Tag: amnesty

GOP Establishment Nutbags Promised Amnesty In Spanish Version Of SOTU Response (Video)

GOP Promised Amnesty In Spanish Version Of SOTU Response – Gateway Pundit

.

.
REPUBLICAN PARTY BUSTED –

The Grand Old Party promised amnesty in their Spanish version of the State of the Union response.

And they thought they’d get away with it.

.

.
Unreal.

Conservative Treehouse reported:
.

There is a bigger controversy about to break wide-open that’s potentially far more significant than Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell approving Nikki Haley’s non-subtle attack on GOP frontrunner Donald Trump. That bigger controversy is the Spanish version of the GOP State of the Union rebuttal containing an “amnesty pledge“.

Governor Haley gave the English version, Miami Representative and party-insider Mario Diaz-Barlat delivered it in Spanish. Here’s a (paragraph by paragraph) comparison as translated by the Miami Herald (emphasis mine):

English (Via Haley): No one who is willing to work hard, abide by our laws, and love our traditions should ever feel unwelcome in this country.

Spanish (Via Diaz-Barlat): No one who is willing to work hard, abide by our laws, and love the United States should ever feel unwelcome in this country. It’s not who we are.

English: At the same time, that does not mean we just flat out open our borders. We can’t do that. We cannot continue to allow immigrants to come here illegally. And in this age of terrorism, we must not let in refugees whose intentions cannot be determined.

Spanish: At the same time, it’s obvious that our immigration system needs to be reformed. The current system puts our national security at risk and is an obstacle for our economy.

English: We must fix our broken immigration system. That means stopping illegal immigration. And it means welcoming properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion. Just like we have for centuries.

Spanish: It’s essential that we find a legislative solution to protect our nation, defend our borders, offer a permanent and human solution to those who live in the shadows, respect the rule of law, modernize the visa system and push the economy forward.

.

.

Marco Rubio’s Newest Billionaire Backer Is Big-Time Amnesty Proponent

Marco Rubio’s New Billionaire Backer Top Funder For Open Borders – Breitbart

.

.
Hedge-fund billionaire Paul Singer’s decision to throw his financial weight behind the donor-class 2016 favorite, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), has sparked fresh questions about Rubio’s coziness with the financial interests funding his career.

Singer was a major financial force behind the Rubio-Obama amnesty and immigration expansion push in 2013.

As Politico reported at the time, Singer “quietly go[t] involved in the fight for immigration reform, making a six-figure donation… to the National Immigration Forum” – a George Soros-backed organization that lobbied for Rubio’s legislation to issue 33 million green cards to foreign nationals in the span of a single decade. The announcement of Singer’s endorsement highlights an intra-party tension that has emerged with new strength since Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)’s inauguration as Speaker of the House.

There is a growing chasm between the more than 9 in 10 GOP voters, who want to see future immigration rates cut, versus GOP donors that are desperately seeking to install leaders in the White House and Congress who will further expand the nation’s already record breaking immigration rates that are transforming the country’s economy and electorate.

Upon the announcement of the Singer’s decision, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump tweeted:
.

I see Marco Rubio just landed another billionaire to give big money to his Superpac, which are total scams. Marco must address him as ‘SIR’!

.
Even though Rubio’s donors stand to make an enormous profit from a surge of low-wage migrant labor, Rubio has repeatedly denied that his wealthy backers have influenced his agenda. “People buy into my agenda. I don’t buy into theirs,” Rubio has said.

However, a review of several of Rubio’s top donors reveals that many of them have benefited from the Floridian’s rise to power.

Perhaps one of the most widely-criticized areas of Rubio’s campaign pledge to create “A New American Economy” on migrant labor is his support for tripling the controversial H-1B visa program.

Throughout his brief time in Washington – noted primarily for pushing the La Raza and Obama-backed amnesty bill through the Senate – Rubio has co-authored two pieces of legislaton that would massively expand the wage-depressing H-1B visa program used to replace American workers in white-collar jobs. His most recent bill – known as I-Squared – would triple the number of H-1B visas imported into the United States despite the fact that the U.S. Census Bureau reports 3 in 4 Americans trained in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) are not employed in those fields. The Walt Disney Company used H-1Bs to lay off hundreds of American workers and forced them to train their low-wage foreign H-1B replacements. Disney’s CEO has endorsed Rubio’s I-Squared bill.

Trump, who has called on Disney to hire back all of Rubio’s laid-off constituents, thundered:
.

Lobbyists write the rules to benefit the rich and powerful. They buy off Senators like Marco Rubio to help them get rich at the expense of working Americans by using H-1B visas – so called “high tech” visas – to replace American workers in all sorts of solid middle class jobs… Senator Rubio works for the lobbyists, not for Americans. That is why he is receiving more money from Silicon Valley than any other candidate in this race. He is their puppet.

.
According to open-secrets, Goldman Sachs has been one of Rubio’s biggest financial boosters. Since 2011, Goldman Sachs was the top donor to Rubio’s campaign committee, contributing $53,200. Interestingly, Goldman Sachs is also among the top 50 corporate users of the H-1B visa, which labor experts call an “indentured servitude” program. According to USCIS data analyzed by Computerworld’s Patrick Thibodeau, Goldman Sachs is the ranked number 33 among the biggest users of the program.

Behind Goldman Sachs, Microsoft is the second largest contributor to Rubio’s campaign committee since 2011, donating $33,100. Similarly, Microsoft is the 12th biggest user of the H-1B program, having brought in 1,048 foreign workers on H-1Bs in 2013. Last year, Microsoft announced its plans to lay off 18,000 workers at the same time the company was lobbying to increase the H-1B program, prompting strong condemnation from U.S. Senator Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), a top opponent of Rubio’s H-1B expansion plan.

Morgan Stanley has also been one of Rubio’s top financial contributors – having donated $47,564 to Rubio throughout his career. Morgan Stanley is the ranked 66th among the biggest H-1B users.

Larry Ellison, the founder and executive chairman of the Oracle Corporation, has been another one of Rubio’s financial boosters. In July, the WSJ reported that Ellison gave $3 million to the pro-Rubio super PAC. In June, Ellison hosted a $2,700 per-person fundraiser for Rubio. Oracle is the 20th biggest users of H-1B and has endorsed Rubio’s Gang of Eight and I-Squared immigration bills.

Beyond the controversial H-1B expansions, however, critics allege that Rubio’s donors have benefited in other ways from his immigration legislation. For instance, according to open-secrets, Carnival Corporation is one of the top 20 contributors to Rubio’s campaign committee since 2011, having donated $14,500.

According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, Section 4606 of the Rubio-Obama immigration bill included a “backroom deal” that, “creates a new nonimmigrant Z visa to admit individuals who possess ‘specialized knowledge’ to perform maintenance on airlines and cruise ships” in place of American labor. Rubio’s top immigration lawyer during the Gang of Eight push was Enrique Gonzalez. Prior to working for Rubio, Gonzalez had formerly made his living, in part, by bringing foreign workers into the country on behalf of large corporations. Gonzalez had been a partner at the nation’s largest immigration firm Fragomen, where, as Bloomberg reports, “he helped Carnival, Viacom, and other companies obtain visas for their foreign workers.” Gonzalez features this Bloomberg article on his profile on Fragomen’s website.

Yet beyond Rubio’s legislative action on immigration, reports document how Rubio’s donors may have shaped many more of his policy platforms.

For instance, according to OpenSecrets, Fanjul Corporation is the fourth biggest contributor to Rubio’s campaign committee since 2011, donating $25,200. The Fanjul family has boosted Rubio throughout his career. As Yahoo Finance’s Rick Newman reports, the Fanjul’s sugar empire “includes Domino and Florida Crystals… Donors associated with Florida Crystals have given Rubio at least $81,100 since 2009.” The Washington Post has described Jose “Pepe” Fanjul as part of Rubio’s “inner circle”: “Over the years, Fanjul has played a key role in raising money for Rubio and introducing him to well-heeled donors.” In April, the Fanjuls hosted a fundraiser in Palm Beach for Rubio. The cost of attending the reception and lunch was $2,700. Rubio’s closeness with the family has been well-documented, as The Daily Caller’s Joanne Butler notes, “It’s been reported that one of the first people Rubio greeted after making his presidential campaign announcement was Pepe Fanjul, Sr.”

The Fanjul family benefits from the federal government’s policies that protect of the sugar industry. The Daily Caller writes these protections have come at a cost to Americans:
.

While the Fanjul family has reaped the benefits of a protected sugar industry, other Americans have paid a price in lost jobs… What we have is a special interest group with lots of political muscle to protect its industry – to the detriment of 120,000 U.S. jobs lost over the past fifteen years.

.
Multiple reports have documented how the Fanjuls may have influenced Rubio’s votes. For instance, the Washington Post has described Rubio as a “major player” and one of sugar industry’s “names to know”.
.

Rubio, an outspoken defender of the sugar program… courted the Fanjul family during his 2010 Senate campaign. In his 2012 memoir, “An American Son,” Rubio credited a Fanjul fundraiser on Labor Day weekend in 2009 for helping him surpass a critical early fundraising goal. This year, 60 supporters paying $10,000 each gathered on the terrace of Pepe Fanjul’s Palm Beach home to toast Rubio.

.
“The Fanjuls might be considered the First Family of Corporate Welfare… they benefit from federal policies that compel American consumers to pay artificially high prices for sugar,” says a report by Time Magazine’s Donald Bartlett and James Steele.

While Rubio’s campaign rhetoric decries corporate welfare, he does not seem to mind it when it comes to the Fanjuls. As the Washington Examiner has observed, “In June 13, 2012, Rubio cast a very odd vote: he voted to save the indefensible federal sugar program… [It’s] relevant that the biggest sugar family in Florida, the Fanjuls, was supporting Rubio early in his long shot Senate race in 2010.”

The news of Singer’s endorsement may bring Rubio additional endorsements. Another donor Rubio has actively courted is Sheldon Adelson, CEO of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation. Reports have questioned whether Rubio’s support for Sheldon Adelson’s bill to stop Americans from gambling online was intended to woo the GOP megadonor.

“Rubio signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill… raising eyebrows and prompting questions from reporters,” the Washington Post wrote. “The Florida senator has assiduously courted the billionaire casino mogul.”

Shortly after the news broke that Adelson was considering endorsing Rubio, Trump declared, “Sheldon Adelson is looking to give big dollars to Rubio because he feels he can mold him into his perfect little puppet. I agree!”

Adelson stands to benefit financially from Rubio’s policy of expansive immigration as well. Indeed, Nevada has the largest share of illegal immigrants of any state in the country (4.7 percent), and roughly one in five Nevada residents is foreign-born.

In a recent piece in New York Magazine, Jonathan Chait writes that Rubio is the candidate best positioned to enact the donor-class agenda. Chait writes: “Rubio has carved out a valuable niche in the Republican field as the candidate who will carry out the agenda of the party’s donor base, but who has the identity and communication skills to sell that agenda more effectively.”

Rush Limbaugh has similarly warned that “the donor-class push” is to “get rid of Trump, and have Rubio or Jeb win the White House.”

Limbaugh predicts that, with Paul Ryan as Speaker and Rubio as President, in the “first 12-to-18 months, the donor-class agenda [will be] implemented, including amnesty and whatever else they want.”

.

.

Shocker! Amnesty Activist Jorge Ramos’ Daughter Works For Hitlery

Surprise, Surprise! Jorge Ramos’ Daughter Works For Hillary Clinton, Univision’s Chair Pledged ‘All Might’ To Help Hillary – Weasel Zippers

.

.
Gee who would have thunk?

Via The American Mirror:

Jorge Ramos, the amnesty activist moonlighting as a Univision and Fusion journalist, revealed in June that his daughter is an employee of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

In a statement on the Fusion website, Ramos wrote:

As journalists the most important thing we have is our credibility and integrity. We maintain that, in part, through transparency with our audience, our colleagues and our critics. That is why I am disclosing that my daughter, Paola, has accepted a position working with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Keep reading

A little more background on the Univision and Ramos bias, Univision doesn’t even bother to pretend Ramos is a fair journalist, they admit he’s pushing a political agenda.

Via Newsbusters:

As Univision News President Isaac Lee explained to a journalism forum at the University of Texas at Austin earlier this year, the journalism Ramos practices is focused on promoting a very particular agenda.

As is evident from Lee’s remarks, Ramos’ agenda is not focused on what’s best for the population of the country as a whole, but rather the interests of Univision’s audience, an audience that most certainly includes a sizeable portion of unauthorized immigrants to the United States, with whose amnesty agenda Ramos closely identifies.

