Barack Obama unilateral nullifying of laws highly illegal; Executive further usurping power from Congress and Judiciary

[freebuddy]

Here's someone Mr. A and the other Obama haters can get behind:

President Louie Gohmert would save Christmas from Mexicans, nutty activist froths

TRAVIS GETTYS

05 DEC 2014 AT 15:16 ET

Nativist activist William Gheen sketched out a strategy to install Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) as Speaker of the House and then president in a scenario that sounds like House of Cards meets Kirk Cameron.

Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration, appeared Thursday on the evangelical VCY America radio network program Crosstalk, where he explained his theory that big tycoons and kings and princes and emperors were trying to destroy Christmas and other holidays through immigration.

Theyve found a way to take over our corporations, to take over our media, (and) to take over our country by facilitating a very costly and deadly illegal alien invasion, Gheen said, in remarks reported by Right Wing Watch.

Immigrants and non-Christians posed a mortal danger to the U.S. because they tended to vote Democratic, Gheen said.

The growing anti-Christ spirit and anti-Christ movement in this country that is becoming stronger and more emboldened as the traditional conservative center-right Americans are displaced in our jobs and our politics and elections, he warned.

President Barack Obama is trying to flood the U.S. with immigrants to outnumber Republican voters.

Once this happens, the Socialist States of America are fait accompli, and anybody that represents the sort of moderate ground or center-right past Americans that celebrated Christmas and Thanksgiving and things like that, Fourth-of-July-type Americans, will never be in charge of our own country, Gheen said.

The anti-immigrant activist said his group is working to remove Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-KY) and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) from their leadership positions.

Then, Gheen explained, Republican lawmakers would elect Gohmert or Rep. Steve King (R-IA) as House Speaker setting up the final phase of his plan.

Under his scenario, Congress would vote to impeach and remove both Obama and Vice President Joe Biden which would put Gohmert next in line for the White House.

The Speaker of the House can take over the executive branch functions, which would rein in the persecution of conservative Americans by the Internal Revenue Service, the neglect of their jobs and the persecution of Americans by the Department of Homeland Security all of these Constitutional and republic abuses can be reined in by the Speaker of the House until the next election can restore the executive, Gheen said.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/president-louie-gohmert-would-save-christmas-from-mexicans-nutty-activist-froths/

[freebuddy]

And your point is???

Gee, ya think the Republicans might be having some internal problems? Funny that nobody brings up the part of the article Mr. A quotes from The Washington Post that blames the House Republicans for sitting around and not doing anything about immigration, and yet now this is supposed to be some big threat to the USA? What a fucking joke!

[Kragar]

Gee, ya think the Republicans might be having some internal problems? Funny that nobody brings up the part of the article Mr. A quotes from The Washington Post that blames the House Republicans for sitting around and not doing anything about immigration, and yet now this is supposed to be some big threat to the USA? What a ???? joke!

Gee, you think that's a surprise that there are internal issues within the GOP? When you have out-going moderate-to-left Republicans supporting Democrats instead of the conservative Republican candidate that beat them in the primary, that's a sign of internal strife. When you have the new Senate Majority Leader and the RNC putting down the conservative movement within the party, that's another sign. No news there.

Why is it always important to you that someone does something about an article Ambien quotes?

House Representatives are supposed to represent the people in their districts. Do you understand the Balance of Powers at all? Obama has his vision for immigration reform. The Senate bill you refer to, created by a Dem-majority, is likely pretty damn close to what Obama wants. The leader of the branch that the Republicans control did not deem the bill vote-worthy. This is part of the job. Take a look some time and see how many House-passed bills Harry Reid did not put up for a vote in the Senate. It happens, it happened before Obama, and it will happen after Obama.

The three houses are supposed to work together and negotiate. The whole point of this article is to show that Obama is not a negotiator. He is a whiny spoiled brat who has to have his way, and if he can't force Congress to do what he wants, he will go over their heads. Illegally.

