Rule Of Law? Fuggedaboutit.

Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others in this post-Constitutional American Tyranny we exist in.

Nothing new in the Banana Republic that Obama and both parties have fundamentally transformed us into.

Rule of law? What rule of law?  The Oligarchy is exempt.  The “law” is just for us little people so the high and mighty can sleep secure knowing we are in our place.

“The Law” is now whatever the Ruling Class and their courts say it is – however they massage it, however they decree it to be.

Justice John Roberts rewrote the Affordable Care Act to redefine a “Penalty” to become a “Tax”

He rewrote the Affordable Care Act again to redefine the meaning of “An Exchange Established by the State” to mean “An Exchange Established by the Federal Government”.

Anthony Kennedy “Reads into” the Constitution the right to redefine marriage for 300 million Americans and pisses in the face of 6,000 years of human history and religious law and tradition.

Now, FBI Director James Comey tells us that the law which criminalizes gross negligence of classified material, which underscores the point that government officials have a high obligation to safeguard national defense secrets, now says today that they cannot prosecute Hillary Clinton because she did not INTEND to harm the United States.

It’s all about what the meaning of the word IS, is in this brave new tyranny erected over us, and the United States is making Banana Republics look morally upright and legitimate in comparison.

FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

By Andrew C. McCarthy

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed.

It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged.

It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information.

I think highly of Jim Comey personally and professionally, but this makes no sense to me.

Finally, I was especially unpersuaded by Director Comey’s claim that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence uncovered by the FBI. To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case.

Obama Begins Imposing Defacto Sharia Law In the USA

America is being colonized by our enemies at the hand of Obama and the Democrat Party who are imposing Sharia Law right under our noses.

Obama routinely criticizes Christians and the Christian faith, while at every opportunity he preaches the glories and benefits of Islam.   The Bitter Clingers he so despises should be prohibited and punished for criticizing Islam according to his own words. It is nothing new for Obama.  A year ago he used a Christian Prayer Breakfast to call for curbs on criticism of Islam.  This is a consistent trait with our first Islamic leader who pretended to be Christian in order to deceive the nation he intends to gift to the Caliphate as a slave state.

Yesterday His Heinous, wannabe Caliph Barrack has decreed at a radical Mosque that criticism of Muslims “has no place on our country”, as if by Dictatorial Decree he can simply abolish the inalienable right to free speech and religious exercise.  And while he is not yet able to simply say “so it shall be done” and make it so, Obama has instructed his regime to begin imposing one of the major tenets of Sharia Law which is to abolish any criticism of Islam and criminalize it.

Obama: Criticism of Muslim Americans “Has No Place In Our Country” 

…[Obama] lectured Americans – as always – on our own intolerance, the glories of Islam, and how if we just gaze longingly into his eyes, our souls will be set free of the baser matter surrounding them….Muslims account for only about 1 percent of the U.S. population but account for about half of terrorist attacks since 9/11. That means Muslims in the United States are about 5,000 percent more likely to commit terrorist attacks than non-Muslims.”But statistics are Islamophobic, so Obama merely ignored them. Instead, he focused on the “inexcusable political rhetoric against Muslim Americans that has no place in our country,” lamenting “the threats and harassment of Muslim Americans have surged.” No statistics, just anecdotal evidence, followed….Obama continued, “We have to be consistent in condemning hateful rhetoric and violence against everyone. And that includes against Muslims here in the United States of America.”

The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech no matter that Muslims consider any criticism of their religion as ‘hateful rhetoric’.  But that doesn’t matter to Obama, because Sharia Law trumps the Constitutional limits on government infringing on an inalienable right.

See, Obama is pushing what was introduced by his Attorney general Loretta Lynch back in December:

Loretta Lunch Vows to Prosecute Those Who Use “Anti-Muslim” Speech

The day after a horrific shooting spree by what appears to be a radicalized Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a Muslim advocacy and lobbying group that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used “anti-Muslim rhetoric” that “edges toward violence.”

…Lynch said her “greatest fear” is the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric” in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech.

In the mind of Muslims, Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood members that dominate Obama’s Cabinet, any criticism of Islam or Muslims is automatically deemed an act of violence, because that is what Sharia Law dictates.  In fact, in an Islamic State, criticism of any aspect of Islam is an automatic death sentence.  In Dhimmitude states (slave states subjected to Islam) criticism of Islam by nonbelievers is mandated to be a criminal act. And of course, this is EXACTLY what Obama and the Democrat Party are imposing by fiat upon a nation being colonized into a Dhimmi state.

DEMOCRATS MOVE TO CRIMINALIZE CRITICISM OF ISLAM

House Resolution 569 condemns “violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.”

 

And of course in keeping with Obama’s policy that if Congress does not do his bidding, he will act unilaterally on his own – he has instructed his Attorney General to implement a UN program that supplants local police forces with UN/Global police policies, of which all impose various aspects of Sharia law.  Now you know why Obama has used the Ferguson and Baltimore Riots as a pretext to put local police forces under the control of the Federal government.  Because this is all about the imposition of Dhimmitude upon a nation he hates and is in the process of destroying.

