If Americans decide they truly want to control access to their own borders, there is a realistic way to accomplish this.
Arrested illegal aliens in Long Island, New York
(1) The Justice Department should vigorously attack the “sanctuary movement” that officially thwarts the immigration laws of the United States.
Among the 31 “sanctuary cities” of this country: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.
These cities have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances that do not allow municipal funds or resources to be used to enforce federal immigration laws, usually by not allowing police or municipal employees to inquire about one’s immigration status.
(2) The most effective way to combat this movement: Indict the highest-ranking officials of those cities who have actively violated Federal immigration laws.
In San Francisco, for example, former District Attorney Kamala Harris—who is now California’s Attorney General—created a secret program called Back on Track, which provided training for jobs that illegal aliens could not legally hold.
She also prevented Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting even those illegal aliens convicted of a felony.
(3) Indicting such officials would be comparable to the way President Andrew Jackson dealt with the threat South Carolinians once made to “nullify” any Federal laws they didn’t like.
Jackson quashed that threat by making one of his own: To lead an army into that State and purge all who dared defy the laws of the Federal Government.
(4) Even if some indicted officials escaped conviction, the results would prove worthwhile.
City officials would be forced to spend huge sums of their own money for attorneys and face months or even years of prosecution.
And this, in turn, would send a devastating warning to officials in other “sanctuary cities” that the same fate lies in store for them.
(5) CEOs whose companies–like Wal-Mart–systematically employ illegal aliens should be held directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates.
They should be indicted by the Justice Department under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, the way Mafia bosses are prosecuted for ordering their own subordinates to commit crimes.
Upon conviction, the CEO should be sentenced to a mandatory prison term of at least twenty years.
This would prove a more effective remedy for combating illegal immigration than stationing tens of thousands of soldiers on the U.S./Mexican border. CEOs forced to account for their subordinates’ actions would take drastic steps to ensure that their companies strictly complied with Federal immigration laws.
Without employers luring illegal aliens at a fraction of the money paid to American workers, the flood of such illegal job-seekers would quickly dry up.
(6) The Government should stop granting automatic citizenship to “anchor babies” born to illegal aliens in the United States.
A comparable practice would be allowing bank robbers who had eluded the FBI to keep their illegally-obtained loot.
A person who violates the bank robbery laws of the United States is legally prosecutable for bank robbery, whether he’s immediately arrested or remains uncaught for years. The same should be true for those born illegally within this country.
If they’re not here legally at the time of birth, they should not be considered citizens and should–like their parents–be subject to deportation.
(7) The United States Government–from the President on down–should scrap its apologetic tone on the right to control its national borders.
The Mexican Government doesn’t hesitate to apply strict laws to those immigrating to Mexico. And it feels no need to apologize for this.
Neither should we.
(8) Voting materials and ballots should be published in one language: English.
In Mexico, voting materials are published in one language–Spanish.
Throughout the United States, millions of Mexican illegals refuse to learn English and yet demand that voting materials and ballots be made available to them in Spanish.
(9) Those who are not legal citizens of the United States should not be allowed to vote in its elections.
In Mexico, those who are not Mexican citizens are not allowed to participate in the country’s elections.
The Mexican Government doesn’t consider itself racist for strictly enforcing its immigration laws.
The United States Government should not consider itself racist for insisting on the right to do the same.
(10) The United States should impose economic and even military sanctions against countries–such as China and Mexico–whose citizens make up the bulk of illegal aliens.
Mexico, for example, uses its American border to rid itself of those who might demand major reforms in the country’s political and economic institutions.
Such nations must learn that dumping their unwanteds on the United States now comes at an unaffordably high price. Otherwise those dumpings will continue.




9/11, ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, TEA PARTY, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER
T(OBACCO) PARTY UNVEILED: PART ONE (OF TWO)
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on September 17, 2014 at 12:07 am“Should Barack Obama Be Impeached?” shouts the headline on the Right-wing website of TeaParty.org.
“A fake birth certificate, the Benghazi attack, the IRS scandal, National Security invasions on privacy….Many are questioning Obama’s competence. Should Congress initiate impeachment proceedings?
“What do you think?”
Click here: Teaparty.org — Should Barack Obama be Impeached?
Then the site offers this in tribute to its sponsor:
“TeaParty.org, one of America’s leading websites and top online news sources is conducting a poll about an important issue.
“The results of these polls will be published online and are shared with major news networks and policymakers.
“Don’t miss this opportunity to let your voice be heard!
“Vote today!”
The viewer is then given two questions to answer.
The first is: “Should Barack Obama be impeached?”
The website offers three possible answers for the visitor to choose:
The second question is: “Whom do you believe has better solutions for the nation’s problems?”
It, too, provides three possible answers:
The website omits a number of truths–about both President Barack Obama and the Tea Party itself.
Let’s start with its first charge against Obama: “A false birth certificate.”
The election of Barack Obama pushed the Right to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
President Barack Obama
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama–in the course of a single week–dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Then there’s the second Tea Party charge: “The Benghazi attack.”
A total of four Americans died in a terrorist attack on the American diplomatic consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.
Whereas a total of 3,000 Americans died in the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001. But those occurred on the watch of a white Republican President, so naturally no treason charges were invoked by the Right.
The third accusation: “The IRS scandal.”
In 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disclosed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes.
Although Right-wingers have claimed that their political organizations were exclusively targeted by the IRS, the agency opened investigations based on such trigger-words as:
“While some of the IRS questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked,” said Ohio State University law professor Donald Tobin.
In January, 2014, the FBI announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal.
No evidence has come to light suggesting that President Obama was responsible for the IRS’s actions.
Finally, there is the Tea Party charge that Obama is guilty of “National Security Agency (NSA) invasions on privacy.”
This totally ignores that it was former President George W. Bush who, after 9/11, ordered the NSA to vastly increase its electronic-interception capabilities.
No longer would the agency be confined to spying on calls outside the United States. From now on, it would target Americans who might be linked to international terror cells.
As for the website’s claim: “Many are questioning Obama’s competence”:
While this is true–among those on the Right and Left–it misses the essential legal point: Even if true, “incompetence” is not a legitimate impeachable offense.
And no evidence has come forth to indict the President for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Share this: