The deterioration of the situation has dire consequences on the Iraqi situation and are as follows:
This creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI [al Qaeda Iraq] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it considers one enemy, the dissenters. ISI could also declare an Islamic state through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.
Some of the “dire consequences” are blacked out but the DIA presciently warned one such consequence would be the “renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena.”
This DIA report is getting new attention these days, most recently in The New York Times this week.  No wonder Obama gets so crazy when pushed on the Syria disaster, as this documents his alliance with jihadists in Libya led not only to the killing of four Americans in Benghazi but helped spark the ISIS war that threatens to ensnare the West in another world wide war.
Our litigation, our reporting, our investigation, and our educational efforts on these national security and related immigration/border issues won’t slow down.  Your Judicial Watch takes the Islamist terrorist threat seriously, especially when the politicians of both parties move on to other, petty topics.  You can track our work here, at www.judicialwatch.org.  Please get the word out about our essential work to your elected leaders, family, friends, and colleagues.

Obama’s Citizenship Push for Immigrants the Focus of New Judicial Watch Lawsuit
Further proof that the Obama administration is a menace to the rule of law, our nation’s security, and our republican form of government can be found in the background behind just one new Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.  Judicial Watch attorneys filed the lawsuit last month to obtain records related to letters sent by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to current green card holders, urging individuals to become naturalized U.S. citizens prior to the 2016 election.
In April 2015, President Obama’s “White House Task Force on New Americans” issued a strategic action plan to help millions of green card holders become U.S. citizens.  Immigration Services is reportedly reallocating vast resources away from its “Electronic Immigration System,” a computerized system designed to facilitate national security and criminal background checks, to a campaign of letters to all nine million green card holders urging them to naturalize before the 2016 election.  The Obama administration’s push includes federal funding for leftist groups that advocate for illegal aliens and amnesty.
On May 14, 2015, Judicial Watch submitted a simple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to Immigration Services asking for:

  • Records related to letters sent by [Immigration Services] to current green card holders urging such individuals to become naturalized U.S. citizens prior to the 2016 election, including, but not limited to, memoranda, guidance, and/or instructions provided to [Immigration Services] staff regarding such letters and records of [Immigration Services] funds allocated to such efforts.
Judicial Watch sued after the agency, despite telling us it received our request, simply refused to respond to us in any way.  You probably are not surprised by the lawless cover-up given the issues (and likely corruption) at stake.
Obama’s effort to replace the American electorate with one more amenable to his despotic approach government means getting the millions of aliens to apply for and be granted citizenship as quickly as possible.  However, Immigration Services is obligated to conduct a criminal and security background investigation of an immigration applicant upon his or her filing for naturalization.
We can’t trust this to happen.
In 2012, Immigration Services abandoned required background checks, adopting, instead, “lean and lite” procedures in effort to keep up with the flood of amnesty applications spurred by President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive amnesty, an expansion of which has been ruled illegal by the federal courts.  Nevertheless, thousands of illegal aliens exempted from deportation under Obama’s unilateral amnesty moves are also potentially eligible for citizenship.  The Obama administration has already admitted into the United States a large number of people with documented ties to ISIS and other radical Islamic groups.  By the way, refugees (from Syria, Somalia, and other countries) can become citizens as soon as six years after receiving refugee or asylum status.  President Obama is dead set against serious background checks for refugees from these Islamist regions.
Despite the release of criminal aliens by the administration and other immigration non-enforcement, violations, and failures, the administration is reportedly expanding the naturalization effort.
The Obama “New American” initiative is reminiscent of Al Gore’s Clinton-era “Citizenship USA” program, which saw citizenship applications approved without the required FBI criminal background checks in the run-up to 1996 presidential election, in which President Clinton was reelected. As our friends at PJ Media report:

Naturalization plus mobilization is the explicit aim of the DHS “Task Force on New Americans.”
Multiple sources at DHS confirm that political appointees are prioritizing naturalization ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Empirical voting patterns among immigrants from minority communities demonstrate that these new voters will overwhelmingly vote for Democrat candidates.  If the empirical rates of support for Democrats continued among these newly naturalized minority voters, Democrats could enjoy an electoral net benefit of millions of new voters in the 2016 presidential election.
I hope you see what is happening.
The Obama administration is violating the federal transparency law to cover up it plans to use tax money to rush through citizenship for millions of legal and illegal aliens just in time for the 2016 elections.  Americans should wonder about whether this administration is importing voters and granting unilateral amnesty to help win elections at the expense of the safety and security of American citizens.

Appallingly Dishonest Pew Study on Immigration Trend from Mexico

 By Daniel Horowitz

 Conservative Review, November 22nd, 2015
. . .
Yet, Pew was dishonest enough to report this data as if it reflects the current reality, even though the current trend portends a political dynamic completely the opposite of that which they are trying to implant in the media cycle.

In reality, this Pew report proves every premise of the border hawks. The fact that some illegal aliens returned home following the recession demonstrates how the false choice between amnesty and mass deportation is a straw-man argument. Mere passive economic disincentives from a recession were strong enough to entice illegal immigrants to repatriate. Imagine the effects of cutting off welfare and education benefits, jobs, and unqualified birthright citizenship? Every time disincentives were effectively rolled out, a number of illegal immigrants voluntarily returned home.
And that is what has been so tragic about Obama’s amnesty programs from 2012-2015 and Rubio’s amnesty bill in 2013. The allure of mass amnesty completely reversed the tide and has spawned one of the sharpest increases in net migration from Mexico in years. Incentives and disincentives matter in terms of immigration policy and border control.
. . .
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/11/appallingly-dishonest-pew-study-on-immigration-trend-from-mexico



This Op-Ed is part of Conservative Review's continuing effort to bring you breaking, premium commentary from the best and the brightest minds from around the country, writing on the issues you care about.


In light of last week's gruesome terrorists attacks on Paris and continuing threats from ISIS, now more than ever the American people need to be reassured of their safety at home. As leaders and presidential candidates debate how to manage the crisis of Syrian refugees, immigration policy, and offer their plan for tackling terror from Islamic extremists, in an exclusive op-ed to Conservative Review, Senator Ted Cruz lays out a bold plan to secure the borders, restore the rule of law, and reform legal immigration in a way that protect Americans.





Make sure to check out some of the latest and greatest features from our other authors:
Paris Jihad: It's Immigration, Stupid – Daniel Horowitz
6 steps Congress can take to address the Islamic refugee program.

LISTEN: Levin: Why Aren't We Talking About How to Win? – CR Wire
"WWIII has started, like I said 16 months ago." – Mark Levin

The Obamacare Death (Spiral) March – Chris Jacobs
Another insurance market company announces it’s in trouble.

Someone Tell Hillary: It's Radical Islam, Stupid – Amanda Carpenter
Would someone, at some point, ask Hillary Clinton what the first "I" in ISIS stands for?




Patriots Should Rejoice as Cruz Tries to Steal Trump’s Thunder on Immigration

 By James Kirkpatrick

 VDare.com, November 23, 2015

Even Donald Trump can’t single-handedly turn Republicans into a party for immigration patriots. But the GOP frontrunner is receiving some support from an unexpected quarter—Senator Ted Cruz. Albeit overshadowed by the Paris bombing, Cruz has suddenly started to sound like Trump when it comes to birthright citizenship, limiting H1-B visas, attacking the Donor Class, and building Trump’s signature wall. Not surprisingly, Trump has even speculated about the Texas Senator as a vice-presidential candidate. [Trump names Cruz when asked about VP spot, By Mark Hensch, Politico, November 17, 2015]Regardless, a process of radicalizing the party is underway that the GOP Establishment can’t control.

Greatly to his credit, Ted Cruz opposed the Gang of Eight’s Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill. But, looked at in more detail, Cruz has a checkered record on immigration, often falling into the cliché of “legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad. His overall position at the beginning of the primary season was distinctly weaker than that of some other candidates. Cruz barely mentioned immigration when he announced his campaign and he has a long record of wanting to boost H1B visas as a handout to the Donor Class.

Unexpectedly, however, Cruz made his move during the most recent Republican debate. As the moderators tried to bait other candidates into attacking frontrunner Trump, Cruz unexpectedly threw down the gauntlet on immigration, blasting any effort to turn Republicans into the “party of Amnesty” and, critically, connecting the immigration issue to low wages.
. . .
Even more significant, Cruz has explicitly committed to ending birthright citizenship, bringing up the topic during his stump speeches, and, critically, featuring it in his official platform [Cruz Plan To Stop Illegal Immigration Highlights, Ted Cruz 2016, Accessed November 23, 2015].

For good measure, Cruz also says in his platform “I will complete the wall”—and vows to triple the number of Border Patrol agents.
. . .
http://www.vdare.com/articles/patriots-should-rejoice-as-cruz-tries-to-steal-trumps-thunder-on-immigration



Sen. Sessions Wants to Defund Refugee Admissions Program

 By Warren Mass

 The New American, November 24, 2015 . . . With the rise of the refugee crisis stemming from the turmoil in Iraq and Syria, and especially since the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris in which ISIS is suspected of playing an important role, Sessions and many others concerned about our nation’s weak or non-existent security screening of aliens have shared their concerns. In his speech, Sessions addressed the matter of security as follows:

 The President persists in this plan even though his own officials, testifying before my Immigration Subcommittee, conceded there is no database in Syria with which to vet refugees…. The FBI director tells us there are now active ISIS investigations in all 50 U.S. states.

Our subcommittee has identified dozens of examples of foreign-born immigrants committing and attempting acts of terror on U.S. soil. Preventing and responding to these acts is an effort encompassing thousands of federal agents and attorneys and billions of dollars: in effect, we are voluntarily admitting individuals at risk for terrorism and then, on the back end, trying to stop them from carrying out their violent designs.
  Sessions quoted a warning made by the former head of the Citizenship and Immigration Services union (which represents immigration caseworkers) more than a year ago: “It is also essential to warn the public about the threat that ISIS will exploit our loose and lax visa policies to gain entry to the United States.”

And Sessions is not alone in the Senate in having such reservations about the Obama refugee plan. He continued:

Senator [Ted] Cruz [R-Texas] and I sent the Administration a list of 72 individuals charged or convicted of terrorism in just the last year. We asked for the immigration histories of each individual. Stunningly, the Administration refused to respond.

It would be unthinkable for Congress to acquiesce to the President’s refugee funding request when he refuses to even publicly disclose the immigration history of these 72 terrorists, many of whom are involved with ISIS.

Cruz, a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has had his own run-ins with the president concerning the administration's refugee plan. On November 16, his campaign released a video highlighting Cruz’s challenge to Obama for a debate on the administration’s proposed plan to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees. The description of the video on Cruz’s Senate website notes that FBI Director James Comey has acknowledged that these refugees cannot be properly vetted.


 . . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/22022-sen-sessions-wants-to-defund-refugee-admissions-program?tmpl=component&print=1



Appallingly Dishonest Pew Study on Immigration Trend from Mexico

By: Daniel Horowitz | November 22nd, 2015
              
If you want to know the depths of dishonesty and obfuscation the liberal elite employ in order to distort the reality on any given issue, take a look at this Pew research report on immigration from Mexico.  Pew claims that migration from Mexico is down to such a point that there is net out-migration—that is to say more Mexicans in America have died or gone back home than returned.  
As we reported several months ago, according to the most up-to-date census data, based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), there has been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico since 2014, precisely after Obama and the Gang of Eight began encouraging illegal immigration in a number of ways.
 
Media outlets, from The Hill and Politico to the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, are breathlessly promoting the headline of this report as if it reflected the truth of the moment.  Their broader message was: “See, the right wing nuts are going crazy about a border crisis when, in reality, there is zero net migration from Mexico.”

The one problem? Pew was using old data from 2009-2014. 

There is nothing new about this.  Pew has been reporting on a number of occasions that in light of the recession a number of illegal immigrants from Mexico returned home.  But guess what?  As we reported several months ago, according to the most up-to-date census data, based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), there has been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico since 2014, precisely after Obama and the Gang of Eight began encouraging illegal immigration in a number of ways.   The fact that 80 percent of illegal immigrants are now officially shielded from deportation and most others are unlikely to ever encounter resistance has clearly contributed to the surge.  Intelligence reports based on interviews of illegal aliens bear out the growing perception that our policies incentivize illegal immigration.
Yet, Pew was dishonest enough to report this data as if it reflects the current reality, even though the current trend portends a political dynamic completely the opposite of that which they are trying to implant in the media cycle. 
In reality, this Pew report proves every premise of the border hawks.  The fact that some illegal aliens returned home following the recession demonstrates how the false choice between amnesty and mass deportation is a straw-man argument.  Mere passive economic disincentives from a recession were strong enough to entice illegal immigrants to repatriate.  Imagine the effects of cutting off welfare and education benefits, jobs, and unqualified birthright citizenship?  Every time disincentives were effectively rolled out, a number of illegal immigrants voluntarily returned home.
And that is what has been so tragic about Obama’s amnesty programs from 2012-2015 and Rubio’s amnesty bill in 2013.  The allure of mass amnesty completely reversed the tide and has spawned one of the sharpest increases in net migration from Mexico in years.  Incentives and disincentives matter in terms of immigration policy and border control.
Here are the numbers obfuscated by Pew and ignored by the media:
  • From 2009-2014, net migration was -140,000.  Because of the recession, roughly 140,000 more Mexican nationals left the country than migrated in from Mexico. 
  • Yet, from July 2014 through June 2015, the trend was completely reversed.  There was a 740,000 net increase in Mexican migration.  The population from Mexico grew 449,000 in just the first 6 months of 2015 alone!
  • And this doesn’t factor in the massive influx from Central American countries.  There has been a 460,000 net increase in immigration from Central America since July 2014. 
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/11/appallingly-dishonest-pew-study-on-immigration-trend-from-mexico?utm_source=E-mail+Updates&utm_campaign=377041166d-
Obama’s Unilateral Immigration Amnesty Plan Gets to the Supreme Court

On Friday, the U.S. Justice Department filed a 35-page petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review Texas v. U.S., the case filed by 26 states against President Obama’s immigration amnesty plan.
The government is appealing a preliminary injunction that stopped implementation of Obama’s amnesty plan, which was issued by a federal district court and upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Nov. 9.
In an odd coincidence, Donald Verrilli, the solicitor general, filed the petition on the one-year anniversary of Obama’s speech to the nation on Nov. 20, 2014, where he announced his unprecedented, unilateral action to violate federal immigration law and provide lawful status and work permits to as many as five million illegal aliens.
The government’s petition asks the Supreme Court to take up the case, despite the fact that this is only a preliminary injunction. No permanent injunction has been issued, and no trial has yet been held. But Verrilli claims that review is needed now because of the “great and immediate significance” of the president’s amnesty plan and “the irreparable injury to the many families affected by delay in its implementation, and the broad importance of the questions presented.”

Of course, given that the Obama administration has virtually stopped all of its deportation procedures, with only some exceptions for certain criminal aliens, it is hard to imagine what “irreparable injury” all of these illegal aliens will suffer, since they have, in all practical terms, been granted “lawful presence” already even without the president’s official amnesty plan in place.
It is true that the preliminary injunction prevents the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from issuing work permits to illegal aliens, but even that is probably not that significant for many of them, because employers all over the country know that the administration has no interest in enforcing federal law barring employers from hiring illegal aliens.
What Is the Government Arguing?
The government makes the same losing arguments to the Supreme Court that it made to the Fifth Circuit, all of which were disposed of by the court of appeals in a very thorough, well-written opinion. Verrilli claims none of the states even have standing to sue the federal government because any costs they incur from illegal aliens being granted lawful presence are just “voluntary.” This is almost a farcical argument, given the enormous education, health care, and law enforcement costs imposed on the states with the influx of huge numbers of illegal aliens into their communities.
Verrilli also makes the over-the-top claim that this injunction is “unprecedented” and “in violation of established limits on the judicial power.” Thus, “if left undisturbed, that ruling will allow States to frustrate the federal government’s enforcement of the Nation’s immigration laws” (emphasis added). Given how far outside the “established limits” of the president’s executive power under the Constitution the immigration amnesty plan is, claiming that it is the courts—and not the administration—acting outside the scope of their constitutional powers is almost insulting.
And it is quite audacious to accuse the courts of frustrating the administration’s “enforcement of the Nation’s immigration laws” when the whole policy of this president is to frustrate enforcement of our immigration laws.
As the Fifth Circuit pointed out, it was the president himself who said that because Congress refused to amend our immigration laws to suit his interests, he had to “change the law” himself. That is a far cry from enforcing our current immigration laws as passed by Congress and signed into law by this or a prior president.
The Administrative Procedure Act
The government also reiterates the unsuccessful arguments made in the lower courts that the states have no claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the federal statute governing the issuance of new regulations and rules by government agencies.
The solicitor general continues to claim that Jeh Johnson, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, had “ample authority to issue” the “guidance” that implemented the president’s amnesty plan, including not just giving illegal aliens “lawful presence” status in the U.S. so they cannot be removed or deported, but also providing them with work permits.
Verrilli argues that the immigration amnesty plan and Johnson’s “guidance” should be exempt from all notice and comment requirements under the APA because otherwise “it threatens far-reaching consequences by constraining needed flexibility to adapt enforcement policies to changing circumstances and priorities.” To the contrary, the whole point of the APA is to force federal agencies like DHS to provide notice and an opportunity for the public to comment on major changes in rules, regulations, and policies.
The APA doesn’t stop agencies from having the flexibility needed to adapt to “changing circumstances and priorities,” but it makes sure they don’t do so in secret on an arbitrary and capricious basis without the public and individuals who will be affected by these changes having a chance to influence the agency. This is vitally important, since the purpose of the executive branch is to serve the best interests of the public as a whole, something that does not always seem to be the objective of this administration.
On Nov. 23, the Texas solicitor general, Scott Keller, sent a request to the Supreme Court asking for an extension of time to respond to the Justice Department’s petition until Jan. 20, 2016. Keller cited “pressing deadlines” in numerous other Texas cases before the Supreme Court, including oral argument in Evenwel v. Abbott, a redistricting case, which is scheduled for Dec. 8.
There is one thing that the government gets right: This is an important case that is vital to the future of this country, although certainly not in the way the administration claims. This case is about the rule of law and the constitutional limits on the power of the executive branch. So the Supreme Court may very well take the case. If they do, we have to hope that they uphold the injunction and don’t allow the president to act as an unchecked monarch who can change whatever laws he doesn’t like at will.


Lawless: The Obama Adminstration’s Uprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law


 12:00-1:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 17, 2015


The Heritage Foundation, Lehrman Auditorium
214 Massachusetts Ave NE
Washington DC 20002-4999


http://www.heritage.org/events/2015/11/lawless

Overview: In Lawless, George Mason University law professor David E. Bernstein offers a scholarly and unsettling account of how the Obama Administration has undermined the Constitution and the rule of law. He documents how the President has presided over one constitutional debacle after another – from Obamacare to unauthorized wars in the Middle East to attempts to strip property owners, college students, religious groups, and conservative political activists of their rights, and more.

Respect for the Constitution’s separation of powers has been violated time and again. Whether in amending Obamacare on the fly or signing a memorandum legalizing millions of illegal immigrants, the current Administration ignores not only Congress, but also the Constitution’s critical checks and balances.

In Lawless, Professor Bernstein shows how the Constitution as well as the President’s own stated principles have been betrayed. In doing so, serious and potentially permanent damage has been done to our constitutional system and repairs must be addressed by the next President of the United States.


A Pattern of Executive Overreach



Commentary By
Portrait of David Berstein

Recently, the Justice Department announced it would not be indicting anyone for his or her role in the most serious domestic political scandal since the Nixon years.

Starting in 2010, the IRS, under pressure from congressional Democrats and the White House, engaged in blatant ideologically motivated discrimination against conservative organizations applying for non-profit status.

That the most feared bureaucracy in Washington was making decisions based on illegal political criteria should send a chill down the spine of any American who cares about the First Amendment and the rule of law.

Yet the Department of Justice has refused to indict even IRS official Lois Lerner, who invoked her Fifth Amendment right to silence to avoid incriminating herself in testimony before Congress.

Unfortunately, the failure to prosecute anyone responsible for abusing the IRS’s authority reflects the Obama administration’s broader contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Consider just a few examples:
  1. Going to war in Libya in blatant violation of the War Powers Resolution, and in defiance of the legal advice of the president’s own lawyers, based on the ridiculous theory that bombing the heck out of Libya did not constitute “hostilities” under the law
  1. Appointing so-called policy czars to high-level positions to avoid constitutionally-required confirmation hearings
  1. Modifying, delaying, and ignoring various provisions of Obamacare in violation of the law itself
  1. Attacking private citizens for engaging in constitutionally protected speech
  1. Issuing draconian regulations regarding sexual assault on campus not through formal, lawful regulation but through an informal, and unreviewable, “dear colleague” letter
  1. Ignoring 100 years of legal rulings and the plain text of the Constitution and trying to get a vote in Congress for the D.C. delegate
  1. Trying to enact massive immigration reform via an executive order demanding that the Department of Homeland Security both refuse to enforce existing immigration law, and provide work permits to millions of people residing in the U.S. illegally
  1. Imposing common core standards on the states via administrative fiat
  1. Ignoring bankruptcy law and arranging Chrysler’s bankruptcy to benefit labor unions at the expense of bondholders
  1. Trying to strip churches and other religious bodies of their constitutional right to choose their clergy free from government involvement.
More generally, the president has abandoned any pretense of trying to work with Congress, as the Constitution’s separation of powers requires. He prefers instead to govern by unilateral executive fiat, even when there is little or no legal authority supporting his power to do so.
Presidents trying stretch their power as far as they can is hardly news. What is news, however, is that top Obama administration officials, including the president himself, see this not as something to be ashamed of, but as a desirable way of governing, something to brag about rather than do surreptitiously.
Obama behaves as if there is some inherent virtue in a president governing by decree and whim, as if promoting progressive political ends at the expense of the rule of law is proper not simply as a desperate last resort but as a matter of principle.
After all, Obama says, democracy is unduly “messy” and “complicated.” “We can’t wait,” the president intones, as he ignores the separation of powers again and again, ruling instead through executive order.
“Law is politics,” and only politics, according to a mantra popular on the legal left, and therefore the law should not be an independent constraint to doing the right thing politically. Obama seems to agree.
As Obama’s lawlessness has received increased attention from Congress, the (conservative) media, and the general public, the president has been defiant, even petulant. When confronted by allegations of lawlessness, Obama takes no responsibility, and doesn’t even bother to defend the legality of his actions.
Harry S. Truman famously said “the buck stops here.” Obama responds to serious concerns about his administration’s lawlessness with a derisive “so sue me.”
As George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley writes, Obama “acts as if anything a court has not expressly forbidden is permissible.” And in many situations, no one has legal standing to challenge the president’s actions in court—which means that no judge can stop the administration’s lawbreaking.
So sue me? If only we could.
On Tuesday, Nov. 17, David Bernstein will be at The Heritage Foundation at noon for an event about his book, “Lawless: The Obama Administration’s Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law.” More details here.


THE WEEKLY STANDARD:


Obama's 'Shameful' Policy Toward Middle Eastern Christians | The Weekly Standard


America is at War Right Now, With or Without Obama | The Weekly Standard


America is at War Right Now, With or Without Obama | The Weekly Standard


Number of Unaccompanied Kids Crossing Border Has Doubled in Last Year

 By Joel Gehrke

 National Review Online, November 25, 2015
. . .
About 3,400 people cleared to receive the children “have later been determined to have criminal convictions including re-entry after deportation, DUI, burglary, distribution of narcotics, domestic violence, homicide, child molestation, and sexual assault,” Senate majority whip John Cornyn and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley wrote in a Monday letter to HHS and the Department of Homeland Security.
. . .
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427651/border-crisis-unaccompanied-kids-crossing-doubled-last-year


Importing Terrorism and Other American Values


By Ann Coulter

Human Events Online, November 25, 2015
. . .
Contrary to Obama’s laughable reference to “the universal values” that “all of humanity” share, most of the world does not share our values, at all. They barely seem to share our DNA. As indignantly explained by the lawyer representing two Iraqis accused of child rape in Nebraska, America’s views about women and children “put us in the minority position in the world.”

Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings — when will America grow up and join the 21st century? (A lot sooner if Marco Rubio has his way!)

The New York Times boasts about how amazingly painstaking the “vetting” of Syrian refugees will be, but I notice the main point the paper keeps stressing is how long it will take. Twenty-four months!

“Waiting” is not “vetting.” What is 24 months to people who can hold a grudge for a thousand years?

As we found out from Michael Steinbach, assistant director of the FBI, in congressional testimony last month, there are no Syrian computer databases for our investigators to use in their famed “vetting” of refugees.
. . .
http://humanevents.com/2015/11/25/importing-terrorism-and-other-american-values/


Syrian Leader: Impossible to Weed Terrorists Out of Migrants Coming to U.S.

By Selwyn Duke


The New American, November 23, 2015
. . .
It has now been confirmed: It is simply impossible to sufficiently vet the Muslim migrants entering our nation. Intelligence officials have said it. The Greek government has said it. And now a New York City Syrian community leader has this to say about Barack Obama’s claim that it is possible to distinguish between terrorists and other migrants: “Are you out of your mind?”

He is 57-year-old Aarafat “Ralph” Succar. Having arrived in the United States at age 10 and living in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, home of the Big Apple’s largest Syrian-immigrant enclave, Succar can straddle two very different worlds. One of them is a source of terrorists.

The other world is taking them in.

As the New York Post wrote late last week, “[Succar] told The Post on Wednesday that ISIS terrorists have ‘absolutely’ sneaked into America by posing as civil-war refugees — and joined sleeper cells just waiting to be activated. ‘I believe the terrorists from Syria have been coming into the United States, not only in the past few years, but way before that…. I think they’re already at work."

Despite this, the Obama administration is still at work trying to convince our nation’s governors otherwise. As the Associated Press just reported, "‘In short, the security vetting for this population — the most vulnerable of individuals — is extraordinarily thorough and comprehensive,’ Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson write in letters sent to all state and territorial governors and to the mayor of Washington, D.C.” Furthermore, the administration claims migrants who arrive on our shores via “its resettlement program undergo a ‘rigorous security vetting process,’ particularly if they are fleeing from Syria,” writes the AP.
. . .
Succar echoes many who’ve warned that terrorist-spawning nations lack the databases necessary for vetting. As he put it, “Third World countries, particularly places like Syria, do not have the network of information the United States has,” reports the Post.

Yet Succar also mentions a factor that would render accurate databases, even if they existed, irrelevant: Bribes in Syria can get you official government documents stating you’re whoever you want to be. As the Post relates:

“You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” he said.

“These are not forged documents. These are written out by a government employee who needs money, whose family has no food.”
. . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/22007-syrian-leader-impossible-to-weed-terrorists-out-of-migrants-coming-to-u-s?tmpl=component&print=1




The Alien Nation on Its Way

 By Greg Richards
American Thinker, November 26, 2015
. . .
That is the result, but we still have to articulate the conservative argument: why is it a bad idea to welcome a migration of Muslims into America? Conservative resistance to this is characterized by liberals as bigotry. We know it isn't that. So what is it?

The problem is that Islam is a culture alien to the culture of America. Ours is a culture that has been built up:

* over 3,500 years in terms of Judaism – i.e., the Ten Commandments;
* over 2,000 years in terms of Christianity;
* over 500 years in terms of Protestantism;
* over 300 years in terms of the Scottish Enlightenment – i.e., the primacy of the individual over the state;
* over 250 years in terms of America itself, of liberty and constitutional republicanism, of the rights of minorities in the face of the majority.


 We are the heirs:

* of very specific conceptions of mankind and our unalienable rights;
* of very specific relationships between the individual and the state;
* of very specific Christian ideas of what we owe each other and how we treat each other – the golden rule, love thy neighbor as thyself;
* of very specific ideas of the separation of church and state.

The Enlightenment split into two streams of thought. In the Scottish Enlightenment, to which the Founding Fathers were heirs, the individual comes before the state. In the French Enlightenment, the state is the highest expression of humanity and comes before the individual. This is the wellspring of fascism and, really, communism.

So, while America is part of Western civilization, we are a unique part. We have a distinct heritage and a distinct culture.

Islam is alien to that culture. It is based on dominance, not equality, within society and aggression toward and death for nonbelievers. It is a philosophy of constant war, of jihad against the infidel. It is a political philosophy that guides every aspect of society and the state. There is no right of the individual and no separation of church and state. Because it is based on a divine and perfect revelation – the Koran – organizing a society upon the desires of its members – democracy – is blasphemy.

. . .
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/the_alien_nation_on_its_way.html



Appallingly Dishonest Pew Study on Immigration Trend from Mexico

 By Daniel Horowitz

 Conservative Review, November 22nd, 2015
. . .
Yet, Pew was dishonest enough to report this data as if it reflects the current reality, even though the current trend portends a political dynamic completely the opposite of that which they are trying to implant in the media cycle.

In reality, this Pew report proves every premise of the border hawks. The fact that some illegal aliens returned home following the recession demonstrates how the false choice between amnesty and mass deportation is a straw-man argument. Mere passive economic disincentives from a recession were strong enough to entice illegal immigrants to repatriate. Imagine the effects of cutting off welfare and education benefits, jobs, and unqualified birthright citizenship? Every time disincentives were effectively rolled out, a number of illegal immigrants voluntarily returned home.
And that is what has been so tragic about Obama’s amnesty programs from 2012-2015 and Rubio’s amnesty bill in 2013. The allure of mass amnesty completely reversed the tide and has spawned one of the sharpest increases in net migration from Mexico in years. Incentives and disincentives matter in terms of immigration policy and border control.
. . .
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/11/appallingly-dishonest-pew-study-on-immigration-trend-from-mexico

THE BLOG ALSO SUGGESTS:

What ISIS Really Wants

The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.

To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.” To Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments—the stoning and crop destruction—juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an “uncircumcised geezer.”)

NOW ADD UP THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THE BUSH LIBRARY AND HILLARY AND BILLARY FOR BILLARY'S PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND PHONY FOUNDATION HAVE TAKEN IN BRIBES FROM MUSLIM DICTATORSHIPS.

WATCH OBAMA GO GROVELING FOR DIRTY MUSLIM MONEY NOW FOR HIS PHONY FOUNDATION.

Lawless!

The Obama Administration’s Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law


November 17, 2015

 The Heritage Foundation, Lehrman Auditorium


 214 Massachusetts Ave NE
Washington DC 20002-4999


http://www.heritage.org/events/2015/11/lawless

Overview: In Lawless, George Mason University law professor David E. Bernstein offers a scholarly and unsettling account of how the Obama Administration has undermined the Constitution and the rule of law. He documents how the President has presided over one constitutional debacle after another – from Obamacare to unauthorized wars in the Middle East to attempts to strip property owners, college students, religious groups, and conservative political activists of their rights, and more.

Respect for the Constitution’s separation of powers has been violated time and again. Whether in amending Obamacare on the fly or signing a memorandum legalizing millions of illegal immigrants, the current Administration ignores not only Congress, but also the Constitution’s critical checks and balances.

In Lawless, Professor Bernstein shows how the Constitution as well as the President’s own stated principles have been betrayed. In doing so, serious and potentially permanent damage has been done to our constitutional system and repairs must be addressed by the next President of the United States.


Obama to Wannabe Illegals: Do as I Say, Not as I Do
By Mark Krikorian

 CIS Blog, October 30, 2015

http://cis.org/krikorian/obama-wannabe-illegals-do-i-say-not-i-do

In response the surge of Central Americans sneaking into Texas in the summer of 2014, the Obama administration launched an ad campaign in the sending countries earlier this year to stem the flow. The radio and TV spots assert that "there are no permits for the people trying to cross the border without papers" and promise "the immediate deportation of those trying to cross the border without documents."

None of it is true. There are permits for illegal-alien minors and families. Formally known as Notices to Appear but known colloquially in Spanish as permisos, they require the aliens to present themselves to immigration authorities by a certain date, until which they have temporary legal status. That gives them time enough to travel to join their relatives and disappear into the existing illegal population. And disappear they do, since, despite the tough promises, virtually none of them are deported, immediately or otherwise.