“Univision’s audience knows that Jorge is representing them,” Lee said of how Ramos understands his role as the country’s leading Spanish-language journalist. “He is not asking the questions to be celebrated as a fair and balanced journalist. He’s asking the questions to represent them. He’s going to ask the person whatever is necessary to push the agenda for a more fair society, for a more inclusive society and for the Hispanic community to be better.”

The credibility and impartiality of Univision’s coverage of U.S. electoral politics has already been undermined by the network’s executive chairman, Haim Saban, pledging his “full might” to the mission of putting Hillary Clinton in the White House. That credibility has been further eroded by the network’s partnership with the Clinton Foundation.

.

.

Obama Crime Syndicate Update: Regime Violates Executive Amnesty Injunction… AGAIN!

‘OOPS!’ Feds Violate Executive Amnesty Injunction… Again! – Breitbart

.

.
The government has once again violated a federal court’s injunction prohibiting the implementation of President Obama’s executive amnesty plan. The action comes right before high-ranking federal government officials, including the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), have been ordered to appear in an August hearing to show why they should not be held in contempt for prior failures to comply with the injunction.

The litigation began in December 2014 when the state of Texas and 25 other states filed a federal lawsuit to halt President Obama’s amnesty plan.

A federal judge in Brownsville, Judge Andrew Hanen, issued an injunction in early February temporarily stopping the implementation of the executive amnesty plan.

In April, Judge Hanen issued a scathing rebuke directed at government lawyers and the DHS for misrepresentations made in the case, ordered the government to produce related documents, and warned the government against destroying any of this evidence, as reported by Breitbart Texas.

On July 7th, Judge Hanen ordered top Obama administration officials to personally appear in his court.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, and all other federal defendants, were ordered to attend a hearing on August 19th at 10 a.m. to show why the judge should not hold them in contempt of court.

Other defendant top officials ordered to appear include: R. Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Leon Rodriguez, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; Sarah R Saldana, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Ronald D. Vitiello, deputy chief of U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border of Protection.

The judge said he would cancel the hearing if a report ordered filed on July 31st satisfied him that the situation had been remedied. “Otherwise, the Court intends to utilize all available powers to compel compliance.”

The government’s latest report, and supplemental report, were filed just a few weeks before the July 31st compliance date.

Lawyers for the federal government have been working on the reports, called an “advisory,” to update the judge.

When compiling the report, the government found yet another failure by the federal government to follow the federal judge’s orders. The government has had to scurry in an attempt to avoid further wrath by the judge.

A government contractor mailed approximately 500 cards extending work and stay authorizations.

The executive amnesty plan would expand from two to three years, work authorizations and stays in the U.S.

The cards had been mailed prior to the injunction but were returned because of a problem with the addresses. The contractor updated the addresses and then mailed them out again – this time after the court’s injunction.

The government assures the Court that it is taking immediate actions to address the new violations.

The government says they have attempted to remedy this new problem by sending letters to these individuals demanding that they return the cards.

In his July order, Judge Hanen warned the government if violations which had been committed as of that time had not been corrected, and corrected by the end of the month, “the only logical conclusion is that the Government needs a stronger motivation to comply with lawful orders.”

He continued, “Neither side should interpret this Court’s personal preference to not sanction lawyers or parties as an indication that it will merely acquiesce to a party’s unlawful conduct.”

The judge noted in his July 7th order that there had been “approximately 2,000 individuals that were given various benefits in violation of this Court’s order after the injunction was issued.”

He wrote, “The Court was first apprised by the Government of the violations of its injunction on May 7, 2015. It admitted that it violated this Court’s injunction on at least 2,000 occasions – violations which have not been fixed.”

The judge warned U.S. Department of Justice lawyers and federal officials that “no reasonable person could possibly consider a direct violation of an injunction a side issue.”

He also wrote, “the Court is shocked and surprised at the cavalier attitude the Government has taken with regards to its ‘efforts’ to rectify this situation.”

He noted that the situation had not been corrected six weeks after the government admitted it had violated the orders on May 7th and promised it would mend the situation.

In ordering federal officials to the August 19th hearing in Brownsville, he also ordered that “the Government shall bring all relevant witnesses on this topic as the Court will not continue this matter to a later date.”

At that time, the Court stated that the administration “has not remediated its own violative behavior,” despite the passage of two months. The judge wrote, “That is unacceptable and, as far as the Government’s attorneys are concerned, completely unprofessional.”

Judge Hanen warned, “To be clear, this Court expects the Government to be in full compliance with this Court’s injunction. Compliance as to just those aliens living in the Plaintiff States is not full compliance.”

It is unknown how the Court will take yet another violation of its orders.

.

.

IRS Commissioner Admits Illegal Aliens Can Get Back Taxes Under Obama’s Executive Amnesty

IRS Finally Admits Illegals Can Get Back Taxes Under Obama Amnesty – Washington Times

.

.
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen has confirmed to Congress that illegal immigrants granted amnesty under President Obama’s new programs could claim back refunds even when they never filed returns to pay their taxes in the first place.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, who had pressed Mr. Koskinen over the issue, released written responses Wednesday in which the commissioner admitted he’d botched the question earlier and, in fact, illegal immigrants granted the amnesty will now be able to claim refunds on tax returns they never even filed, thanks to the Earned Income Tax Credit.

“To clarify my earlier comments on EITC, not only can an individual amend a prior year return to claim EITC, but an individual who did not file a prior year return may file a return and claim EITC (subject to refund limitations under section 6511 of the Internal Revenue Code),” Mr. Koskinen said.

He insisted, however, that he doubts many illegal immigrants will take advantage of the loophole because they would have to be able to prove their earnings for those years they never filed returns.

“Filers would have to reconstruct earnings and other records for years when they were not able to work on the books,” he said.

Taxpayers must have Social Security numbers in order to claim the EITC, and illegal immigrants aren’t supposed to have numbers. But Mr. Obama’s new deportation amnesty grants illegal immigrants work permits, which are then used to obtain Social Security numbers.

IRS lawyers have ruled that once illegal immigrants get numbers, they can go back and refile for up to three previous years’ taxes and claim refunds even for time they were working illegally.

The lawyers said since the EITC is a refundable credit, that’s allowed even when the illegal immigrants worked off the books and never paid taxes in the first place.

“Section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code requires an SSN on the return, but a taxpayer claiming the EITC is not required to have an SSN before the close of the year for which the EITC is claimed,” Mr. Koskinen said. “At your request, the IRS has reviewed the relevant statutes and legislative history, and we believe that the 2000 Chief Counsel Advice (CCA) on this issue is correct.”