Did Obama’s ‘Strong Cities’ Initiative Put US Under Islamic Law?

Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced a new worldwide law enforcement initiative, the Strong Cities Network, to be set up in certain American cities. What this actually is is the UN plan for global police, using the Department of Justice. It’s the overriding of American law by the Obama administration in conjunction with the UN, without Congressional input.

What’s the initiative all about? Officially, it’s to prevent and combat “violent extremism in all of its forms” without linking it “with any particular religion, nationality or ethnic group.” The emphasis is on inclusiveness, collaboration, and non-discrimination. Although it doesn’t mention any specific religion, using the language of Obama-speak, its goal of “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism” actually means peacekeeping between Muslims and non-Muslims, “mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities,” according to Pamela Geller.

This is a reasonable interpretation. Instead of “building social cohesion,” the flood of Islamic refugees and immigrants are destroying social unity in Western nations; yet they’re being welcomed by governments despite public outcry. And the FBI recently sent out a bulletin to law enforcement warning of attacks against Muslims by “militia extremists,” even though there’s no proof of any imminent attacks. In DHS reports, we’ve also seen the Obama administration target conservatives such as Christians, gun-owners and pro-lifers as dangerous.

So Obama is being consistent: Islam good and wonderful – Christians are hateful bitter clingers and dangerous.  Everything must be done to make sure America is as vulnerable as he can make it, and criminalize those who dare point out the dangers of what Obama is doing and with whom he is empowering and protecting.

Couple what His Heinous said yesterday at the mosque and what his regime is imposing via all these ‘initiatives’ and policies that harass and target American Christian and Conservative groups with the following news that Obama has ordered immigration laws to be ignored and border agents to “stand down”, and clearly brethren SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES.  But we cannot say that for much longer if Obama gets away with what he is doing.

BORDER AGENTS ORDERED TO STAND DOWN, ‘MIGHT AS WELL ABOLISH IMMIGRATION LAWS’

In a shocking reversal of policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are being told to release illegal immigrants and no longer order them to appear at deportation hearings, essentially a license to stay in the United States, a key agent testified Thursday.

Obama reinstates ‘catch-and-release’ policy for illegal immigrants

The Obama administration has revived the maligned illegal immigrant “catch-and-release” policy of the Bush years, ordering Border Patrol agents not to even bother arresting and deporting many new illegal immigrants, the head of the agents’ labor union told Congress on Thursday.

Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, said Homeland Security was embarrassed by the number of illegal immigrants not showing up for their deportation hearings, but instead of cracking down on the immigrants, the department ordered agents not to arrest them in the first place — meaning they no longer need to show up in court in the first place.

Mr. Judd said the releases are part of President Obama’s “priorities” program, which says he’s only worried about illegal immigrants who came across after Jan. 1, 2014. Mr. Judd said illegal immigrants without serious criminal convictions on their record only have to claim they came before 2014 — without even needing to show proof — in order to be released without ever being arrested.

“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions,” Mr. Judd testified to the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “That fact is well known in other countries.”

All-Of-A-Sudden

Obama’s fruits showcase a deliberate pattern of High Treason and treachery.  We are given over to strong delusion, to believe lies as the nation chooses to remain blind to what is happening right in front of it.

I read an interesting entry on one of the discussion forums I peruse from time to time from a fellow with the moniker of Sierra D.  He put together a very cogent series of ‘suddenlies’ that have grown to prominence or are happening under the Obama regime we currently suffer under.

These all-of-a-suddenlies when check marked together create a very disturbing picture about what is transpiring under our very noses.

As I meditated on his observations,  there were a number of additional facts and issues that more than bolstered his point and I thought it important enough to share what he shared, and add a few other all-of-a-suddens that I recalled to illustrate the fruits of Obama in regards to our safety and security as a nation.

So thanks to Sierra D for inspiring us to think about the larger question you pose: WHY?

All Of A Sudden

Before Obama there was virtually no outlandish presence of Islam in America.

• All of a sudden, Islam is taught in schools and is required study.  Christianity and the bible are banned in schools.

• All of a sudden we must allow prayer rugs everywhere and allow for Islamic prayer in schools, airports and businesses.

• All of a sudden we must stop serving pork in prisons, public places and institutions.

• All of a sudden we are inundated with law suits by Muslims who are offended by American culture.

• All of a sudden we must allow burkas to be worn everywhere even though you have no idea who is covered up under them.

• All of a sudden Muslims are suing employers and refusing to do their jobs if they personally deem it conflicts with Sharia Law.

• All of a sudden Muslim training compounds are popping up throughout the USA.

• All of a sudden the Attorney General of the United States vows to prosecute anyone who engages in “anti-Muslim speech”.

• All of a sudden, Jihadists who engage in terrorism and openly admit they acted in the name of Islam and ISIS, are emphatically declared they are NOT Islamic by our leaders and/or their actions are determined NOT to be terrorism, but other nebulous terms like ‘workplace violence’.

• All of a sudden, White Men are declared to be the greatest terror threat to the country by our leaders, even while ISIS and Al Qaeda promise attacks inside the USA.

• All of a sudden, it becomes Policy that Secular Middle East dictators that were benign or friendly to the West, must be replaced by Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood.

• All of a sudden our troops are withdrawn from Iraq and the middle east, giving rise to ISIS.

• All of a sudden, America has reduced it’s nuclear stockpiles to 1950 levels, as Obama’s stated goal of a nuke-free America by the time he leaves office continues uninterrupted.

• All of a sudden, a deal with Iran must be made at any cost, with a pathway to nuclear weapons and HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of dollars handed over to fund their programs.

• All of a sudden America APOLOGIZES to Muslim states and sponsors of terror worldwide for acts of aggression, war and sabotage THEY perpetrate against our soldiers.

• All of a sudden, the American Navy is diminished to 1917 pre-World War I levels of only 300 ships. The Army is at pre-1940 levels. The Air Force scraps 500 planes and planned to retire the use of the A-10 Thunderbolt close air support fighter.  A further draw down of another 40,000 military personnel is in progress.

• All of a sudden half of our aircraft carriers are recalled for maintenance by Obama rendering the Atlantic unguarded, NONE are in the Middle East.

• All of a sudden Obama has to empty Guantanamo Bay of captured Jihadists and let them loose in Jihad-friendly Islamic states.  He demands to close the facility.

• All of a sudden America will negotiate with terrorists and trade FIVE Taliban commanders for a deserter and Jihad sympathizer.

• All of a sudden there is no money for American poor, disabled veterans, jobless Americans, hungry Americans, or displaced Americans but there is endless money for Obama’s “Syrian refugee” resettlement programs.

• All of a sudden Obama fills the Federal Government with Muslims in key positions.

• All of sudden there is an ammunition shortage in the USA.

• All of a sudden, the most important thing for Obama to do after a mass shooting by two Jihadists, is disarm American Citizens.

Given all of the above, ask yourself this question; why is it suddenly so important for Obama to disarm Americans?  Especially in the aftermath of the San Bernardino Jihad attack?

My answer: Because a disarmed country is ripe for takeover by the Muslim Army that Obama is importing into the United States.

Remember this?

 

Perhaps the ‘civilians’ he was referencing in his mind, are the millions he has imported into this country?  Sharia Law requires  Muslims ‘police themselves’ and enact laws that punish anyone who ‘slanders Islam’.  Recall that AG Loretta Lynch has stated to make it a FEDERAL CRIME and prosecute anyone who engages in anti-Muslim speech.  That is the imposition of defacto Sharia Law, no matter how they attempt to spin it.

Obama can’t do these things legally, so he issues decrees he deems ‘legal’ and empowers his Alphabet agencies to carry out his orders.   Diminishing guns in the hands of American citizens is one way America can be subjugated to Islam.

By his fruits you will know him. Obama’s actions speak far beyond his words.

Obama won’t even say the words “Islamic Terrorist”

Does anyone bother to ask WHY?

If you have, and you know the answer – WHY do we turn a blind eye to the fact that we have an Islamist sympathizer and traitor as leader?

Ted Cruz Proves Despicable Mitch McConnell Is Another Harry Reid Liar

Cruz exposes comments on the Senate floor that McConnell made to Republican senators in a private lunch, showing that McConnell lied to his entire conference.

That McConnell lies is not news.  He is the LEADER of the Ruling Class Establishment GOP; the arch LIAR of the betray the Constitution party by surrendering their power to Obama.  McConnell has lied to Americans while passing bills drafted in secret and shutting down any possible opposition to their treason.

I’m reposting this news because the entire mainstream media propaganda apparatus (Including Fox News) has refused to cover this story.

SENATE FLOOR: TED CRUZ EXPLODES ON MITCH MCCONNELL, SAYS HE LIED TO ENTIRE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, delivered a brutal speech bashing his own party’s leadership’s failures on the Senate floor on Friday morning after Majority Leader

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) moved forward with a plot to reauthorize the Export Import Bank.

In the speech, Cruz says—calling him out personally—McConnell lied to the entire Republican conference. Cruz’s speech stemmed from how McConnell—despite telling the entire GOP conference there was no such secret deal with the Democrats during the Obamatrade process to later bring up Ex-Im reauthorization—actually did cut a deal with Democrats, specifically

“Today is a sad day for this institution,” Cruz said on the floor.

The Senate operates based on trust. Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, these 100 Senators have to be able to trust that when a Senator sys something, he or she will do it. Even if we disagree on substance, that we don’t lie to each other. What we just witnessed this morning is profoundly disappointing.

Cruz then proceeded to expose comments McConnell made to Republican senators in a private lunch, showing that McConnell lied to his entire conference. The comments Cruz talks about were around the time of the first Obamatrade votes in the Senate, when McConnell told Republicans—something that has since been proven to be untrue—that there was no deal with Democrats to vote on Ex-Im later in exchange for the necessary votes to pass Obamatrade.

Cruz voted for Obamatrade’s Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) the first go-around in the Senate based on McConnell’s word—and he famously turned against the fast-track trade authority later.

“I want to describe the context of two preceding discussions. A number of weeks ago when this Senate was considering Trade Promotion Authority, a group of Senators gathered on this floor and blocked TPA for many minutes because they were pressing for the Export-Import Bank,” Cruz said.

They huddled on this floor and negotiated a deal in front of C-SPAN, in front of the world. Then when they had their deal, TPA had the votes to pass. Shortly thereafter, we had a Senate Republican lunch where I stood up and I asked the Majority Leader very directly what was the deal that was just on TPA and was there a deal for the Export-Import Bank. It was a direct question. I asked the Majority Leader in front of all the Republican senators. The Majority Leader was visibly angry with me that I would ask such a question, and the Majority Leader looked at me and said there is no deal.

Cruz noted that McConnell made the promise that “there is no deal” three times in public and then again in a private discussion with him and  Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)

 “There is no deal. Like St. Peter, he repeated it three times,” Cruz said.

He said the only thing I told the proponents of the Export-Import Bank is like any other Senator in this body, they could offer any amendment they liked on any amendable vehicle, but I gave them nothing. There is no deal. He was emphatic. And he was repeated. Following that Republican discussion, Sen. Mike Lee and I approached the Majority Leader afterwards in which he emphasized again there is no deal, I will do nothing, I oppose the Export-Import Bank. All I said is they can offer an amendment like any Senator can to any bill. Madam President, I went back to my office and I sat and had a long discussion with my staff.

In those discussions, Cruz said his staff told him that McConnell was lying to him. But he couldn’t believe right off the bat that the Senate GOP majority leader would lie like that to his face or to the faces of all other GOP senators.

“My staff told that afternoon he’s lying to you,” Cruz said.

That’s what my staff said. We have been around the Senate a long time. He is not telling you the truth. And what I told my staff that afternoon, I said well, I don’t know if that’s the case or not, but I don’t see how when the Majority Leader looks me in the eyes and makes an explicit promise — and by the way, looks in the eyes of every other Republican Senator and says that to every other Republican Senator, I don’t see how I cannot take him at his word when he makes an explicit promise. As a result, I cast my vote in May in support of TPA because I support free trade and I felt I had no choice but to assume that when the Majority Leader spoke to 54 Republican Senators and made an explicit promise that he wasn’t lying to us. Well, as TPA moved on, as it went to the House, it became abundantly clear, there was a deal. There was a deal in the House for the Export-Import Bank. And so the second time TPA came up, I voted ‘no’ because of that corrupt deal.

From there, Cruz proceeded to further berate McConnell on more than just the Ex-Im Bank secret deal.

“Let me tell you a second element of the background context,” Cruz said.

A number of weeks ago when we were debating the Corker-Cardin bill, the Iran Review Act, there were a number of amendments that senators had filed. I filed an amendment that will actually put teeth in the Iran Review Act by requiring affirmative congressional approval before sanctions on Iran could be lifted. Other senators filed very good amendments. 

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) filed an amendment calling for Iran to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish State before sanctions could be lifted. Our friends on the Democratic side of the aisle did not want to vote on that amendment. And, in response, the Majority Leader cut off all amendments. Madam President, I sat in the Majority Leader’s office, and I urged the Majority Leader invoke cloture on Sen. Rubio’s amendment calling on Iran to recognize Israel’s right to exist and setting that as a precondition of any lifting of sanctions. I argued vociferously with the Majority Leader that if the Democrats were so opposed to voting on that amendment, that was all the more reason because it was important substantively, and the Majority Leader said no, he would not do so, that invoking cloture on an amendment was an extraordinary step, and he wouldn’t do so. So he cut off off every amendment. He filled the tree and terrace.

Cruz then noted the hypocrisy where now Senate Minority Leader

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) called out McConnell for engaging in the same tactic he engaged so many times to close down Senate debate.

“It was striking a minute ago seeing the Democratic Leader Harry Reid calling out the Majority Leader for filling the tree, for engaging in the same procedural abuse that railroaded—that Harry Reid did over and over and over again in this body,” Cruz said.

Now the Republican Leader is behaving like the senior senator from Nevada. What we just saw was not, Madam President, what the Majority Leader told you and me and every other Republican senator. What we just saw was not that the proponents of the Ex-Im Bank, like anyone else, could stand up and offer any amendment they’d like on any issue. What the Majority Leader just did is, number one, he called up that amendment. He called it up himself. Why does that matter? Because as Majority Leader he has priority of recognition. When he calls up an amendment, no one can stop him. He didn’t just call it up. He filled the tree, just like Harry Reid, he filled the tree, blocking everyone else’s amendments. By the way, I agree with Senator Reid when he said the Obamacare amendment is a cynical amendment. Of course it is. It is empty showmanship.

Cruz then hammered GOP leadership for putting forward nothing more than a show vote—a meaningless vote—on repealing Obamacare.

“We’ll have a vote on repealing Obamacare,” Cruz said.

The Republicans will all vote “Yes.” The Democrats will all vote “no.” It will be at a 60-vote threshold. It will fail. It will be an exercise in meaningless political theater. Mind you when we actually had a fight to stop Obamacare and defund it, the Majority Leader was opposed. But an empty showboat, that is a good way to distract from what’s going on. There is a profound disappointment among the American people because we keep winning elections and then we keep getting leaders who don’t do anything they promised. The American people were told if only we have a Republican Majority, things will be different. Well, in 2010, the American people showed up in enormous numbers and we got a Republican majority in the House. And very little changed. Then the American people were told, you know, the problem is the Senate. If only we get a Republican majority in the Senate and retire Harry Reid as Majority Leader, then things will be different. Well, in 2014, the American people rose up in enormous numbers, voted to do exactly that. We’ve had a Republican majority in both Houses of Congress now for about six months. What was that majority done?

Cruz then proceeded to detail how the 2010 and 2014 elections handing the GOP majorities in the House then Senate didn’t matter one bit at all.

“First thing we did, in December, is we came back and passed a $1 trillion Cromnibus plan filled with pork and corporate welfare,” Cruz said.

That was the very first thing we did. Then this Republican majority voted to fund Obamacare, voted to fund President Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty. And then leadership rammed through the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as Attorney General. Madam President, which of those decisions would be one iota different if Harry Reid were still Majority Leader? Not a one. Not a one. This Senate operates exactly the same. The same priorities. And let me tell you why. It’s not that this majority doesn’t get things done. It does get things done. But it listens to one and only one voice. That is the voice of the Washington cartel, of the lobbyists on K Street, of the big money and big corporations. You know, if you go to the American people and ask is reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank a priority for you, the standard response for most of them would be ‘the what?’ They don’t even know what this is. Let me tell you what this is. It is an egregious example of corporate welfare. It is the American taxpayers being on the dime for hundreds of billions of dollars in loan guarantees given out to a handful of giant corporations. It is a classic example of cronyism and corporate welfare. And by the way, among others you know one person who had the clarity of thought on that?

Cruz then noted how when Obama was in the Senate, he was opposed to the Ex-Im Bank—and then proceeded to further detail how the Ex-Im Bank is crony capitalism—before he turned his fire on McConnell again.

“Madam President, it saddens me to say this,” Cruz said.

I sat in my office, I told my staff the Majority Leader looked me in the eye and looked 54 Republicans in the eye. I cannot believe he would tell a flat-out lie, and I voted based on those assurances that he made to each and every one of us. What we just saw today was an absolute demonstration that not only what he told every Republican Senator, but what he told the press over and over and over again was a simple lie. This institution should not operate at the beck and call of lobbyists in Washington. This institution, the Majority and Minority Leader arm in arm again, should not team up against the American taxpayers. It’s why our children are going bankrupt. Now we’re facing an enormous threat with this Iran deal, a nuclear Iran poses the greatest national security threat tot his country.”

Cruz laid out next how McConnell wouldn’t take the steps he took to force the crony capitalist Ex-Im Bank through the Senate to protect the nation of Israel from President Obama’s deal with Iran.

And yet the Majority Leader refused to do what he just did for the Export Import Bank on Iran, refused to invoke cloture,” Cruz said. “That was an extraordinary step. Madam President, if he was telling us the truth when he said there was no deal, why would he do what he just did? Well, we now know that when the Majority Leader looks us in the eyes and makes an explicit commitment that he is willing to say things that he knows are false. That has consequences for how this body operates. If you or I cannot trust what the Majority Leader tells us, that will have consequences on other legislation as well on how this institution operates.

Cruz said the U.S. Senate, in addition to actually stopping the Iran deal, should be focused on matters like defunding Planned Parenthood.

“There are a host of amendments that the American people are focused on, things like defunding Planned Parenthood after the gruesome video,” Cruz said.

The Majority Leader doesn’t want to vote on that. That’s actually something the American people are focused on. He brought up his Obamacare amendment as a smokescreen because it’s intended to fail. But you know what he didn’t bring up is my amendment to end the congressional exemption from Obamacare, the corrupt deal that Harry Reid made with Obama. We’ve got to live under the same rules as everybody else. The Majority Leader doesn’t want to vote on that because he doesn’t want to end the cronyism for members of Congress any more than end the cronyism for giant corporations who enrich themselves at the expense of the American people. There are a host of priorities that the voters who elected you and me. Madam President, I would ask you to think about when you were running for the Senate not too long ago. Do you recall any of your constituents ever saying we want the Export-Import bank? No. They want other things. They have other priorities, but those are not the priorities of Republican leadership. Sadly today we have government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists, and for the lobbyists. That is not how the United States Senate is supposed to operate. A far more important amendment than bringing back this corporate welfare and cronyism is my amendment that provides that sanctions on Iran cannot be lifted unless and until Iran does two things. Number one, it recognizes Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. And number two, it releases the four American hostages languishing in Iranian prisons. That is a far more important issue than enriching some more lobbyists on K Street and getting a few more campaign contributions. That’s what we should be voting on.

McConnell’s office did not respond to a request for comment in response to Cruz’s speech.

Commandants Of The New Reich Demand Probe Of Group Exposing Planned Parenthood

Democrat ghouls protecting the death camps and sale of human infant parts demand Obama’s InJustice Department investigate those who dared shine the light of truth on the horrors at Planned Parenthood

All during the 1920’s and very early 30’s The Munich Post newspaper had been engaged in warning the people of Germany of the intents of a madman who would become their dictator.  They accurately warned about the extermination plans that Adolf Hitler had been dreaming up for the Jews and the conquest of Europe he envisioned over a decade before they took place. Not many average Germans listened or paid much attention to what was being warned about, chalking up the warnings to “politics” between rival ideologies.  But the warnings were prophetic – and unheeded.

Hitler had referred to the paper as ‘The poison kitchen’ and he long-sought to silence it during his rise to power.  That moment would have to wait until Hitler swindled the Chancellorship from Von Hindenburg in 1933 – whereupon Hitler turned his SA Brownshirts loose to raze the paper to ruins and imprison and/or kill all the journalists who dared to expose him and his party of death for what it would unleash upon the world.

It is the hallmark of genocidal and despotic regimes and the administrators of their ghoulish institutions to go after and attack anyone daring to shine a light of truth about the pogroms and evil being perpetrated under the noses of an ignorant populace.  Often dictatorial regimes will criminalize and turn their personal Praetorians upon those that attempt to show the world how truly evil and insidious their plots and plans are.

That hallmark can be witnessed right now in America.

Attempting to protect their Sacrament of Death to Planned Parenthood’s death camps and organ harvesting programs, the Democrat SS are urging the SA Obama Justice Department to investigate the Center For Medical Progress for daring to film and expose the doctors and Administrators of Planned Parenthood negotiating price over lunch and drinks for harvested infant parts.

See, in the view of all National Socialists on the Left in America – exposing the truth of what they are doing is a criminal offense and they demand to sic the dogs of the courts and activist Judges upon anyone and everyone who dares to oppose them.

So it is a natural assumption that in the wake of the stomach-churning and nauseating video expose of Planned Parenthood Executives and Doctors haggling over the price of infant body parts to an undercover reporter – that they would seek to limit the damage by attacking the group responsible for exposing them.   The hallmark is in watching them unleash their government upon those daring to reveal the demonic nature and horrors going on within a taxpayer-funded organization.  An organization that His Heinous Obama himself champions and invokes the Almighty to bless.

Given the absolutely sickening and gruesome details of infant genocide and profit motives in selling the parts for a “Lamborghini” I don’t find that the Nazi death camps were engaged in similar across-the-board profit-making schemes to any bidder when they gassed and incinerated their victims.  Yet here in the Land of the Free (to choose to kill your baby) – selling the baby parts adds additional incentive to the industry managers that is funded and supported by the government at your expense.

Dare to expose the Devil, and his party faithful will come to the aid of evil and turn the light you dare to shine into criminality.  We have certainly made evil good, and call good the evil in Obama’s Amerika.

House Dems Cry For Probe Into Group Over Planned Parenthood Videos

A group of House Democrats are now asking for an investigation into the group behind a set of videos that show Planned Parenthood executives blithely discussing the sale of body parts from abortions.

Eleven Republican senators have already sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch requesting an investigation into whether Planned Parenthood has violated a federal law that bans the sale of fetal tissue.

Now several Democrats have written Lynch and California Attorney General Kamala Harris, demanding an investigation not of Planned Parenthood’s practices, but a probe of the whether the group that made the videos violated any laws by making and publishing the videos without Planned Parenthood’s consent.

Democratic Reps. Jan Schakowsky, Jerrold Nadler, Yvette Clarke and Zoe Lofgren blasted the group that made the videos, the Center for Medical Progress — a stark contrast from the many Republicans who have come out against funding for Planned Parenthood in the wake of the videos’ release.

“This is a new low, even for anti-abortion activists who will stop at nothing in their effort to undermine a woman’s right to choose,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky said in a statement. “I believe the Center for Medical Progress may have broken the law in developing and executing this unbelievably elaborate and troubling scheme.”

“Like the millions of women who access their broad-range of health services every day, we trust Planned Parenthood,” Rep. Jerry Nadler said in a statement. “I urge the Department of Justice and the state of California to investigate the Center for Medical Progress and determine if their activities in planning and making these videos violated state and federal laws.”

The videos, which have cued outrage from conservatives and pro-life groups, show top Planned Parenthood executives discussing the harvesting and trafficking of body parts from aborted babies. The first video depicted Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Senior Director of Medical Services Dr. Deborah Nucatola discussing the process of “crushing” certain body parts while preserving others for harvesting, while eating a salad.

A follow-up video released this week shows Mary Gatter, the president of Planned Parenthood’s Medical Directors’ Council, discussing whether a surgeon would be willing to perform abortions differently in order to keep tissue and organs intact.

David Daleiden, the executive director of the Center for Medical Progress, called the requests an effort to “persecute” the group for their efforts.

“Planned Parenthood is trying to use the power of their political cronies to shut down free speech, to silence the freedom of the press, to persecute me, and to save their half-a-billion in taxpayer money and avoid accountability to the law and the American people,” Daleiden said in a statement Wednesday.

“They will attack me and my organization all day long, but that does not change the facts about what our investigation has uncovered and what the American people now know — that Planned Parenthood is engaged in an enterprise-wide operation that traffics and sells baby body parts,” the statement continued.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid admitted that the videos “raise some questions,” but called them “politically motivated,” telling The Daily Caller that “nothing I’ve seen indicates Planned Parenthood violated federal law.”

The Department of Justice may ultimately open an investigation on the issue.

“I’m aware of those matters generally from the media, and form some inquiries that have been made to the Department of Justice, and again at this point we’re going to review all the information and determine what steps, if any, to take at the appropriate time,” Lynch said at a press conference Wednesday, according to The Hill.

GOP Outrage Over Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal? It’s All Kabuki Theater

Obama to use UN to impose Nuke Deal.   Senate was told about John Kerry’s approval of Obama’s plans to circumvent Congress on Iranian nukes at his Confirmation hearings back in 2013.  They rubber-stamped Kerry’s nomination anyway.

For all the public outrage over His Heinous Barack Obama’s Dictatorial end-run around Congress and ignoring the Constitutional requirement for treaties to be ratified in the Senate, the truth is that the very same people now speaking out against Obama’s unilateral nuke deal agreement with Tehran – VOTED TO CONFIRM the very man who told them he approved of Obama using that tactic back in 2013.

It’s not like the Senate and the GOP did not know that Obama was planning to negotiate a deal with Iran without them. They knew!   John Effing Kerry TOLD them during his confirmation hearing in 2013 that HE SUPPORTED OBAMA ENACTING SUCH A DEAL BY HIMSELF and using methods outside of the ‘ideological restraint’ of Congress!!!!  Here’s excerpts from the transcript of his confirmation hearing:

SENATOR JAMES RISCH (R-ID)

There are a lot of us that are becoming increasingly concerned about all this talk regarding executive agreements as opposed to treaties that are negotiated by the executive branch as contemplated by the Founding Fathers and ratified, if appropriate, by this committee and eventually by the full Senate. Can you give us your view on matters regarding executive agreements? How do you feel about that and the bypassing of the committee?

SEN. KERRY: Well, it would depend — I would say to you, Senator, that it would depend on what the subject matter is and what the sort of scope is and whether or not it falls under a traditional treaty purview or it falls under executive agreement purview.

I can’t — I don’t want to be commenting in some prophylactic way one side or the other without the specific situation in front of me. But I’m confident the president is committed to upholding the Constitution. He’s — I don’t think he’s — you know, and I think — and I’ll say this to all of you.

There’s no better way to guarantee that whatever concerns you have about the president’s desire to move on an executive agreement would be greatly, you know, nullified or mollified if we could find a way to cooperate on a treaty or on the broader issues that face the nation. But you know, I think — I think there’s a lot of frustration out there that some of the automatic ideological restraint here that prevents the majority from being able to express their voice has restrained people and pushed people in a way where they’ve got to consider some other ways of getting things done.

SEN. RISCH: Well, and that’s exactly what concerns us, Senator Kerry, is the fact that it’s OK to do this through the regular order if it gets done, but if it’s not going to get done, then it’s — the ends justify the means; it’s OK to end-run around the Constitution.

So even when Kerry confirmed to these Senators that he was going to support an end-run around the Constitution in regards to Obama enacting treaties outside of Congress – these same Senators voted to confirm him as Secretary of State ANYWAY.

It’s all kabuki theater.

They say they oppose ObamaCare – the GOP FUNDS IT.  They say they oppose Obama’s Executive Amnesty and automatic citizenship for illegals – THE GOP FULLY FUNDS IT.  They say they oppose Obama’s usurpation of power and using the ATF, the FCC, FEC and other alphabets to impose “Law” by decree – they not only FULLY FUND IT – they refuse to use the tools the Constitution provides them to defund and oppose what Obama is implementing.

Kabuki.

These same GOP leaders will no doubt feign outrage over upcoming dictatorial decrees and usurpations by Obama and his Executive branch – yet they will no doubt confirm radical Loretta Lynch to replace Eric Holder at the Justice Department, even after she told them she approves of Obama making law outside the Constitution and handing rights to illegal aliens in preference over American citizens.

The Constitution is irrelevant to this regime now, and the GOP refuses to uphold it – or their oaths to support and defend it.

Obama will cut out Congress and take his Iran ‘deal’ to give the Mullah’s nukes to the UN Security Council, and this letter will be about the only effort they employ to assuage an outraged and bewildered American people.

 

Senate Was Warned About Obama’s End Run on Iran

Congress is struggling to thwart President Obama’s attempt to strike a nuclear deal with Iran on his own, in violation of the Constitution. Lawmakers are taking unprecedented measures — the invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Corker-Menendez bill and even a letter to Tehran to stop it. None of this would be necessary if the U.S. Senate had done its job instead of rubber-stamping John Kerry’s nomination as secretary of state.

In January 2013, Kerry plainly warned Senate Foreign Relations Committee members — the same people now leading the charge against the Iran deal — that he intended to support Obama’s end run around the Constitution because “they’ve got to consider some other ways of getting things done.” Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and John McCain, R-Ariz., all heard Kerry’s statement first-hand, ignored it and voted for him, offering effusive praise for their former Senate buddy. Now they are getting what they should have seen coming.

Too bad the U.S. Senate abdicated its responsibility. It has final say on presidential appointments, but our senators would rather go along and get along than make sure nominees will follow the Constitution.

Have the senators learned their lesson? This month, the U.S. Senate is expected to vote on the nomination of Loretta Lynch as the next attorney general — the nation’s top law enforcement official. During a Judiciary Committee hearing in January, Lynch indicated she thought Obama’s executive actions to rewrite immigration laws were “reasonable.” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz calls her views “disqualifying” and says the Senate has a choice: defend the rule of law or “confirm an attorney general who has candidly admitted she will impose no limits on the president whatsoever.” Ensuring that top government officials are committed to the U.S. Constitution, it’s a no-brainer.

That’s what Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, tried to do at Kerry’s confirmation hearing. The U.S. Constitution requires that treaties be ratified by a two-thirds vote of the Senate, something Obama foresees he cannot get. Obama calls the possible deal with Iran an “agreement.” Presidents have always made “agreements” without Senate approval, but none of the importance and duration of the Iran deal. “To allege that this doesn’t have all of the marks of a treaty is an insult to everybody’s intelligence,” says McCain now. But at the hearing, McCain was mum about the point.

Only Risch pressed Kerry, insisting that calling it an agreement, not a treaty, amounted to an “end run around the Constitution” that reflected a dangerous “ends justify the means” mentality. With masterful obfuscation, Kerry said maybe things could get done in “the regular order” — meaning constitutionally — but he wouldn’t guarantee it. “It would depend.”

Fast-forward to February 24, 2015, when Kerry returned to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for a budget hearing. When Menendez and Corker pressed him for information about the Iran negotiations, he stonewalled. “I’m not going to go into the details of where we are and what we’re doing.”

Worse, Kerry said there should be no “formal approval process” by Congress. “This is the president’s prerogative.” Kerry threw the senators a few crumbs, conceding that though the president can suspend sanctions against Iran, permanently removing them would require a vote in Congress.

A vote, but not the two-thirds majority of the Senate that the Constitution requires for treaty approval. That is why the Senate’s effort at curbing the president — the Corker-Menendez bill — is a shameful retreat. The bill says Obama must submit a final Iran arms deal to Congress within 60 days for hearings and a vote, and bars the president from suspending sanctions against Iran in the meantime. This puts the burden on Congress to cobble together a veto-proof majority, instead of the president having to win over two-thirds of senators. That’s not what the founders intended.

The Senate failed to do its job during Kerry’s confirmation hearings, and now the nation faces the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. Senators treat these hearings as media opportunities and quibble about getting their 10 minutes on camera instead of asking tough questions. In fact, they request that answers be kept short so as not to infringe on their own time. It’s hardly the deliberative body the framers envisioned to provide “advice and consent” on critical issues.

Would the White House really try to get around the Constitution?

bizarre as it may seem — is that the administration would go to the United Nations Security Council to pass the Iran agreement and thereby boost its status as enforceable international law.

…the State Department refused to rule out the end run around the Senate and the Constitution. (“State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki said on Tuesday: ‘I’m just not going to get ahead of how this would be implemented at this point in time.’”)

There are multiple, serious problems with such an approach. For one thing, Secretary of State John Kerry confirmed in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that it was a non-binding deal that the next president could demolish with “a stroke of the pen.” Was he misleading the Senate, or is he willing to rule out the end run around the Senate?

Second, the entire legal theory is dubious at best. To believe it could work is to assert the president can unilaterally supersede the dictates of the Constitution.