"This lawsuit is born out of the lies and misinformation the Biden administration has pushed against Georgia's Election Integrity Act from the start," he said. "Joe Biden, Stacey Abrams, and their allies tried to force an unconstitutional elections power grab through Congress—and failed."
More Than 500K Illegal Immigrants Crossed Southern Border Since Kamala Harris Named ‘Border Czar’
Vice President Kamala Harris finally visited the southern border, three months after being put in charge of solving the immigration crisis. In that time, more than half-a-million illegal immigrants were apprehended at the southern border.
Upon arriving in El Paso on Friday, the vice president continued to attack journalists for asking questions about why she waited so long to make the trip. "It's not my first trip, I've been to the border many times," Harris snapped, apparently referring to previous visits she made as a senator.
Since President Joe Biden made Harris his "border czar" on March 24, illegal immigrants have crossed the southern border at a record rate of nearly 180,000 per month, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
CBP agents apprehended 178,854 illegal immigrants at the southern border in April, which at the time was the highest monthly figure since April 2000. At least it was until the following month, when CBP agents apprehended 180,034 illegal immigrants attempting to enter the country.
When the CBP data for June is reported next month, the total number of illegal crossings since late March is likely to surpass 500,000, which would mark a tremendous increase compared with last year. During that same three-month period (April-June) in 2020, CBP apprehended just 73,392 illegal immigrants. The 2020 numbers were likely deflated due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but CBP reported just 146,210 illegal border crossings for that same three-month period in 2018, significantly below this year's figure.
Harris has come under fire for not taking the border crisis seriously. She has on several occasions laughed like a maniac in response to questions about her refusal to visit the border until now. During an interview with NBC's Lester Holt earlier this month, Harris falsely claimed "we've been to the border" and attacked the journalist for asking about it.
"This whole thing about the border. We've been to the border. We've been to the border," Harris said, contrary to the facts.
When Holt pointed out that she had not, in fact, been to the border, Harris lashed out in a manner unbecoming of an elected official. "I—and I haven't been to Europe. And I mean, I don't—I don't understand the point that you're making," Harris said.
The vice president's decision to finally visit the border is unlikely to silence Harris's critics who contend that she is a terrible politician who has no idea what she's doing.
The DOJ’s suit against Georgia’s new voting laws is a joke
On Friday, the Department of Justice, through its Civil Rights Division, which is headed by an anti-White, antisemitic radical, sued Georgia, claiming its new voting laws are racist. The suit is a patent attempt to achieve through lawfare what the Democrats were unable to do via legislation; namely, federalize voting laws across America and build into them easy ways to commit voter fraud. On close review, the suit is even more ridiculous than it first appeared. The allegations make clear that the law is above reproach. It’s just that the DOJ is darn sure that Georgia’s legislators had racist hate in their hearts.
Margot Cleveland, law professor and lawyer who worked for around twenty-five years in the Seventh Circuit, was the first to figure out how utterly ludicrous the complaint is. Based on the paragraphs she highlighted, it should instantly be dismissed at the pleading stage without ever really revving up the case.
Before getting to Cleveland’s finding, a word about one aspect of Civil Rights law. A law or rule that is racist on its face is obviously invalid (e.g., a rule saying only Black farmers can get federal funds.). It is true, though, that a law can be facially neutral but nevertheless violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The question is whether it has a disparate impact on minorities.
For example, a law that redistricts a community may look neutral insofar as it just describes streets and boundaries. However, if plaintiffs allege that the law’s practical effect is to destroy a specific race’s ability to vote, that claim, if proven, will justify striking down the law (as the Supreme Court held in Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960).)
It’s apparent that the DOJ is trying to make that case: Namely, that the Georgia voting act may look innocent, but its intent is racist. However, as Margot Cleveland discovered, the DOJ cannot allege that the law, which is manifestly neutral on its face, is racist in its effect – because it isn’t. Instead, all that the DOJ’s complaint manages to assert is that bad people wrote the law. Therefore, the DOJ contends, even though the law is neither racist in language nor in effect, it’s still racist.
As I said, this case shouldn’t make it past the pleading stage because it’s a joke. When I studied law, a first-year student would have known better than to write that, but it’s now coming out of the United States Department of Justice, which has effectively and officially announced that it is now a subsidiary of the Democrat party – and staffed with clowns.
Because Cleveland’s Twitter thread is acting funky when transferred to our server, I’ve run it through Spooler to make it more readable.
The DOJ's complaint against Georgia is surreal.
So, basically, the DOJ is now litigating because legislators opposed to the legislation lost.
OMgosh....Maybe the guy who called the law Jim Crow 2.0 wasn't invited for a reason???
And, sure, GA is responsible for some wacko white supremacist group that everyone denounced!
WTFudge?