So it should come as no surprise to read today's AP report, which begins this way:




Once again, President Obama is looking to defy Congress in implementing its immigration reform proposals. This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it. A judge sitting on the 5th Circuit in Texas issued an...



NO PRESIDENT HAS HAD MORE CONTEMPT FOR LEGALS, OUR LAWS AND BORDERS THAN MEXICO'S LA RAZA SUPREMACIST, BARACK OBAMA!

NOT ONLY DOES OBAMA FUND THE MEX FASCIST MOVEMENT OF LA RAZA "The Race"
BUT IT OPERATES OUT OF THE AMERICAN WHITE HOUSE UNDER LA RAZA V.P. CECILIA MUNOZ!


Obama set to defy federal court on amnesty

By Rick Moran


Once again, President Obama is looking to defy Congress in implementing its immigration reform proposals.
This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it.
A judge sitting on the 5th Circuit in Texas issued an injunction last June against the administration's regulatory plans to legalize millions of aliens in the U.S. illegally.  The injunction was upheld by a federal appeals court in Louisiana, and the president's plan is now stalled while the administration works through the federal court system.
Except now there are plans afoot to change the regulations pertaining to green cards that would accomplish almost everything the president can't get from Congress or the courts.  A leaked memo from DHS outlines four plans the administration is considering.
Ian Smith of the Immigration Reform Law Institute:
The internal memo reveals four options of varying expansiveness, with option 1 providing EADs to “all individuals living in the United States”, including illegal aliens, visa-overstayers, and H-1B guest-workers, while option 4 provides EADsonly to those on certain unexpired non-immigrant visas. Giving EADs to any of the covered individuals, however, is in direct violation of Congress’s Immigration & Nationality Act and works to dramatically subvert our carefully wrought visa system. 
As mentioned, the first plan the memo discusses basically entails giving EADs to anyone physically present in the country who until now has been prohibited from getting one. A major positive to this option, the memo reads, is that it would “address the needs of some of the intended deferred action population.” Although DHS doesn’t say it expressly, included here would be those 4.3 million people covered by the president’s DAPA and Expanded DACA programs whose benefits were supposed to have been halted in the Hanen decision. On top of working around the Hanen injunction, this DHS plan would also dole out unrestricted EADs to those on temporary non-immigrant visas, such as H-1B-holders (their work authorizations being tied to their employers) and another 5 to 6 million illegal aliens thus far not covered by any of the President’s deferred action amnesty programs. By claiming absolute authority to grant work authorization to any alien, regardless of status, DHS is in effect claiming it can unilaterally de-couple the 1986 IRCA work authorization statutes from the main body of U.S. visa law. While DHS must still observe the statutory requirements for issuing visas, the emerging doctrine concedes, the administration now claims unprecedented discretionary power to permit anyone inside our borders to work. 
Get a load of what the DHS bureaucrats think about illegals working in the U.S.:
The anonymous DHS policymakers state that a positive for this option is that it “could cover a greater number of individuals.” In a strikingly conclusory bit of bureaucratese, they state that because illegal aliens working in the country “have already had the US labor market tested” it has been “demonstrat[ed] that their future employment won’t adversely affect US workers.” The labor market, in other words, has already been stress-tested through decades of foreign-labor dumping and the American working-class, which disproportionately includes minorities, working mothers, the elderly, and students, is doing just fine. Apparently, the fact that 66 million Americans and legal aliens are currently unemployed or out of the job-market was not a discussion point at the DHS “Retreat.” 
Smith concludes: "Bottom line: The memo foreshadows more tactical offensives in a giant administrative amnesty for all 12 million illegal aliens who’ve broken our immigration laws (and many other laws) that will emerge before the next inaugural in January 2016."
I'm not sure that judge in Texas will let the administration get away with this.  When the government began handing out green cards anyway in defiance of the injunction, the judge, Andrew Hanen, threatened to arrest the lot of them for contempt.  He forced the government to recall the green cards immediately.  There will be no circumventing the law in his court.
But the plans may be untouchable because they don't directly stem from the series of executive orders currently being adjudicated.  Of course, any plan to blanket the country in work permits for illegals will be challenged in court.  But eventually, the administration may find a friendly judge who gives it the go-ahead.
Once again, President Obama is looking to defy Congress in implementing its immigration reform proposals.
This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it.
A judge sitting on the 5th Circuit in Texas issued an injunction last June against the administration's regulatory plans to legalize millions of aliens in the U.S. illegally.  The injunction was upheld by a federal appeals court in Louisiana, and the president's plan is now stalled while the administration works through the federal court system.
Except now there are plans afoot to change the regulations pertaining to green cards that would accomplish almost everything the president can't get from Congress or the courts.  A leaked memo from DHS outlines four plans the administration is considering.
Ian Smith of the Immigration Reform Law Institute:
The internal memo reveals four options of varying expansiveness, with option 1 providing EADs to “all individuals living in the United States”, including illegal aliens, visa-overstayers, and H-1B guest-workers, while option 4 provides EADsonly to those on certain unexpired non-immigrant visas. Giving EADs to any of the covered individuals, however, is in direct violation of Congress’s Immigration & Nationality Act and works to dramatically subvert our carefully wrought visa system. 
As mentioned, the first plan the memo discusses basically entails giving EADs to anyone physically present in the country who until now has been prohibited from getting one. A major positive to this option, the memo reads, is that it would “address the needs of some of the intended deferred action population.” Although DHS doesn’t say it expressly, included here would be those 4.3 million people covered by the president’s DAPA and Expanded DACA programs whose benefits were supposed to have been halted in the Hanen decision. On top of working around the Hanen injunction, this DHS plan would also dole out unrestricted EADs to those on temporary non-immigrant visas, such as H-1B-holders (their work authorizations being tied to their employers) and another 5 to 6 million illegal aliens thus far not covered by any of the President’s deferred action amnesty programs. By claiming absolute authority to grant work authorization to any alien, regardless of status, DHS is in effect claiming it can unilaterally de-couple the 1986 IRCA work authorization statutes from the main body of U.S. visa law. While DHS must still observe the statutory requirements for issuing visas, the emerging doctrine concedes, the administration now claims unprecedented discretionary power to permit anyone inside our borders to work. 
Get a load of what the DHS bureaucrats think about illegals working in the U.S.:
The anonymous DHS policymakers state that a positive for this option is that it “could cover a greater number of individuals.” In a strikingly conclusory bit of bureaucratese, they state that because illegal aliens working in the country “have already had the US labor market tested” it has been “demonstrat[ed] that their future employment won’t adversely affect US workers.” The labor market, in other words, has already been stress-tested through decades of foreign-labor dumping and the American working-class, which disproportionately includes minorities, working mothers, the elderly, and students, is doing just fine. Apparently, the fact that 66 million Americans and legal aliens are currently unemployed or out of the job-market was not a discussion point at the DHS “Retreat.” 
Smith concludes: "Bottom line: The memo foreshadows more tactical offensives in a giant administrative amnesty for all 12 million illegal aliens who’ve broken our immigration laws (and many other laws) that will emerge before the next inaugural in January 2016."
I'm not sure that judge in Texas will let the administration get away with this.  When the government began handing out green cards anyway in defiance of the injunction, the judge, Andrew Hanen, threatened to arrest the lot of them for contempt.  He forced the government to recall the green cards immediately.  There will be no circumventing the law in his court.
But the plans may be untouchable because they don't directly stem from the series of executive orders currently being adjudicated.  Of course, any plan to blanket the country in work permits for illegals will be challenged in court.  But eventually, the administration may find a friendly judge who gives it the go-ahead.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/11/obama_set_to_defy_federal_court_on_amnesty.html#ixzz3qSG6XCr3
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


Obama’s Secret Destruction of Our Immigration System

 By Arnold Ahlert

 Canada Free Press, November 4, 2015

A newly-leaked memo from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reveals the Obama administration is seeking to sidestep a federal court injunction that suspended portions of the president’s amnesty-based initiatives known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In short, Obama is determined to impose his transformational agenda on the nation by any means necessary.

According to the Hill, the document outlining the administration’s attempt to thumb its nose at the rule of law was prepared at a DHS “Regulations Retreat” last June, four months after a preliminary injunction was initially imposed by Texas Judge Andrew Hanen and subsequently left in place by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit’s final ruling on that injunction, either confirming or reversing it, is expected to occur in a matter of days.Apparently the Obama administration couldn’t care less.
. . .
http://canadafreepress.com/article/76535

TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED AND BUILD THEIR LA RAZA "The Race" MEXICAN ILLEGAL PARTY BASE, THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAS RUTHLESSLY ASSAULTED THE AMERICAN WORKER, OUR LAWS ON HIRING ILLEGALS AND OUR BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.



"The U.S. now ranks at, or near, the top of developed countries for income inequality. Job creation has lagged far behind population growth. Automation has erased some jobs, but corrupt, inept government leadership is responsible for the deplorable job- deficit-low wage situation." 

"The federal government encourages the massive illegal and legal immigration that plays a huge role in job scarcity and income suppression for American workers. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, a viable economy cannot exist with open borders and unrestricted immigration. An oversupply of workers willing to work for less pay, the outsourcing of jobs, and visa-immigrant hiring allow companies to replace American workers with immigrants for reduced labor and benefit costs."



Income inequality has risen during the last several decades to heights last seen in the 1920s. Most of the income growth has gone to a small fraction of the population, the ultra-rich elites, while real wages for the bottom 90 percent ...

The Causes of Income Inequality

Income inequality has risen during the last several decades to heights last seen in the 1920s. Most of the income growth has gone to a small fraction of the population, the ultra-rich elites, while real wages for the bottom 90 percent has been stagnant since the 1980s. The U.S. now ranks at, or near, the top of developed countries for income inequality. Job creation has lagged far behind population growth. Automation has erased some jobs, but corrupt, inept government leadership is responsible for the deplorable job- deficit-low wage situation.    

Trade agreements are one cause of job and wage reduction. Over the last twenty years, we’ve amassed $10 trillion in trade deficits and exported 12 million manufacturing jobs, forcing workers to move into lower-wage service jobs. Government brags about the free trade agreements, CAFTA, NAFTA, KORUS, and TPP. But the “free” applies only to the foreign trading partners, which manipulate their currencies, pay sweatshop workers low wages, manufacture under environmentally-toxic conditions, and restrict U.S. imports. We hand over our technology, good-paying jobs, product labeling, and safety guarantees -- all to enrich multinational corporations and foreign industry. Industrial research and development have been decimated as companies move overseas or outsource jobs, leaving the nation a future of little technological innovation. The U.S. is left with hollowed-out industries and service jobs. 
The federal government encourages the massive illegal and legal immigration that plays a huge role in job scarcity and income suppression for American workers. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, a viable economy cannot exist with open borders and unrestricted immigration. An oversupply of workers willing to work for less pay, the outsourcing of jobs, and visa-immigrant hiring allow companies to replace American workers with immigrants for reduced labor and benefit costs. A well-known example is that of Disney IT workers who were forced to train their cheaper immigrant replacements. It is no coincidence that the rise in immigration has occurred simultaneously with the rise of the welfare state. People unemployed, or in low-wage and part-time jobs, rely on government subsidies. The result is larger national debt, more corporate wealth, and declining wages.

ObamaCare influences, and will influence to greater degrees, the lowering of incomes for Americans as healthcare costs rise. Higher premiums and deductions for health insurance are being shifted to employees, reducing benefits and wages. Medical care costs already have risen much faster than wages, leaving many struggling to pay for necessities. Ever-higher deductions mean that people can’t afford to use the insurance they are forced to buy because they can’t even pay the deductions.        

Another contributor to job deficiency and wage stagnation is the increased regulation and taxation of small businesses instituted by Obama’s executive orders, EPA overreach, and ObamaCare. Small businesses traditionally have created two-thirds of new jobs annually. The bright spot in the economy, small businesses have created 78.7 percent of new jobs since the recession. Today, faced with these government anti-business policies, small businesses are closing their doors at a faster rate than new businesses are opening. The small businesses that remain open often don’t expand because of Obamacare and government regulations.

Income inequality is greatly impacted by the Federal Reserve’s policies of money-printing and zero interest rates, which have led to the funding of the financial and corporate markets while ignoring the needs of smaller businesses. The money supply and cheap lending has gone to the government, large corporations, and Wall Street, leaving the rest of the economy to sputter along with little capital and fewer jobs. The Fed’s policies of crony capitalism favor big business and big banks over that of smaller entities and are responsible for the increasing number of big business deals such as Walgreen's purchase of Rite Aid.


DEATH OF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS

This government-driven, crony-capitalist economy defined by job scarcity and wage stagnation is the reason college graduates are burdened by $1.3 trillion debt, living with parents, can’t afford to marry or buy homes, and working as waitresses and bartenders. Job scarcity and low wages are the reasons we’re becoming a nation of renters rather than homeowners. They are the reasons that 51 percent of workers earn less than $30,000 a year. They are the reasons for the demise of the middle class and the burgeoning welfare rolls, the modern-day equivalent of slavery.    

Income inequality and its devastating consequences are seldom mentioned on the nightly news. The media and bogus government statistics paint rosy pictures about economic recovery, and government masks the bad economy with welfare so that we don’t see Great Depression bread lines. But the only recovery has been in the Federal Reserve’s inflated stock market, not in the main street economy, where 94 million working-age adults are unemployed and 47 million are on some welfare program. The “Made in America” displays weekly touted by ABC news are the few exceptions, rather than the rule, in an American economy of boarded-up stores and factories.    
The political implications of income inequality are most evident in the increasing rise and entrenchment of career politicians, supported by big donor funding and media favoritism. The integrity of the electoral process is endangered as election propaganda, funded by big money and hyped by corporate media bias, become more prominent in spreading lies, distortions, and innuendos to the voting public. Unrestricted campaign funding has given the moneyed elites first access to elected officials. At the same time, private-sector unions, small businesses, and citizens find their influence dwindling or irrelevant. This crony capitalism, resembling dictatorships and communist oligarchies, seriously threatens our democracy because money, power, and media control are consolidated in the hands of a few at the top. Voter apathy prevails, as voters feel increasingly powerless to change the course of events. 

The United States, a once great economic powerhouse and the largest creditor nation, has become the largest debtor nation, and is fast becoming a banana republic. Past and present elected authorities and public officials have stripped bare our industries, put the nation under a mountain of debt, and turned the U.S. into a welfare depository. Government leaders have intentionally failed to protect our borders, jobs, and freedoms. These public “servants” and the wealthy elites have garnered riches for themselves, and purposely impoverished citizens and future generations. The greatest threats to our economy and national security are not foreign countries or terrorists; they are the enemies inside, corrupt government leaders and the money masters they serve. 
Income inequality has risen during the last several decades to heights last seen in the 1920s. Most of the income growth has gone to a small fraction of the population, the ultra-rich elites, while real wages for the bottom 90 percent has been stagnant since the 1980s. The U.S. now ranks at, or near, the top of developed countries for income inequality. Job creation has lagged far behind population growth. Automation has erased some jobs, but corrupt, inept government leadership is responsible for the deplorable job- deficit-low wage situation.    

Trade agreements are one cause of job and wage reduction. Over the last twenty years, we’ve amassed $10 trillion in trade deficits and exported 12 million manufacturing jobs, forcing workers to move into lower-wage service jobs. Government brags about the free trade agreements, CAFTA, NAFTA, KORUS, and TPP. But the “free” applies only to the foreign trading partners, which manipulate their currencies, pay sweatshop workers low wages, manufacture under environmentally-toxic conditions, and restrict U.S. imports. We hand over our technology, good-paying jobs, product labeling, and safety guarantees -- all to enrich multinational corporations and foreign industry. Industrial research and development have been decimated as companies move overseas or outsource jobs, leaving the nation a future of little technological innovation. The U.S. is left with hollowed-out industries and service jobs. 
The federal government encourages the massive illegal and legal immigration that plays a huge role in job scarcity and income suppression for American workers. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, a viable economy cannot exist with open borders and unrestricted immigration. An oversupply of workers willing to work for less pay, the outsourcing of jobs, and visa-immigrant hiring allow companies to replace American workers with immigrants for reduced labor and benefit costs. A well-known example is that of Disney IT workers who were forced to train their cheaper immigrant replacements. It is no coincidence that the rise in immigration has occurred simultaneously with the rise of the welfare state. People unemployed, or in low-wage and part-time jobs, rely on government subsidies. The result is larger national debt, more corporate wealth, and declining wages.

ObamaCare influences, and will influence to greater degrees, the lowering of incomes for Americans as healthcare costs rise. Higher premiums and deductions for health insurance are being shifted to employees, reducing benefits and wages. Medical care costs already have risen much faster than wages, leaving many struggling to pay for necessities. Ever-higher deductions mean that people can’t afford to use the insurance they are forced to buy because they can’t even pay the deductions.        

Another contributor to job deficiency and wage stagnation is the increased regulation and taxation of small businesses instituted by Obama’s executive orders, EPA overreach, and ObamaCare. Small businesses traditionally have created two-thirds of new jobs annually. The bright spot in the economy, small businesses have created 78.7 percent of new jobs since the recession. Today, faced with these government anti-business policies, small businesses are closing their doors at a faster rate than new businesses are opening. The small businesses that remain open often don’t expand because of Obamacare and government regulations.

Income inequality is greatly impacted by the Federal Reserve’s policies of money-printing and zero interest rates, which have led to the funding of the financial and corporate markets while ignoring the needs of smaller businesses. The money supply and cheap lending has gone to the government, large corporations, and Wall Street, leaving the rest of the economy to sputter along with little capital and fewer jobs. The Fed’s policies of crony capitalism favor big business and big banks over that of smaller entities and are responsible for the increasing number of big business deals such as Walgreen's purchase of Rite Aid.

This government-driven, crony-capitalist economy defined by job scarcity and wage stagnation is the reason college graduates are burdened by $1.3 trillion debt, living with parents, can’t afford to marry or buy homes, and working as waitresses and bartenders. Job scarcity and low wages are the reasons we’re becoming a nation of renters rather than homeowners. They are the reasons that 51 percent of workers earn less than $30,000 a year. They are the reasons for the demise of the middle class and the burgeoning welfare rolls, the modern-day equivalent of slavery.    

Income inequality and its devastating consequences are seldom mentioned on the nightly news. The media and bogus government statistics paint rosy pictures about economic recovery, and government masks the bad economy with welfare so that we don’t see Great Depression bread lines. But the only recovery has been in the Federal Reserve’s inflated stock market, not in the main street economy, where 94 million working-age adults are unemployed and 47 million are on some welfare program. The “Made in America” displays weekly touted by ABC news are the few exceptions, rather than the rule, in an American economy of boarded-up stores and factories.    
The political implications of income inequality are most evident in the increasing rise and entrenchment of career politicians, supported by big donor funding and media favoritism. The integrity of the electoral process is endangered as election propaganda, funded by big money and hyped by corporate media bias, become more prominent in spreading lies, distortions, and innuendos to the voting public. Unrestricted campaign funding has given the moneyed elites first access to elected officials. At the same time, private-sector unions, small businesses, and citizens find their influence dwindling or irrelevant. This crony capitalism, resembling dictatorships and communist oligarchies, seriously threatens our democracy because money, power, and media control are consolidated in the hands of a few at the top. Voter apathy prevails, as voters feel increasingly powerless to change the course of events. 

The United States, a once great economic powerhouse and the largest creditor nation, has become the largest debtor nation, and is fast becoming a banana republic. Past and present elected authorities and public officials have stripped bare our industries, put the nation under a mountain of debt, and turned the U.S. into a welfare depository. Government leaders have intentionally failed to protect our borders, jobs, and freedoms. These public “servants” and the wealthy elites have garnered riches for themselves, and purposely impoverished citizens and future generations. The greatest threats to our economy and national security are not foreign countries or terrorists; they are the enemies inside, corrupt government leaders and the money masters they serve. 


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/the_causes_of_income_inequality.html#ixzz3qSBDYQVs
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook



Obamacare open enrollment: A widening health care disaster for workers

Obamacare open enrollment: A widening health care disaster for workers

3 November 2015
“All of Obama’s policies have been geared toward increasing social inequality. … The claim that the health care overhaul is an oasis of progress in this desert of social reaction is simply a lie”— World Socialist Web Site, March 22, 2010


Open enrollment for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) began November 1 for plans taking effect January 1. The coming year will be the third in which the ACA, signed into law by President Obama in March 2010, will be operational. The World Socialist Web Site’s assessment five years ago that the “reform” commonly known as Obamacare would usher in a frontal assault on the health care available to working people is being richly confirmed.
The ACA has nothing in common with universal health care. That was merely the slogan initially advanced to disguise a corporate-designed scheme to dramatically shift health care costs onto the working class.
The central component of the scheme, the “individual mandate,” requires that individuals and families without health insurance through their employer or a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid obtain insurance or pay a tax penalty. Low-income people can qualify for modest tax subsidies to go toward premiums.
The uninsured are required to purchase coverage from private, for-profit insurance companies on the health care “exchanges” set up under the law. This vastly increases the market for private insurance firms without placing any real restraints on the prices they charge—a formula for windfall profits.
By the government’s own forecast, enrollees will face a 7.5 percent average premium rate increase in 2016. Other sources project rate hikes in excess of 20 percent. A recent study showed that many insurers are requesting double-digit rate increases next year and state insurance commissions are approving them.
A frenzy of mergers in the health care industry will fuel further premium increases. In the space of a few weeks in July, Aetna Inc. and Humana Inc. merged in a $37 billion deal, and Anthem Inc. agreed to acquire Cigna Corp. for $54 billion. As a result, the five largest health insurers in the US were consolidated into three.
Drug makers Allergan and Pfizer are in the advanced stages of talks to merge and form the world’s largest pharmaceutical company, valued at $330 billion. The price of top brand name prescription drugs are already surging, having increased by 12.9 percent in 2013, the last year for which data is available.
Last week the giant drug store chain Walgreens announced a deal to take over one of its main competitors, Rite Aid, creating a mega-chain to compete with CVS for total domination of the market.
Premiums and drug costs are only one aspect of the burden to be borne by those purchasing coverage under the ACA. The average deductible for the lowest tier “bronze” plans on the exchanges was $5,200 in 2015, and the prevalence of such “high-deductible” plans is sure to expand in 2016. This means that aside from mandated “essential services,” such as certain forms of wellness care and screenings, no medical care is covered until the entire deductible is paid out of pocket. Co-payments for doctor visits and other services are also required.
Research published in the current issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association looked at 135 health plans in 34 state marketplaces available during last year’s open enrollment period. The study found that as of April 2015, 18 plans in nine states lacked in-network specialists for at least one specialty. These included obstetricians/gynecologists, dermatologists, cardiologists, psychiatrists, oncologists, neurologists, endocrinologists, rheumatologists and pulmonologists.
What all of this means is that a substantial portion of the 12 million people who have purchased coverage on the health care exchanges will be forced to self-ration medical care due to economic necessity. Workers and their children will forego doctor visits, prescriptions for life-saving medicines will go unfilled, needless suffering and deaths will occur.
This appalling state of affairs is not an unfortunate byproduct of the ACA. By design from its inception, the legislation has been crafted to cut costs for the government and corporations and boost the profits of the health insurers, pharmaceutical corporations and health care chains.
According to the big business parties and their corporate sponsors, Americans are living too long and health care costs are sucking up too much of the national wealth. There is a calculated drive to lower life expectancy for working people.
That is why the introduction of Obamacare has been accompanied by a concerted drive to restrict access to basic medical tests—that is, to ration health care for workers. In recent months, official bodies have called for reducing or delaying mammograms, pap smears, prostate tests and other standard screening procedures.
One indication of the catastrophic implications of the assault on health care is a recent study showing that since 1998, the death rate for middle-income white Americans age 45-54 has risen sharply, resulting in half a million deaths, comparable to the 650,000 Americans who have lost their lives from AIDS since 1981. Researchers point to suicides and substance abuse, driven by increasing financial stress, as the main contributing factors. The ACA will only increase the number of such tragedies.
The implications of Obamacare go far beyond those buying insurance on the ACA exchanges and extend to all segments of health care. The legislation is serving as a model for the assault on employer-sponsored health care coverage as well as the bedrock government-run programs Social Security and Medicare.
Today, approximately half of all Americans receive their health care coverage through their employers. Employer-paid health benefits was an important social gain wrested from the corporations by the struggles of workers in the aftermath of World War II and has been central in raising the living standards of working class families.
But the workings of Obamacare aim to destroy these gains. As Ezekiel Emanuel, a close ally of Obama and key architect of the ACA, predicted in 2009: “By 2025, few private-sector employers will still be providing health insurance.” These plans will give way to vouchers handed out to employees to purchase coverage on insurance exchanges, either those set up under the ACA or others.
In the current contract struggle of US autoworkers, the drive by the auto companies and their union partners to dismantle the “cradle-to-grave” medical coverage won by autoworkers and retirees is in line with the Obama administration’s policy of shifting health care costs to workers.
The recent budget deal between Obama and congressional Republicans rolls back a significant provision in the ACA, the requirement that businesses with more than 200 workers automatically enroll their employees for health insurance. And while employers are basically absolved of responsibility for providing insurance, fines for individuals for not obtaining insurance will rise substantially in 2016—to $695, or 2.5 percent of income, whichever is higher.
Paul Ryan, the newly elected speaker of the House of Representatives, has advocated transforming Medicare into a voucher program and partially privatizing Social Security. That he is now presented as a “moderate” unifying force by the ruling elite and the media is an indication of how far to the right the political establishment in America has veered. The foundations are already being laid for the dismantling of Medicare and Social Security.
As the real content of Obamacare becomes clear to millions of workers and middle class people, who suddenly discover that they cannot get access to drugs or doctors and standard medical procedures are no longer covered by their insurance plans, there will be an explosive growth of social opposition.
The third year of the Affordable Care Act is the occasion to call the reactionary legislation by its rightful name: a health care counterrevolution. The only rational and progressive solution to the health care crisis in America is to replace the privately owned and controlled system with socialized medicine, in which the health care industry is nationalized, restructured, and placed under the democratic control of a workers government. This will make possible the provision of quality health care for all as a basic social right.
Kate Randall

"Amazon became a byword this year for savage treatment of 

employees. Bezos joins several others in the top 15 notorious 

for low-wage exploitation, including four heirs to the Wal-

Mart retail empire, James, Alice, Christy and Samuel Robson 

Walton, and Phil Knight, chairman of Nike Inc., whose $24.4 

billion fortune is extracted from his international network of 

sports apparel-producing sweatshops."


OBAMA-CLINTONomics is a simple device - Serve the super rich and pass the cost of their looting and Wall Street crimes on to the backs of the last of the American middle-class!


"Of course, the wealth of the financial elite cannot come from nowhere. Ultimately, the continual infusion of asset bubbles is the form taken by a massive transfer of wealth, from the working class to the banks, investors and super-rich. The corollary to rise of the stock market is the endless demands, all over the world, for austerity, cuts in wages, attacks on health care and pensions."


“As a result, the share of wealth held by the richest 0.1 percent of the population grew from 17 percent in 2007 to 22 percent in 2012, while the wealth of the 400 richest families in the US has doubled since 2008.”

OBAMA-CLINTONomics and the final death of the American middle-class

"Obama expanded the Wall Street bailout, handing trillions of dollars to the criminals who wrecked the economy. He then utilized the financial meltdown to restructure the auto industry on the basis of brutal pay cuts, setting a precedent for the transformation of the US into a low-wage economy."

"In the midst of the deepest slump since the Great Depression, the administration starved state and city governments of resources, leading to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of education and public-sector jobs and the gutting of workers’ pensions. Obama’s Affordable Care Act set in motion the dismantling of employer-paid health insurance and massive cuts in the Medicare insurance system for the elderly."

Wealth of America’s super-rich grows to $2.34 trillion

By Nick Barrickman 
3 October 2015
The wealth of the 400 richest Americans 
continues to soar, according to the results of 
the new Forbes 400 list, published annually 
by the business magazine of the same name. 
At $2.34 trillion, the total net worth for the multi-billionaires on the list set new records, displacing last year’s all-time high of $2.29 trillion.

 
OBAMA-CLINTONomics: MELTDOWN!

Did their crony banksters ultimately destroy the global economy?





Richest one percent controls 

nearly half of global wealth

 

In 2009, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 was $1.27 trillion. Today, nearly six years into the so-called economic “recovery” fostered by the Obama administration, the wealthiest Americans have nearly doubled their hoard. The total wealth of the richest 400 Americans managed to reach new heights even while financial markets have been roiled by tumultuous swings.

The Forbes report notes that in 2015, “It was 
harder than ever to join the 400. The price of 
entry this year was $1.7 billion, the highest

it’s been in the 33 years that Forbes has

racked American wealth.” Forbes makes note

that the wealth threshold was so high this year that 145 billionaires failed to make the list.
While a majority of billionaires have prospered, their wealth underwritten by the massive government bailouts of financial institutions and near-zero interest rates from the Federal Reserve, a significant fraction of the wealthy elite have lost ground in the turbulent stock markets of recent months.
The ratio of winners and losers among the billionaires was ten to one last year, but this year was much closer to 50-50. Forbes noted that the top three position-holders on the list, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett and Oracle’s Larry Ellison, each saw a drop in their total net worth of at least 5 percent in the last year. This did nothing to threaten the position of Gates, number one at $76 billion, or Buffett, number two at $62 billion, but Ellison’s third-place position, with $47.5 billion, left him “only” $500 million ahead of the fourth-place multi-billionaire, Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com.
The majority of those on the Forbes list were associated with some form of financial speculation, or with computer software and the Internet. According to the industry breakdown supplied by Forbes, its 400 include 126 engaged in investment, real estate and finance, 81 from computer technology and media, 36 from food and beverage, 32 from retail and fashion (including five members of the Walton family, owners of Wal-Mart), 31 from oil & gas, 20 from health care, 19 from miscellaneous services (including six members of the Pritzker family, owners of Hyatt Hotels), and 19 from sports and gaming.
This left only 35 listed as making their fortunes in manufacturing, automotive, construction, and logistics. The largest manufacturing fortune is the $7.4 billion of Harold Kohler, whose company makes toilets and other plumbing fixtures. Perhaps that is symbolic, given the state of manufacturing in the United States, once the world leader in industry, but no longer.
The growth of financial parasitism has underwritten the wealth of many on the Forbes 400. In 1982, the first Forbes 400 list saw figures directly involved in finance making up only 4.4 percent of the total wealth on the list. As of today, this group now makes up more than 21 percent of billionaires on the list.
Former Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, who has held the number one spot on the Forbes 400 for 22 years, has less than 13 percent of his fortune in stock in the company he founded. According toForbes, the majority of Gates’ wealth is bound up in Cascade, the software mogul’s investment firm, which specializes in “investing in stocks, bonds, private equity and real estate.”
Besides the well-known super-rich of Silicon Valley like Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin (with $33.3 billion and $32.6 billion, respectively) and Mark Zuckerberg, founder of the social media web site Facebook, the seventh wealthiest man in America with $40.3 billion in total assets, there are numerous other newly minted Internet billionaires, including the owners and co-owners of Uber, Airbnb, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Twitter, SnapChat, GoPro and GoDaddy.com.
Jeffrey Bezos, owner of the online retailer Amazon, saw the largest gain in wealth for the year, making $16 billion in 2015, placing his total net worth at $47 billion and catapulting him to fourth place. Nearly half of Bezos’ gains came within a single day last July, when his company announced gains in the second quarter, leading to a speculative frenzy which bid up stock values for Amazon by over 18 percent.
Amazon became a byword this year for savage treatment of 

employees. Bezos joins several others in the top 15 notorious 

for low-wage exploitation, including four heirs to the Wal-

Mart retail empire, James, Alice, Christy and Samuel Robson

Walton, and Phil Knight, chairman of Nike Inc., whose $24.4 

billion fortune is extracted from his international network of 

sports apparel-producing sweatshops.
While safeguarding the ill-gotten wealth of the Forbes billionaires remains an ironclad principle of both the Republican and Democratic parties, working people throughout the US continue to suffer the brunt of attacks on their living standards. A US Census report released earlier this month shows that 14.8 percent of the US population lives in poverty; a figure that is unchanged from a year earlier. The Census findings show that 6.6 percent of the population lives in “deep poverty,” or less than half of the already unrealistically low official poverty line in the US.