Mr. Koskinen had initially said illegal immigrants could claim refunds, but only for years they’d filed returns and presumably had paid some taxes.

Most of Mr. Obama’s amnesty is on hold after federal courts ruled he likely broke the law by acting on his own without Congress‘ approval and without putting his policy out for public review and comment.

But a 2012 policy that applies to so-called Dreamers, or young adult illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, is in effect.

Homeland Security has approved 664,607 initial applications for Dreamers, and approved another 243,872 renewals over the last year, extending the initial two-year amnesty for another two years.

.

.

Federal Court Deals Blow To President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Federal Appeals Court Deals Blow To President Obama’s Amnesty – Washington Times

.

.
A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against President Obama’s new deportation in a ruling Tuesday that marks the second major legal setback for an administration that had insisted its actions were legal.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Texas, which had sued to stop the amnesty, on all key points, finding that Mr. Obama’s amnesty likely broke the law governing how big policies are to be written.

“The public interest favors maintenance of the injunction,” the judges wrote in the majority opinion.

Mr. Obama had acted in November to try to grant tentative legal status and work permits to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants, saying he was tired of waiting for Congress to act.

The full amnesty, known as Deferred Action for Parental Accountability, or DAPA, had been scheduled to begin last week, while an earlier part had been slated to accept applications on Feb. 18. But just two days before that, Judge Andrew S. Hanen issued his injunction finding that Mr. Obama had broken the law.

Administration officials had criticized that ruling, and immigrant-rights advocates had called Judge Hanen an activist bent on punishing immigrants. But Tuesday’s ruling upholds his injunction, giving some vindication to the judge.

It also could mean Mr. Obama will have to appeal to the Supreme Court if he wants to implement his amnesty before the end of his term.

In the 2-1 decision, Judge Jerry E. Smith and Jennifer Elrod ruled in favor of Texas, finding that the state would suffer an injury from having to deliver services to the illegal immigrants granted legal status, and ruling that it was a major enough policy that the president should have sent it through the usual rule-making process.

“DAPA modifies substantive rights and interests – conferring lawful presence on 500,000 illegal aliens in Texas forces the state to choose between spending millions of dollars to subsidize driver’s licenses and changing its law,” the judges wrote.

Judge Stephen A. Higginson dissented from Tuesday’s ruling, saying he would have left the fight over immigration policy to the White House and Congress, saying Mr. Obama should have broad discretion to decide who gets deported and how he goes about that.

Just Higginson also said the fight was a political battle, not a legal one

“The political nature of this dispute is clear from the names on the briefs: hundreds of mayors, police chiefs, sheriffs, attorneys general, governors, and state legislators – not to mention 185 members of Congress, 15 states and the District of Columbia on the one hand, and 113 members of Congress and 26 states on the other,” he wrote.

.

.

Thanks Barack… Regime Granted Amnesty To Accused Child-Sex Criminal

Amnesty Granted To Child Molesting Camp Counselor Known As ‘Papa Bear’ – Daily Caller

.

.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) knew last year that an illegal alien California camp counselor known as “Papa Bear” was being investigated on child molestation and child pornography charges but did nothing about it, Iowa U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley claims in a letter sent to DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson on Wednesday.

Edgar Covarrubias-Padilla was arrested May 7 and charged with four felonies including child molestation and the distribution of child pornography. According to local news reports, authorities believe that Covarrubias-Padilla also produced child pornography.

Covarrubias-Padilla recently worked as a night counselor at Walden West, an environmental science camp near San Jose. Besides the recovery of 600 child porn images from his computer, Covarrubias-Padilla has been accused of sexually abusing a 10-year-old boy. The Santa Clara County Office of Education told Grassley’s office that it had received over 100 phone calls and 50 emails from parents concerned that their child may have been victimized. Covarrubias-Padilla worked at two other camps over the past two years.

In his letter to Johnson, Grassley stated that whistleblowers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — a DHS sub-agency — claim that the federal authorities knew as early as Nov. 17 that Covarrubias-Padilla was being investigated for child sex abuse charges.

Yet, nothing was done about his DACA status until his recent arrest, Grassley claims.

The whistleblowers claim that on Oct. 8, 2012, Covarrubias-Padilla applied for amnesty protection under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. His amnesty and work eligibility were scheduled to last through this month, at which point he would have been allowed to re-apply for the program.

“These allegations are deeply troubling because, if true, they suggest that DHS was aware for months or years that Mr. Covarrubias-Padilla posed a public safety threat to the children he was monitoring, yet took no action to revoke his DACA authorization,” Grassley, a Republican, wrote to Johnson.

“These allegations are particularly alarming because they suggest that Mr. Covarrubias-Padilla would not have been placed in a position to abuse and exploit children had DHS properly vetted DACA recipients,” Grassley added.

Grassley has recently shed light on other cases involving felonious DACA recipients. One particular egregious case of DHS failure was Emmanuel Jesus Rangel-Hernandez. Rangel-Hernandez was slated for deportation following a 2012 marijuana charge. He applied for amnesty under DACA in Feb. 2013, and his application was approved in Aug. 2013. But the application was approved even though U.S. Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS) was aware that Rangel-Hernandez was gang-affiliated. Gang members are not eligible for DACA status.

After Grassley raised questions about Rangel-Hernandez’s case, USCIS admitted in a response letter that it erred in approving his DACA application and ensured that steps were taken to prevent gang members from being given amnesty in the future.

In his latest letter to Johnson, Grassley asked 11 questions about Covarrubias-Padilla’s DACA application, immigration status, and known criminal history.

He asked for a response by May 29.

Grassley also sought information on how ICE and USCIS coordinated and shared information about Covarrubias-Padilla.

“Did USCIS know or have reason to know that ICE was investigating Edgar Covarrubias-Padilla in connection to crimes involving either possession or distribution of child pornography or child exploitation, including molestation?” Grassley asked.

“If Edgar Covarrubias-Padilla was under investigation by ICE, please provide the procedures in place for when, and in what manner, ICE would have notified USCIS.”

.

.

Obama DHS Blames ‘Technical Glitch’ For Continuing To Approve Amnesty Applications Despite Judge’s Order

DHS Blames ‘Technical Glitch’ For Why It Continues To Approve Amnesty Applications Despite Judge’s Order Not To Do So – Weasel Zippers

.

.
Technically throw a contempt citation at them…

Via Washington Times:

The Obama administration blamed a technology glitch for why it continued to approve new amnesty applications in February, even after a federal judge issued an injunction, telling the court late Friday that they are now begging about 2,000 illegal immigrants to tear up their three-year work authorizations.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Homeland Security agency that approved the deportation amnesty applications for Dreamers despite the judge’s order, insisted it’s corrected the immigrants’ records at headquarters, but said it’s also asking the immigrants themselves to send back their three-year documents and accept two-year papers instead.

The agency also told Judge Andrew S. Hanen that more botched cases could still be found as employees dig through tens of thousands of applications.

President Obama’s lawyers are desperately trying to head off punishment by Judge Hanen after several embarrassing missteps.

Keep reading

.

.

Regime Lawyers Finally Admit Obama Violated Federal Injunction By Approving 2,000 Amnesty Applications

Obama Administration Violates Federal Court Order, Approves 2,000 More Amnesty Applications Despite Injunction – Liberty News

.

.
The Obama Administration has defied Federal Judge Andrew S. Hanen’s injunction once again, this time approving an additional 2,000 amnesty applications for work permits.

Thursday, Obama’s lawyers admitted to Judge Hanen just before midnight that the Department of Homeland Security had violated the injunction by approving the applications despite the fact Hanen admonished the administration two months ago for failing to comply with his ruling.

This latest development comes as DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson continue attempting to reassure Congress that Obama’s amnesty program has halted and that the administration is in full compliance with the court order.

Obama’s lawyers stated to Judge Hanen that “The government sincerely regrets these circumstances” and they are taking immediate steps to remedy the situation.

Via WT

“The last time I checked, injunctions are not mere suggestions. They are not optional,” the Iowa Republican said. “This disregard for the court’s action is unacceptable and disturbing, especially after Secretary Johnson’s assurances that his agency would honor the injunction.”

The Justice Department didn’t respond to a request for comment Friday, but Homeland Security officials said Mr. Johnson has asked his department’s inspector general to investigate what went wrong.

Judge Hanen had already been pondering whether to sanction the Justice Department lawyers after they admitted to misleading him – they said inadvertently – on more than 100,000 amnesty applications approved between the Nov. 20 date Mr. Obama announced the new program and the Feb. 16 date the judge issued his injunction.

Thursday’s filing, however, appears to be worse, since it breaks a direct injunction…

The lawyers also had to correct a previous number they’d given the court, when they’d said just 55 applications had been approved in the immediate aftermath of the injunction. The actual number, the lawyers admitted, was 72. They blamed “additional errors.”

Judge Hanen said he was surprised that the three-year applications were being approved, since he thought the administration had told him none of the new program was in effect. Justice Department lawyers said they hadn’t mean to mislead him, and had included in their briefing papers documents showing that the three-year approvals were to take effect last November – but apologized nonetheless for leaving the wrong impression.

What a complete and total crock…

.
————————————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
Texas Governor Goes After Obama Admin. For Acting ‘Outside The Law’ In Defying Judge’s Immigration Order – The Blaze

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott blasted the Obama administration Friday after Justice Department attorneys admitted the administration violated a federal court order by granting about 2,000 extended work permits to illegal immigrants.

“After months of obfuscation and stall tactics by the Obama administration, the president’s lawyers, have been forced to admit that they acted outside the law by implementing president’s executive amnesty – even after a federal judge had ordered them to stop,” Abbott said in a statement.

Texas is leading a multi-state lawsuit to stop President Barack Obama’s executive actions from November to shield about five million illegal immigrants from deportation. In February, U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen issued an injunction to halt much of the order.

But late Thursday, Justice Department attorneys admitted to Judge Hanen that the Department of Homeland Security had approved about 2,000 applications for three-year work permits.

“The government sincerely regrets these circumstances and is taking immediate steps to remedy these erroneous three-year terms,” the administration lawyers said.

However Abbott sees the admission as part of a pattern.

“Not only did President Obama’s executive action violate the U.S. Constitution; his lawyers’ actions show a blatant disregard for the rule of law that has become typical of this administration and directly violates one of the fundamental principles upon which our nation was founded,” Abbott continued.

.

.

Federal Judge Not A Happy Camper After Being Lied To About Executive Amnesty By Obama Regime

Federal Judge Admonished DOJ Over Apparent Deception: ‘I Was Made To Look Like An Idiot’ – Breitbart

.

.
The U.S. Government lied to a federal judge, misrepresented facts and illegally gave 100,081 illegal aliens immigration status despite a pending lawsuit and an injunction. That is the argument that attorneys representing Texas and more than two dozen other states made.

During the heated court hearing Andrew Hanen, a U.S. District Court Judge, said that the apparent violation had made him look like an idiot since he initially believed the U.S. Government.

In a heated court hearing Angela Colmonero from the Texas Attorney General’s office stated that Texas had acted promptly in November 2014 upon learning of President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty and had followed all the timelines set forth with a sense of urgency.

“This was done to preserve the status quo and to prevent irreparable damage to the state,” Colmonero said referring to the cost that the individuals would bring and to the incentive for further illegal immigration. “You can’t put toothpaste back in the tube.”

During the hearings leading to an injunction handed down by Judge Hanen, attorney’s with the Department of Justice claimed that if an injunction was filed nothing would be done. That wasn’t the case, the Texas attorney said.

“The defendant did the exact opposite and gave 100,000 renewals for a term of three years under the expanded DACA,” Colmonero said. “The defendant didn’t inform the court until March 3 – 15 days after the injunction was filed.”

According to Colmonero’s statements, the program known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival) was implemented in 2012; however in November 2014 it was expanded, changing the time of the permits from two years to three years. Therefore the permits issued by the U.S. Government are a violation.

The coalition of states asked the court to give them early access as to the defendant’s documents and files since they couldn’t be taken at their word, Colmonero said.

DOJ attorney Kathleen Hardeck appeared nervous as she stuttered her response saying it was the terminology used that led to confusion, but once they saw that things could be misinterpreted they had tried to notify the court.

“When I asked you what would happen and you said nothing I took it to heart,” Hanen said. “I was made to look like an idiot. I believed your word that nothing would happen.”

During the hearing Hanen talked about possible penalties if, in fact, the evidence proved that the government had lied. He said it would probably not be financial since the taxpayer would be footing the bill over damages already made to them.

After hearing the arguments from both sides Hanen said he would issue a ruling in the near future.

.

.

Too bad Chief Justice John Roberts does not have the integrity this judge has

You go Judge Andrew Hanan

Hat/tip to Doug Ross @ Journal.

As previously reported here, Texas Federal Judge Andrew Hanen had ordered an investigation into President Obama’s illegal activities concerning his amnesty via Executive Fiat.

Well now the judge has just called a “raise.”

The judge who put a halt to Obama’s amnesty plans was being pressured to put aside his ruling by Obama’s administration. But instead of bowing to pressure the judge demanded that Obama send his representatives to his courtroom to explain why they think they have the powers to even issue the amnesty and why they lied about what they’ve already done.

Obama’s team already admitted that they lied to federal Judge Andrew Hanen about what actions have been taken to push Obama’s amnesty and the judge is furious about it.

“The hearing is in response to a filing last week in which the government acknowledged three-year deportation reprieves were granted before Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction, which temporarily halted Obama’s action, sparing from deportation as many as 5 million people in the U.S. illegally.”

The coalition of 26 states which had convinced Judge Hanen to temporarily block Obama’s executive amnesty charges that the government misled the judge about not implementing part of the plan before the judge halted it, giving the states more time to argue against the president’s unilateral action on immigration.

Judge Hanen is demanding that the administration explain why they issued amnesty papers to up to 100,000 illegals despite telling the judge they hadn’t made any such moves.

This brave judge is not buckling under Obama’s pressure and is instead bringing pressure of his own to bear.

Obama Regime Ordered Back To Federal Court To Explain Why It Lied About Executive Amnesty

WH Ordered Back To Court To Explain Alleged False Facts In Amnesty Case – Big Government

.

.
The judge who blocked President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration has ordered the Justice Department to answer allegations the government misled him about part of the plan.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen has ordered federal government lawyers to appear in his court March 19 in Brownsville. The hearing is in response to a filing last week in which the government acknowledged some deportation reprieves were granted before Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction.

Government attorneys had previously said officials wouldn’t accept such requests under Obama’s action until Feb. 18.

The government said in its filing that the 100,000 immigrants who were granted three-year reprieves and work permits were already eligible under a previous immigration plan from 2012.

The 26 states suing over Obama’s plan requested more information.

.

.

26 States Call For Investigation Of Obama’s Executive Amnesty Scheme And Federal Court Perjury

26 States Want Investigation Of Obama’s Amnesty – Daily Caller

.

.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is asking a judge to allow an investigation of the closed-door workings of President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty, following the discovery that 100,000 illegal immigrants had secretly been given three-year amnesty documents well before a promised start date.

“The Obama Administration appears to have already been issuing expanded work permits, in direct contradiction to what they told a federal judge previously in this litigation,” Paxton said in a Thursday statement describing his legal request, which was signed by the governors or attorneys general of 26 states.

“The circumstances behind this must be investigated, and the motion we seek would help us determine to what extent the Administration might have misrepresented the facts in this case,” he added.

The judge has frozen Obama’s amnesty since Feb. 16, pending the future decisions of appeals court judges. Without the judge’s decision, Obama’s deputies already would be preparing work permits and tax rebates for illegals.

Paxton’s hardball response was cheered by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott. ”I commend Attorney General Paxton for continuing to hold the Obama Administration accountable, and I’m confident an investigation would find the Administration knowingly or recklessly misled a Federal Court in issuing thousands of amnesty documents illegally,” he said Thursday.

“President Obama has continued to show complete disregard for the Rule of Law by acting beyond his Constitutional authority at every stage of this process,” he added.

The judge, Andrew Hanen, showed his skepticism about the administration in a 2014 case, when he said border officers were being used by the administration to illegally transfer foreign children from Central America to their parents living illegally in U.S. cities.

On Feb. 16, Hanen froze Obama’s two-part amnesty, which was intended to provide residency, work permits and tax rebates to at least four million illegals, after concluding it likely violated the federal government’s rule-making process.

The amnesty for roughly 1 million younger illegals is called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, and it was launched in June 2012, five months before the 2012 election. Obama’s November amnesty extends the work permits given to the younger illegals from two years to three years.

The amnesty for roughly 4 million parent illegals is called DAPA, or Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents. Obama’s plan would give them work permits, tax rebates, Social Security numbers, drivers’ license and a fast-track to citizenship.

In November, administration statements had declared it would not start the DACA upgrade until Feb. 18, and would not start the DAPA amnesty until in May 2015. On Jan. 15, Obama’s lawyer told the judge that “no applications for the revised DACA… would be accepted until the 18th of February.”

But Obama’s deputies were already handing out the three-year DACA amnesties. By mid-February, 100,000 three-year amnesties had been given to illegals who had received two-year amnesties in 2012 or 2013.

On March 3, Obama’s lawyers admitted to the judge that officials had already given the three-year DACA amnesties to 100,000 people, according to a March 4 article in the Washington Examiner.

“Out of an abundance of caution, however, Defendants wish to bring one issue to the Court’s attention,” said the administration’s document given to the judge. “Between November 24, 2014 and the issuance of the Court’s [Feb. 16] Order, USCIS granted three-year periods of deferred action to approximately 100,000 individuals who had requested deferred action under the original 2012 DACA guidelines.”

The officials excused the deception by claiming that the announced Feb. 18 start date “may have led to confusion about when USCIS had begun providing three-year terms of deferred action to individuals already eligible for deferred action under 2012 DACA.”

The administration’s “confusion” was exposed March 3, the same day that top GOP leaders allied with Democrats to pressure GOP legislators to pass a budget bill for the Department of Homeland Security. The budget did pass, and it doesn’t block funding for Obama’s unpopular and possibly illegal amnesty.

.

.

*VIDEOS* House Committees: Hearings On Executive Amnesty And Immigration Law Enforcement


HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING ON PRESIDENT OBAMA’S EXECUTIVE AMNESTY

.
REPRESENTATIVE TREY GOWDY’S OPENING STATEMENT

.
REPRESENTATIVE TREY GOWDY QUESTIONS LEFTIST PROFESSOR STEPHEN LEGOMSKY

.
FULL HEARING

……………………….Click on image above to watch video.

.
————————————————————————————————————————–
.

Related videos:

.

HOUSE OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE HEARING ON IMMIGRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT

.
TESTIMONY OF JAMIEL SHAW, FATHER OF TEENAGER MURDERED BY ILLEGAL ALIEN

.
FULL HEARING

.

Federal Judge Slams The Brakes On President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Federal Judge Halts Obama’s Amnesty Orders – WorldNetDaily

.

.
A federal judge in Texas on Monday granted a temporary injunction halting President Obama’s executive-order driven amnesty program.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ordered the government not to proceed with any portion of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, DAPA.

In his order the federal judge said the court found “that at least one plaintiff has satisfied all the necessary elements to maintain a lawsuit and to obtain a temporary injunction.”

“The United States of America, its departments, agencies, officers, agents and employees and Jeh Johnson, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; R. Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of United States customs and Border Protection; Ronald D. Vitiello, deputy chief of United States Border Patrol, United States Customs and Border Protection; Thomas S. Winkowski, acting director of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Leon Rodriguez, director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services are hereby enjoined from implementing any and all aspects or phases of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents…”

The outline of plans was “set out in the Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson’s memorandum dated November 20, 2014.”

The injunction is until “a final resolution of the merits of this case or until a further order of this court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit or the United States Supreme Court,” the judge ordered.

He cited the Obama administration’s failure to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.

Hanen also ordered that federal officials and agencies are further enjoined from implementing “any and all aspects or phases of the expansions (including any and all changes) to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.”

That was the program begun several years ago by Obama.

The judge also explained the defendants will be allowed to “reapproach this court for relief from this order, in the time period between the date of this order and the trial on the merits, for good cause, including if Congress passes legislation that authorizes DAPA or at such a time as the defendants have complied with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”

He scheduled a conference call for counsel following a Feb. 27, 2015, deadline for a schedule for the case to be processed.

In Austin, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “President Obama abdicated his responsibility to uphold the United States Constitution when he attempted to circumvent the laws passed by Congress via executive fiat, and Judge Hanen’s decision rightly stops the president’s overreach in its tracks. We live in a nation governed by a system of checks and balances, and the president’s attempt to by-pass the will of the American people was successfully checked today. The district court’s ruling is very clear – it prevents the president from implementing the policies in ‘any and all aspects.’”

It’s one of two pending cases challenging Obama’s amnesty.

The other actually was developed first, and was thrown out at the district court level.

But it now is on a fast track before an appellate court in Washington, D.C.

It was filed by attorney Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, on behalf of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Klayman told WND he’s waiting now for the government to respond to the appellate court.

“We want the D.C. court to enter a preliminary injunction, stopping everything in its tracks,” he said. “We’re confident that they will agree with us.”

Obama’s amnesty plans are forecast to allow at least another five million illegal aliens in the U.S. to be given a legal status, where they could hold jobs, driver’s licenses – and critics say they would even be allowed to vote.

WND had reported earlier on the significance of the case, which was brought by 26 states against the federal government. It was predicted to go far beyond amnesty and immigration.

The fight will determine whether the United States can be run by a president and his decrees, or by a chief elected official who enforces the laws Congress writes, according to Mark Krikorian, chief of the Center for Immigration Studies, which watches the immigration situation.

“If I were a Republican politician, I wouldn’t even be arguing this on the basis of immigration,” he told WND in an interview. “I would be talking about this as just the latest and most egregious example of a president’s rule by decree.”

He said the coming dispute, which very well may extend into the 2016 presidential election or beyond, is going to decide “the balance of powers, whether Congress actually makes law or is an advisory body like the U.N. General Assembly, which is how Obama sees it.”

Obama already has challenged America’s laws a multitude of times, simply issuing orders to make changes to the Obamacare law, and on a variety of other issues, all without the benefit of a decision by Congress, which originally wrote the laws.

The fight over amnesty is one of two focal points – the other is Obamacare – of a letter-writing campaign to encourage GOP members of the U.S. House to replace Speaker John Boehner.

The “Dump Boehner Now” campaign allows voters to reach every single Republican House member with hard-copy letters asking them to reconsider their choice as speaker. The letter says House members had the chance to stop Obamacare and amnesty, but Boehner failed to take advantage.

Joseph Farah, WND founder and campaign organizer, set up the letters campaign. He said the opposition to Boehner is based on the Obamacare and amnesty program that voters rejected in the 2014 midterm elections.

The letter explains to members of the U.S. House that two issues have “prompted Americans to turn in droves to the Republican Party in November 2014 – Barack Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive action to provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, and the deliberately deceptive restructuring of America’s health-care system through Obamacare, which threatens to unravel the greatest health delivery system in the world.”

Pointing out that Republicans before the election “solemnly vowed to STOP this lame-duck president,” the letter states: “Now you have the power, right and duty to stop him.

“But it won’t happen with John Boehner leading you. You know this to be true. The trillion-dollar budget deal is just the latest proof that Boehner is not capable of leading the House to victory during this critical period.”

It’s because during the lame-duck Congress, Boehner agreed to Obama’s plan to continue funding for Obamacare and amnesty into 2015.

MSNBC did a report only days ago speculating on whether Hanen would halt the federal plan. MSNBC called Hanen “a critic of the Obama administration’s immigration policies.”

Worried MSNBC, “If Hanen decides against the Obama administration, he could block the implementation of the executive measures, which are scheduled to kick in Feb. 18. If that were to happen, the Department of Justice would almost certainly appeal the decision, which would then go to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals – yet another conservative-leaning court.”

The fact that more than half the states are participating in the case has alarmed amnesty supporters, but they still hope more and more illegals come out of the shadows and claim a place at the head of the line of those awaiting official recognition in the U.S., or at least it appears that way.

Karen Tumlin of the National Immigration Law Center told MSNBC, “People have been waiting so long for a chance to come forward and be able to work with authorization and not be looking over their shoulder all day long. We’re really trying to send the message that this should be business as usual.”

House Republicans, under Boehner, also have said they are going to take court action, but haven’t yet.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the decision was a victory.

“And a crucial first step in reining in President Obama’s lawlessness,” he added.

Klayman has explained it’s not a case mainly about immigration.

“This is fundamentally about the rule of law and our constitutional system,” he said.

“I know we would prefer, like all conservatives and patriots, to have a clear ruling that executive overreach by any president is a dangerous injury to our Constitution. Lawyers do recognize, however, that courts try to find the easiest way to reach a result. We hope to reach a ruling that the executive branch cannot rewrite the nation’s laws whether they go through the Administrative Procedures Act process or not,” Klayman said.

In an accompanying 123-page memorandum, Hanen wrote about the states’ interest in not allowing “their own resources” to be drained by the “constant influx of illegal immigrants.”

He found “States ultimately bear the brunt of illegal immigration.”

The opinion noted specifically that Washington “maintains that none of the plaintiffs have standing to bring this injunctive action. The states disagree, claiming that the government cannot implement a substantive program and then insulate itself from legal challenges by those who suffer from its negative effects.”

The judge noted the reality of the immigration situation.

“When apprehending illegal aliens, the government often processes and releases them with only the promise that they will return for a hearing if and when the government decides to hold one. In the meantime, the states – with little or no help from the government – are required by law to provide various services to this population.”

He continued, “It is indisputable that the states are harmed to some extent by the government’s action and inaction in the area of immigration.”

The judge said Obama’s program isn’t only a situation where there aren’t enough resources, so program managers pick and choose which cases to handle. Washington’s current program “is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

“The DHS does have discretion in the manner in which it chooses to fulfill the expressed will of Congress. It cannot, however, enact a program whereby it not only ignores the dictates of Congress, but actively acts to thwart them,” the judge said.

.

.

Undocumented Democrats Update: Obama’s Executive Amnesty Creates Easy Loophole For Illegals To Vote

This Just In: The Term ‘Undocumented Democrats’ Is Not A Joke; Wait Until You Read This – TPNN

.
…………

.
In December 2014, Utah Senator Mike Lee warned that Obama’s illegal executive amnesty would create an easy loophole for illegal aliens to register to vote thereby compromising our election system. On Thursday, two Secretaries of State testified before Congress that Obama’s illegal amnesty would indeed lead to more illegals voting.

Obama’s illegal amnesty creates a significant loophole since illegal aliens will, under Obama’s plan, be able to get drivers licenses and social security numbers. The Washington Times details the testimony of John Husted, Secretary of State in Ohio, and Kris Kobach, Secretary of state in Kansas.

Husted said that mass voter registration drives often lack the resources to fully pay attention to the verification of someone’s immigration status. When the individual is asked if they would like to register to vote and they can produce a drivers license and social security number, which Obama will allow illegal aliens to have, then the result will be more illegals voting, despite the fact that such action is illegal.

“It is a guarantee that it will happen, “ Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach said regarding an increasing number of illegals voting in elections. He added that illegals have pointed to being asked by workers at the Department of Motor Vehicles if they would like to register to vote as the reason that did register, then did indeed vote.

Of course, Democrats are accusing Republicans of simply wanting to suppress the right to vote, even though according to the Constitution, illegals do not have the right to vote.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, a non-voting delegate to Congress representing the District of Columbia, demonstrated that she is in need of a history lesson based upon her criticism of Republicans. Norton said, “The president’s executive order gives immigrants the right to stay – immigrants who have been here for years, immigrants who have been working hard and whose labor we have needed. The Republicans may want to go down in history as the party who tried once again 100 years later to nullify the right to vote. Well, I am here to say they shall not succeed.”

Perhaps Norton needs to brush up on her history since it was the Democrat Party who implemented Jim Crow laws in an attempt to prevent voting by blacks, just as it was the Democrats who enslaved blacks and fought to maintain the practice of slavery.

Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Democrat, took another dishonest path with his defense of Obama’s illegal amnesty by claiming that it’s doubtful that illegal aliens would risk voting since getting caught could get them deported. He added that votes by illegals would be an “insignificant part of an election.”

This disingenuous statement by Lynch is proven to be an egregious lie based upon polls by both the Washington Post and Pew Research Center which determined that illegal aliens are hyper-partisan with an overwhelming majority identifying as Democrats.

.

.

*VIDEO* Rep. Brooks Calls On GOP Senators To Grow A Pair And Defund Obama’s Illegal Executive Amnesty


.

.

Nevada And Tennessee Join 24 Other States Suing To Stop Obama’s Executive Amnesty

Nevada And Tennessee Make It 26 States Suing To Stop Obama’s Amnesty – Townhall

.

.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Monday that both Nevada and Tennessee have joined the Lone Star state’s challenge of President Obama’s executive amnesty, bringing the total number of states fighting Obama’s unilateral immigration policies to 26.

“Texas is proud to lead a coalition that now includes a majority of the United States standing up against the President’s rogue actions,” Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. “The momentum against the President’s lawlessness continues to build with Tennessee and Nevada joining the effort to protect our states from the economic and public safety implications of illegal amnesty. As President Obama himself has said numerous times, he lacks the authority to impose amnesty. His actions represent a blatant case of overreach and clear abuse of power.”

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen already heard oral arguments in the case January 15th, where Texas argued that Obama’s amnesty would create a new wave of illegal immigration that would burden state governments. “This is the second time they’ve done it in two years,” Texas attorney Andrew Oldham told Hanen. “People think: They’ve done it twice in two years. Maybe they’ll do it again in 2016.”

Obama lawyer Kathleen Hartnett disputed that claim, insisting that new arrivals will not come “on the expectation of receiving deferred action because they will be turned away.” “His policy only applies to people who have been here since 2012,” she said.

Judge Hanen is not likely to buy that administration argument. In a 2013 case, Hanen predicted that Obama’s lax border enforcement policies would lead to a wave of illegal immigration. And that is exactly what happened in 2014.

Texas and the other 25 states are asking Judge Hanen to issue an injunction that would stop Obama from giving out any work permits before the program gets up and running in May.

If Obama’s amnesty does stand it will cost taxpayers billions in tax credits every year.

With Tennessee and Nevada, the full list of 26 states suing Obama over his executive amnesty are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin.

.

.

Coalition Of States Suing Over Obama’s Executive Amnesty Scheme Swells To 24

Coalition Of States Suing Over Immigration Swells To 24 – Conservative Intelligence Briefing

Last week we reported that the tip of the Republican spear aimed at President Obama’s Executive-Order-turned-proclamation on immigration was the coalition of states that have joined the suit filed and led by TX Attorney General Greg Abbott.

.

.
At the time of reporting, the coalition of states in the suit stood at a healthy 17, but that number has now swelled to 24. With the potential for more states to sign on in the coming weeks, more than half of the states in the union could be taking on the federal government for its overreach.

Abbott remarked in a statement Wednesday on the coalition’s suit, “The president’s proposed executive decree violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law, circumvents the will of the American people and is an affront to the families and individuals who follow our laws to legally immigrate to the United States.”

The suit now includes the following states, reports CNN: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

.

.