And finally the substantive claim: "with the PURPOSE of denying or abridging..."
If this is an example of the quality of Biden’s DOJ, they all should be summarily disbarred for incompetence.
IMAGE: Kristen Clarke (cropped), Senate Democrats CC BY 2.0; Merrick Garland (cropped), public domain.
Biden’s DOJ Sues Georgia Over Voting Law
Attorney General Merrick Garland thanks journalists who misleadingly reported on law
Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Friday that the Department of Justice is suing Georgia, alleging that the state's recently passed voting law discriminates against black voters.
The Justice Department claims Georgia's election law violates Section Two of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting laws that "discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in one of the language minority groups." In a press conference, Garland said the state passed the law "with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of black Georgians to vote on account of their race or color." He thanked journalists in particular for drawing his attention to certain provisions in the law.
"I want to give credit to the news media," he said. "There were a number of articles that collected all the threats and discussed them, putting them together in a way that, frankly, I had not seen before."
Democrats and members of the media criticized the Republican-backed voting law after it was passed in March, saying the legislation amounted to black "voter suppression" and a "new Jim Crow." The New York Times called it "the most extensive contraction of ballot access in generations," while President Joe Biden called it "Jim Crow on steroids." Republicans have said the purpose of the law was to restore voter confidence after the results of the November election were fiercely contested in the state.
The Georgia voting law is a widely misunderstood piece of legislation. The law imposes some restrictions on absentee or mail-in voting while expanding other provisions. Among other measures, it lengthens the early voting period but requires identification to vote absentee.
Failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (D.), who has never conceded the 2018 race she lost to Gov. Brian Kemp (R.), led a coalition of activists in opposition to the law, claiming its voter ID provision was suppressing black voters.
"Voters without a driver's license or state ID must surrender their personal information and risk identity theft just to receive an absentee ballot," she said in April. She later reversed her position after Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) signaled his support for voter ID provisions.
"No one has ever objected to having to prove who you are in order to vote," she said last week.
One pervasive rumor about the law, trumpeted by Democratic politicians and journalists, was that it prohibited giving food or water to voters waiting in line. In March, Biden said the provision was explicitly intended to suppress the vote. "This is nothing but punitive, designed to keep people from voting. You can't provide water for people about to vote. Give me a break!"
The law has no such provision and, in fact, says the opposite. It encourages poll officers to provide water to voters in line. The law prohibits electioneering—the practice of exchanging goods and services, including food and water, for votes.
Kemp said Friday that Biden and other Democrats were "weaponizing" the Justice Department by suing Georgia "to carry out their far-left agenda."
"This lawsuit is born out of the lies and misinformation the Biden administration has pushed against Georgia's Election Integrity Act from the start," he said. "Joe Biden, Stacey Abrams, and their allies tried to force an unconstitutional elections power grab through Congress—and failed."
DHS Secretary Mayorkas Uses Border Visit to Tout Amnesty for Illegal Aliens
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas used his visit to the United States-Mexico border with Vice President Kamala Harris to tout amnesty for illegal aliens.
On Friday, during a press conference in El Paso, Texas, alongside Harris, Mayorkas said he was “hopeful” that an amnesty for illegal aliens would be approved by Congress.
“I am hopeful that Congress will pass immigration reform to fix a system that everyone recognizes is broke and I am thankful for [Sen. Dick Durbin’s] years-long effort and championing this effort,” Mayorkas said.
Mayorkas also suggested that the role of DHS, under his and President Joe Biden’s direction, is “to build safe and legal pathways for people” to stay in the U.S. indefinitely — a stark contrast to former President Trump’s DHS, which sought to stem illegal immigration and drug trafficking.
The amnesty push by Mayorkas comes as Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) has said he is crafting amnesty legislation that would be sent off to Senate Democrats for negotiating.
In March, the Democrat-controlled House — with support from 30 House Republicans — passed H.R. 1603, known as the “Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2021,” and H.R. 6, known as “American Dream and Promise Act of 2021.”
Together, the two plans would give amnesty to about 2.1 million illegal aliens working on U.S. farms and another 4.4 million Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)-enrolled and eligible illegal aliens and those with Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
Already, many Senate Democrats are seeking to slip an amnesty past Congress through a little-known “reconciliation” maneuver. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is crafting a proposal that would include forcing American taxpayers to spend $150 billion on providing amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
An amnesty would come as nearly 16 million remain jobless, all of whom want full-time jobs. Another 5.3 million Americans are underemployed but likewise, want full-time employment.
An analysis released this week by the Center for Immigration Studies revealed that amnesty for illegal aliens, which would immediately flood the U.S. labor market with millions of newly legalized foreign workers for whom employers can legally hire, would have a devastating impact on the nation’s ongoing unemployment problem.