Actually, everyone wants immigration reform. The argument is really over what immigration reform means.

[Mr. Ambien]

Gee, you think that's a surprise that there are internal issues within the GOP? When you have out-going moderate-to-left Republicans supporting Democrats instead of the conservative Republican candidate that beat them in the primary, that's a sign of internal strife. When you have the new Senate Majority Leader and the RNC putting down the conservative movement within the party, that's another sign. No news there.

Why is it always important to you that someone does something about an article Ambien quotes?

House Representatives are supposed to represent the people in their districts. Do you understand the Balance of Powers at all? Obama has his vision for immigration reform. The Senate bill you refer to, created by a Dem-majority, is likely pretty damn close to what Obama wants. The leader of the branch that the Republicans control did not deem the bill vote-worthy. This is part of the job. Take a look some time and see how many House-passed bills Harry Reid did not put up for a vote in the Senate. It happens, it happened before Obama, and it will happen after Obama.

The three houses are supposed to work together and negotiate. The whole point of this article is to show that Obama is not a negotiator. He is a whiny spoiled brat who has to have his way, and if he can't force Congress to do what he wants, he will go over their heads. Illegally.

Actually, everyone wants immigration reform. The argument is really over what immigration reform means.

[Jaimito]

JEFF SESSIONS: OBAMA WANTS EXEC AMNESTY IMPLEMENTED BEFORE AMERICANS DISCOVER 'GRAVE' CONSEQUENCES

On Thursday, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) accused President Barack Obama of trying to implement his executive amnesty that "stains our legal system and our country" before the American people figure out that the consequences are "graver than a lot of people think" right now.

He urged Congress to use its power of the purse to stop Obama from unilaterally wiping out the nation's immigration laws.

"It's already starting," Sessions said on the Senate floor of the implementation Obama's executive amnesty, while referring to reports that the Obama administration is already hiring thousands of agents who will be responsible for issuing temporary work permits and federal identification cards and Social Security numbers to illegal immigrants.

Sessions accused Obama of trying to "impose his immigration views before the Congress can contain it or restrain it" and "before the American people fully understand what's happening, and to make it so it can't be stopped." He said Obama has issued executive orders that "violate the laws of Congress," because Obama wants to" implement laws he wishes Congress had passed, but Congress has refused to pass."

He noted that the American people stopped the amnesty bills Congress tried to pass in 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014 because they want an immigration system that does not reward lawlessness and one that serves their interests instead of special interests. Sessions noted that perhaps no other issue "defines the gap between the elites in this country and middle Americans who go to work every day, who support our country, pay our taxes, and fight our wars."

Obama's allies in the bipartisan political class have spent nearly $1.5 billion to get sweeping amnesty legislation over the years, and Sessions noted they "haven't given up" on enacting massive amnesty.

"Despite the election, despite the wishes of the American people, they want their policies, and they're going to ram it through this Congress if they possibly can, no matter what we think, no matter what the people think," Sessions said. "That is a threat to representative democracy. It is a threat to the laws of this country. And the Congress needs to say no."

Congress, Sessions reminded his colleagues, is not "hopeless, helpless," and "ineffectual" on Obama's executive amnesty, because Congress has the power of the purse. Sessions emphasized that the executive branch "cannot spend one dime that has not been approved by the United States Congress." He cited former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said that Obama's executive amnesty is a "step toward kingship or dictatorship," and Obama "must be stopped now."

"Our entire constitutional structure is at stake," Gingrich said in Tweets that Sessions mentioned. "This new Obama power grab is the greatest threat to freedom since King George third."

Sessions said even lawmakers who agree with giving amnesty to all of the country's illegal immigrants cannot support Obama's executive action that eviscerates the separation of powers in order to unilaterally "wipe out duly passed laws to create an entirely new system of immigration that Congress refused to establish."

"So Congress has a responsibility and a duty here," Sessions continued. "Congress should fund no program, should allow no presidential expenditure that is spent on programs it deems are unworthy. And it absolutely has a responsibility to ensure that this president spends no money to execute policies that are in violation of existing law."

Though Obama "may well be stopped by lawsuits in years to come," Sessions said that "Congress has the power to stop it now." Sessions noted that federal officials are already rubber-stamping immigration applications and illegal immigrants will get temporary amnesty and work permits without meeting with officials face-to-face, which will make it even tougher to prevent fraud.

Sessions said lawmakers are supposed to "serve the interest of working Americans" and asked, "are we serving their interests or are we listening to special interests, political groups and activist groups, politicians who think they gain political advantage, and certain businesses who want more cheaper labor?"

"Don't we represent the vast majority of the people?" he asked. "Isn't there a national interest, an interest of the American people? Somebody needs to defend that interest."

Sessions also mentioned that none of the nine new Senators elected to the body support Obama's executive amnesty, and perhaps that is why Obama and his allies are trying to move their "lawless agenda forward" during the lame-duck Congress "out of fear it might not be so popularly received next year."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/12/04/Jeff-Sessions-Obama-Wants-Exec-Amnesty-Implemented-Before-Americans-Discover-Grave-Consequences

It's not an amnesty. That's what bush did.

[ice orca]

Stopped reading at Fox News..media wing for the GOP.

[Mustapha]

I'm kinda wondering if Maher is Obama's Lewinsky. Guy couldn't fellate Obama any harder if he tried.

I don't think so, Bill Maher is too busy servicing Israel.

[freebuddy]

Gee, you think that's a surprise that there are internal issues within the GOP? When you have out-going moderate-to-left Republicans supporting Democrats instead of the conservative Republican candidate that beat them in the primary, that's a sign of internal strife. When you have the new Senate Majority Leader and the RNC putting down the conservative movement within the party, that's another sign. No news there.

Why is it always important to you that someone does something about an article Ambien quotes?

House Representatives are supposed to represent the people in their districts. Do you understand the Balance of Powers at all? Obama has his vision for immigration reform. The Senate bill you refer to, created by a Dem-majority, is likely pretty damn close to what Obama wants. The leader of the branch that the Republicans control did not deem the bill vote-worthy. This is part of the job. Take a look some time and see how many House-passed bills Harry Reid did not put up for a vote in the Senate. It happens, it happened before Obama, and it will happen after Obama.

The three houses are supposed to work together and negotiate. The whole point of this article is to show that Obama is not a negotiator. He is a whiny spoiled brat who has to have his way, and if he can't force Congress to do what he wants, he will go over their heads. Illegally.

Actually, everyone wants immigration reform. The argument is really over what immigration reform means.

What "3 houses" are there? There's only the House, the Senate and the President. You agree there's internal strife inside the Republican Party regarding immigration, and yet you say Obama is a whiny spoiled brat because HE didn't agree with them, and is just issuing an executive order on immigration like other presidents have since 1956? The article Mr. A posted from the Washington Post clearly admonishes the Republicans for not doing their part on solving the immigration issue. Am I supposed to ignore that part but accept the rest? Here's a chart for you:

[freebuddy]

It's not an amnesty. That's what bush did.

Well said.

[Mr. Ambien]

I don't think so, Bill Maher is too busy servicing Israel.

In the words of Horrible Bosses 2: "Double fisting it".

[Mr. Ambien]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/12/16/District-Court-Judge-Rules-Executive-Amnesty-Unconstitutional

District Court Judge Rules Executive Amnesty Unconstitutional

A federal district court judge in Pennsylvania ruled Tuesday that portions of President Obama’s executive amnesty are unconstitutional, according to the Washington Post.

Western Pennsylvania District Judge Arthur Schwab concluded in his opinion that Obama’s executive actions go “beyond prosecutorial discretion” and into the realm of legislating.

“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for int he United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” Schwab wrote in his opinion.

Schwab’s ruling, the Washington Post notes, is the first judicial opinion rendered about President Obama’s executive amnesty.

The Pennsylvania opinion came as a result of a case involving an illegal immigrant — Elionardo Juarez-Escobar — arrested for drunk driving and who was found to have already been deported in 2005 but illegally re-entered the country. The court sought to consider whether the November executive orders would apply to Escobar.

In the course of that consideration, Schwab determined some of the actions to be unconstitutional.

"The opinion of the Pennsylvania federal district court regarding the President's Executive Action on Immigration came from an unexpected place, in an unexpected context; but the court was correct in stating that the Executive Action is an unconstitutional violation of Separation of Powers,” John S. Baker, Jr. Louisiana State University Law School professor said in a statement reacting to the decision.

Three other legal challenges to Obama’s executive actions are still awaiting outcomes, including a suit filed by 24 states challenging the executive actions.

[freebuddy]

Sahil Kapur

Judge Who Axed Obama Immigration Actions Is No Stranger To Controversy

12/16/2014 17:10 PM EDT

The federal judge who ruled Tuesday that President Barack Obama's executive actions on immigration are unconstitutional has a controversial past which includes slaps on the wrist from the circuit court that oversees his court.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab of Pennsylvania, who was appointed by George W. Bush in 2002, drew a fierce rebuke from the Justice Department, which called it "unfounded" and "flatly wrong."

Here are some controversies he has been involved in.

Judge Schwab has been pulled from several cases by a higher court

Judge Schwab has twice been removed from cases by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, a rare occurrence for a judge. According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, one instance came in 2008, when he was criticized for his handling of a case involving Cyril H. Wecht, in which a coroner faced accusations of misusing office resources. Another came in 2012, when he was pulled from a case involving a dispute between health care care companies West Penn Allegheny Health System and UPMC. The blog FindLaw reported that Schwab was removed for bias.

One law professor, John M. Burkoff, told the Post-Gazette that it was "a slap in the face" for a judge to be pulled from a case.

In 2011, Schwab recused himself from 17 ongoing cases amid accusations of bias

The legal blog From The Sidebar reported in November 2011: "In a recent criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, a federal judge [schwab] denied the public defenders request to withdraw over a conflict of interest from a prior representation and instead ordered the public defender to obtain separate counsel who could independently manage any claimed conflict. When later accused of bias against the defenders office, the judge voluntarily recused himself from 17 ongoing criminal cases."

Schwab once adopted a defendant's opinion as his court order, 'with only two substantive changes'

In 2004, the Third Circuit reversed one of Schwab rulings in the case of Bright v. Westmoreland County. The reason it gave was extraordinary.

"The Court of Appeals, Nygaard, Circuit Judge, held that reversal and remand was required where district court, with only two substantive changes, adopted defendants proposed opinion and order as its own," the circuit order read.

Schwab once received the lowest rating among judges from county lawyers

In a 2008 survey of lawyers with the Allegheny County Bar Association, Schwab received the lowest ranking among federal judges, according to a June 2008 article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. On a scale of 1 to 5, Schwab "received the lowest scores both for impartiality, with an average score of 2.82, and temperament, with an average of 2.21," the paper reported.

Schwab's ruling on Obama's immigration actions came out of nowhere

The Tuesday ruling became the latest controversy for Schwab, whose decision quickly faced criticism from the American Immigration Lawyers Association. The criminal case before him was about an undocumented immigrant who was prosecuted for illegally re-entering the country after he was removed. AILA pointed out that neither side had asked the court to weigh in on Obama's executive actions; Schwab did so on his own without holding a hearing on the president's actions, the group said.

"Its shocking that a federal judge would use an unrelated criminal case to take it upon himself to declare the lawful, discretionary decisions of a sitting President unconstitutional," AILA's former president, David Leopold, said in a statement.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoints/judge-arthur-schwab-controversies

[jdatb]

^ still a saint compared to obumma