Every year, 1.2 million legal immigrants are given green cards to permanently resettle in the U.S. In addition, 1.4 million foreign nationals are given visas to take American jobs while hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens enter the U.S. annually.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Biden's record on border, CRT, and crime are bombing with voters -poll
Joe Biden, who campaigned for president as a moderate, and now governs as a far-left extremist in his fraudulently won election, has some death-knell polling numbers to concentrate his attention coming out.
According to Washington Examiner's Paul Bedard:
The Biden administration is failing big time with its inability to control illegal immigration, adding it to one of several issues that could doom Democrats if left unchecked.
In a new Harvard/Harris poll,
an overwhelming 80% said that illegal immigration is a serious issue and one that needs more attention than what President Joe Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris are giving. What’s more, 68% said that signals from Biden’s White House are encouraging illegal immigration, and 55% believe that former President Donald Trump’s border closing policies should have been left in place.
Add it to increasing voter concerns about inflation, taxes, and the critical race theory controversy, and this could be a summer of woe for Democrats. “These are not good numbers for Democrats,” said an adviser to House Republicans.
Harvard/Harris, it should be noted, is not run by conservatives. Apparently, they couldn't even push the poll into Joe's direction. All the garbage from Jen Psaki about Biden doing a good job on immigration, and the border surge being 'seasonal' is not being bought by voters. And the critical race theory is another loser with voters, as the various parent groups rise up against leftist school boards and demand the taught-hate be stopped around their kids in an unprecedented revolt.
It comes at a bad time for Biden as New York's mayoral race results slowly roll in and even the New York Times is blanching (emphasis mine):
Can progressives win broad numbers of the Black and brown voters they say their policies will benefit most?
That provocative question is one that a lot of Democrats find themselves asking after seeing the early results from New York City’s mayoral primary this past week.
In a contest that centered on crime and public safety, Eric Adams, who emerged as the leading Democrat, focused much of his message on denouncing progressive slogans and policies that he said threatened the lives of “Black and brown babies” and were being pushed by “a lot of young, white, affluent people.” A retired police captain and Brooklyn’s borough president, he rejected calls to defund the Police Department and pledged to expand its reach in the city.
Black and brown voters in Brooklyn and the Bronx flocked to his candidacy, awarding Mr. Adams with sizable leading margins in neighborhoods from Eastchester to East New York. Though the official winner may not be known for weeks because of the city’s new ranked-choice voting system, Mr. Adams holds a commanding edge in the race that will be difficult for his rivals to overcome.
That's not a vote of confidence in Joe Biden's crime policies, which are basically centered on gun control and blaming gun dealers for the hideous rash of violent crime brought on by leftists demonizing the police and Soros-funded prosecutors failing to prosecute.
The results are still out, but it's very likely that Adams will walk away with the mayoralty based on his tough, open, out-there, stance on stopping the crime from making New Yorkers' lives miserable. And since he's a Democrat, the cheat-machines were unlikely to have been operating in New York to suppress the conservative vote as they do in national elections, meaning, these voters are Democrats and this is what they are willing to vote for.
New Yorkers, who also elected Republican Rudolph Giuliani in 1993, back when New York was a crime-filled dump and Mick Jagger was out singing songs like "Shattered" about it, have always been fairly commonsensical about the need for order in the gargantuan city packed in a small place.
Even more significant, the Bronx and Brooklyn boroughs, which include part of openly socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's constituency, were the ones who put their feet down about the crime mess going on now and voted for law-and-order Adams, who has the additional benefit of being black, so nobody can call him a racist for championing law and order. He's bulletproof, and he says the right things. Better still, he's not an outsider; he knows how the city works so there will be no hanky-panky from bureaucrats running circles around him and, better still, he's old enough to remember how Giuliani effectively cleaned up the city earlier. All in all, there's a strong chance he's going to be a popular and effective mayor.
And presciently, he's sent a few darts Joe Biden's way, stating that he's the new face of the Democrat party, meaning, dinosaur Joe and his soft-on-crime socialist approach from his puppet-strings to some leftist force, is headed for the dustbin of history.
That's a lot of bad news for Biden, who's sought to swing the country as far left as is possible, in a hideous "re-set" of America and its ideals. The leftist garbage is going over like a lead balloon with voters, and though Biden and his roundheels sidekick, Kamala Harris, may still have some voter goodwill among voters, it won't take long for the policies to start sticking to them as they did in.
Bad times are ahead for the Biden agenda as polls like these -- by wide margins -- show huge voter discontent. The old fraud machine that got Joe elected might just find it mission-impossible to overcome it, particularly with Republican state legislatures tightening the screws on voter fraud. Expect Joe to get even crazier as he knows his political days with his far-left agenda are limited. Writing's on the wall for him.
.jpg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment