Tag: Laws

Commie Swine Update: Feds Say Thousands Of Bernie Sanders Contributions Violated Campaign Finance Laws

Feds Flag Thousands Of Illegal Bernie Sanders Contributions – Washington Free Beacon

.
…………….

.
Thousands of contributions to Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ campaign in January violated federal campaign finance laws, election regulators said on Thursday.

The Federal Election Commission sent a letter to the Democratic presidential candidate’s campaign committee on Thursday with a 90-page spreadsheet listing 3,457 “excessive, prohibited, and impermissible contributions.”

The campaign’s January financial disclosure filing listed contributions from foreign nationals and unregistered political committees, the FEC said. Other contributions came from donors who exceeded the $2,700 per-election limit.

“Although the Commission may take further legal action concerning the acceptance of [excessive or prohibited] contributions, your prompt action to refund the prohibited amount will be taken into consideration,” the FEC told the campaign.

Sanders’ campaign has relied on small-dollar individual contributions to a far greater extent than any other presidential campaign, including the Super PAC– and dark money-fueled efforts of Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

The Vermont Senator and self-described socialist is running on a platform of transparency and campaign finance reform, contrasting his grassroots support with Clinton’s high-dollar donors and use of loopholes in federal election laws that allow her campaign to coordinate with outside groups that can accept unlimited contributions.

However, Sanders’ donors have also run afoul of federal campaign finance laws, and his financial disclosure reports have been riddled with errors.

The FEC sent a letter to the Sanders campaign earlier this month flagging an additional 1,316 “excessive, prohibited, and impermissible contributions” in the fourth quarter of 2015.

The commission also noted disbursements from the campaign that failed to include required documentation.

The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Some of the campaign’s legal problems stem from enthusiasm for Sanders’ candidacy from foreign nationals, many of whom have publicly revealed donations to the campaign in violation of U.S. election laws.

“I am German, live in Germany and just donated to Bernie Sanders’ campaign on BernieSanders.com simply using my credit card – Is this illegal in any way?” asked a user on the website Quora.

“UPDATE: Donation rescinded based on your answers,” the user later added.

.

.

Hitlery’s Top Aide Accused Of Criminal Violations Of Conflict-Of-Interest Laws

Hillary’s Huma Accused Of Criminal Violations Of Conflict-Of-Interest Laws – Right Scoop

.

.
Hillary’s top aide Huma Abedin is being accused of criminal violations that would have allowed her to be overpaid while at the State Department under the Hildebeast.

From the Washington Post:

The State Department concluded this year that Huma Abedin, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s closest aides, was overpaid by nearly $10,000 because of violations of rules governing vacation and sick leave during her tenure as an official in the department.

The finding – which Abedin has formally contested – emerged publicly Friday after Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) sent letters to Secretary of State John F. Kerry and others seeking more information about an investigation into possible “criminal” conduct by Abedin concerning her pay.

Grassley’s letters also questioned the status of an inquiry into whether Abedin had violated conflict-of-interest laws related to her special employment status, which allowed her to work simultaneously for the State Department, the Clinton Foundation and a private firm with close ties to the Clintons.

The finding that Abedin, a longtime Clinton confidant who now serves as vice chairwoman of her presidential campaign, had improperly collected taxpayer money could prove damaging to Clinton’s candidacy, as Republicans charge that government rules were routinely bent to benefit Clinton and her aides.

The Hillary campaign has broken all sorts of news today, and very little of good. It looks like Huma is gonna have a crappy weekend.

.

.

Republican Governor Of Tennessee Signs Bill Prohibiting State Cooperation With Federal Gun Control Laws

TN Gov. Signs Bill Prohibiting State Cooperation with Fed Gun Control Laws – Big Government

.

.
On April 30, Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam (R) signed Senate Bill 1110 – a bill which bars state cooperation with federal gun control laws.

Sponsored by Senator Richard Briggs (R-Dist. 7), SB 1110 “prohibits the use of any public funds, personnel, or property to enforce any federal law or regulation that regulates the ownership, use, or possession of firearms, ammunition, or firearms accessories.”

SB 1110 passed the house by a margin of 74 to 20 and the senate by a margin of 24 to 1.

According to the Tenth Amendment Center, the measure was “originally introduced in the House as HB1341 by Rep. Terri Lynn Weaver.” At that time, Weaver said, “I’m from the cut that there is no need for Washington D.C. to be the end all and be all with regards to the regulatory world. We should respect our 10th Amendment and shift the power back to the states and that’s what House Bill 1341 does.”

What was true for HB 1341 is also true for SB 1110.

This law comes on the heels of another blow to federal gun control signed by Indiana Governor Mike Pence (R) last week. On April 29, Pence signed Senate Bill 433 – a bill that “repeals the prohibition against manufacturing, importing, selling, or possessing a sawed-off shotgun.”

SB 433 addresses the ban on short barreled, modified shotguns and will also present a challenge to the federal government’s “title II firearm” policy requiring registration fees and transfer records each time the firearm changes hands.

.

.

*AUDIO* Mark Levin Explains Religious Freedom Laws


.

.

House Judiciary Committee Unveils Four Bills To Strengthen Interior Enforcement Of U.S. Immigration Laws (Videos)

Strengthening The Interior Enforcement Of Our Nation’s Immigration Laws – House Judiciary Committee

.

.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee Chairman Trey Gowdy, Congressman Lamar Smith, Congressman Jason Chaffetz, and Congressman John Carter have unveiled four pieces of legislation to strengthen the interior enforcement of our immigration laws, remove the ability of the President to unilaterally shut down immigration enforcement, ensure jobs are preserved for legal workers, reform the United States’ asylum laws, and make sure unaccompanied alien minors who make the dangerous trek to the United States are safely returned home.

THE “LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT”

Science, Space, and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced the Legal Workforce Act to ensure jobs are preserved for Americans and legal workers. This bill requires all U.S. employers to use E-Verify, a web-based system that checks the Social Security numbers of newly hired employees against Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security records to help ensure that they are genuinely eligible to work in the U.S.

Bill Summary

.

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

THE “PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ACT OF 2015”

Chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee John Carter (R-Texas) is the author of the Protection of Children Act to ensure unaccompanied alien minors who make the dangerous journey to the United States are safely returned home. For those who stay with a sponsor in the United States while awaiting their immigration hearing, the bill provides for greater transparency and safety of these minors to ensure they are not inadvertently delivered into the hands of criminals or abusers.

Bill Summary

————————————————————————————————————————–

THE “ASYLUM REFORM AND BORDER PROTECTION ACT OF 2015”

Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, is author of the Asylum Reform and Border Protection Act. This bill closes loopholes in current law that encourage illegal immigration, such as weak standards for asylum claims that enable the Obama Administration’s rubberstamping of fraudulent applications and policies, and effectively ends “catch and release.”

Bill Summary

————————————————————————————————————————–

THE “MICHAEL DAVIS, JR. IN HONOR OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT”

The Michael Davis, Jr. in Honor of State and Local Law Enforcement Act is authored by Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.). This legislation ensures that the President of the United States can’t shut down immigration enforcement unilaterally by granting states and localities specific congressional authorization to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law. It also strengthens national security and protects American communities by improving visa security, facilitating the removal of dangerous criminal aliens, and barring terrorists from entering and remaining in the United States.

Bill Summary

.

.

.

Ted Cruz To Propose Constitutional Amendment Preventing Feds From Nullifying State Marriage Laws

Ted Cruz Is About To Propose A Constitutional Amendment – The Blaze

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) will soon propose an amendment to the Constitution that would prevent the federal government or the courts from nullifying state marriage laws.

Cruz said Monday that a new amendment is needed after the Supreme Court decided not to consider cases involving five states that wanted to appeal lower court rulings that invalidated their laws banning same-sex marriage. That decision by the high court effectively allowed those lower rulings to stand, which some gay marriage proponents in those states celebrated by immediately getting married.

.

.
Cruz argued in response that marriage is a question only for the states, and that a new amendment would be needed to protect state decisions from court interference. He said he would propose it once Congress is back in session later this year, after the mid-term election.

“Traditional marriage is an institution whose integrity and vitality are critical to the health of any society,” Cruz said. “We should remain faithful to our moral heritage and never hesitate to defend it.”

Many expected the Supreme Court to take on the controversial issue, but its contrary decision was seen by most as huge and possibly historic victory for gay marriage supporters. The decision legalizes gay marriage in 24 states plus the District of Columbia, and many have said that number could be pushed higher in light of the Supreme Court’s decision to leave in place the lower rulings.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to let rulings by lower court judges stand that redefine marriage is both tragic and indefensible,” Cruz said. “By refusing to rule if the States can define marriage, the Supreme Court is abdicating its duty to uphold the Constitution.”

“The fact that the Supreme Court Justices, without providing any explanation whatsoever, have permitted lower courts to strike down so many state marriage laws is astonishing,” he added.

Cruz also said it’s “judicial activism” to allow the lower courts to override state laws put in place by various states.

“Unelected judges should not be imposing their policy preferences to subvert the considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures,” he said.

Cruz’s proposal, like others to amend the Constitution, will face an uphill fight. It would have to be passed by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, and then would have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

.

.

Idaho Officially Nullifies All Future Federal Gun Control Laws

Victory: Idaho Just Officially Nullified All Future Federal Gun Control – Conservative Tribune

Last week, we reported that the state of Idaho passed emergency legislation that would take effect immediately that nullifies all future federal gun control in the state. That bill was just signed into law by Governor Butch Otter. This is a huge victory for the Second Amendment.

.

.
Idaho joins states like Arizona, Missouri, Kentucky, and others who have passed or are considering substantive legislation that would nullify federal gun control by outlawing it in the state outright or preventing the state from cooperating with the feds in the enforcement of gun control measures.

The strategy the Idaho law and similar laws use is one that uses the anti-commandeering doctrine, which was set down by the Supreme Court to protect the Tenth Amendment by preventing Congress from commandeering state officers in the enforcement of a federal regulatory scheme.

From Ben Swann:

On Thursday, Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) signed a bill, which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws, by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.

S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0. Alaska and Kansas have also passed similar laws.

Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ – especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”

The key text of the legislation provides that:

any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…

This is fantastic news. States are openly rebelling against federal gun control, and their refusal to cooperate in enforcing it will render it ineffective in many areas. The feds need states to participate in the enforcement of these kinds of laws, because there simply aren’t enough federal resources to do so. If we get enough states on board with this type of legislation, we can beat back federal gun control just by default.

Please share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you agree with Idaho’s attempt to nullify federal gun control. Let’s fight back.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Most Corrupt Attorney General In History Tells State Attorneys To Ignore Their Laws

Holder Tells State Attorneys To Ignore Their Laws – Sweetness & Light

.

.
From a cheering New York Times:

Holder Sees Way to Curb Bans on Gay Marriage

By MATT APUZZO | February 24, 2014

WASHINGTON – Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday injected the Obama administration into the emotional and politicized debate over the future of state same-sex marriage bans, declaring in an interview that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend laws that they believe are discriminatory.

So it’s okay for government officials to ignore their oaths of office and refuse to enforce a law they don’t personally agree with. But it’s a crime for a religious official to refuse a church wedding to some couple because of a personal belief.

Mr. Holder was careful not to encourage his state counterparts to disavow their own laws, but said that officials who have carefully studied bans on gay marriage could refuse to defend them.

So the Attorney General of the United States, the highest law enforcement officer in the country, says it is okay to ignore legally enacted laws. And, in fact, he is encouraging people to do so. Which he does on quite a few issues, by the way. (Cf. amnesty.)

Six state attorneys general – all Democrats – have refused to defend bans on same-sex marriage, prompting criticism from Republicans who say they have a duty to stand behind their state laws, even if they do not agree with them.

What nonsense. Only Republicans have to enforce laws they disagree with.

It is highly unusual for the United States attorney general to advise his state counterparts on how and when to refuse to defend state laws. But Mr. Holder said when laws touch on core constitutional issues like equal protection, an attorney general should apply the highest level of scrutiny before reaching a decision on whether to defend it. He said the decision should never be political or based on policy objections…

And, of course, they would never be political.

The nation’s first black attorney general, Mr. Holder has said he views today’s gay-rights campaigns as a continuation of the civil rights movement that won rights for black Americans in the 1950s and ’60s. He has called gay rights one of “the defining civil rights challenges of our time.”…

And if you call something a ‘civil right,’ then no one can oppose it. Just like amnesty has suddenly become a civil right.

His comments signal the latest manifestation of the Obama administration’s evolving position on gay rights. Mr. Obama came into office opposed to same-sex marriage. But in 2011, he decided against defending the Defense of Marriage Act and ended the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy barring gays and lesbians from the military. The next year, the president said he personally supported gay marriage…

All of which he did to boost the fundraising for his re-election campaign. But it wasn’t political. No way.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Republican Lawmaker Proposes Bill Nullifying Federal Gun Laws In Tennessee

Tennessee Considers Nullifying Federal Gun Laws – Downtrend

Tennessee State Senator Mae Beavers (R – Mt. Juliet) is on a roll this week. Along with 10 co-sponsors, she introduced “The Health Care Freedom and Affordable Care Act Noncompliance Act” to effectively nullify ObamaCare in her state. Now, she’s taking aim at federal gun-control laws.

.

.
Beavers has introduced Senate Bill 1607 to effectively nullify federal gun laws in The Volunteer State. Under the proposed law:

* Any federal enactment or enforcement actions relating to firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition would be void in the state

* Any federal enactment or enforcement action impacting or infringing upon the rights of an individual or entity relative to firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition would be void

* Agents, employees and public officials in the state and its political subdivisions would be prohibited from carrying out federal gun laws

* Any attempt to enforce federal gun laws would be considered a misdemeanor and subsequent attempts would qualify as a felony

The law, if passed, is set to take effect on July 1. Thus, residents of The Volunteer State could see their Second Amendment rights significantly strengthened in less than six months.

Other states, including Missouri, Virginia and Wyoming, have recently considered similar legislation. And Alaska and Kansas have already signed their own Second Amendment protections into law. However, Tennessee’s proposed law appears to be among the strongest out there with the potential for violators to be charged with a felony.

It seems an increasing number of states are fed up with the Obama administration’s gun-grabbing policies. Will Tennessee be the next one to successfully tell the federal government to back off?

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Unconstitutional Gun Control Laws

Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Laws On Gun Control – New York Times

When Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County explains in speeches why he is not enforcing the state’s new gun laws, he holds up two 30-round magazines. One, he says, he had before July 1, when the law banning the possession, sale or transfer of the large-capacity magazines went into effect. The other, he “maybe” obtained afterward.

.

.
He shuffles the magazines, which look identical, and then challenges the audience to tell the difference.

“How is a deputy or an officer supposed to know which is which?” he asks.

Colorado’s package of gun laws, enacted this year after mass shootings in Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., has been hailed as a victory by advocates of gun control. But if Sheriff Cooke and a majority of the other county sheriffs in Colorado offer any indication, the new laws – which mandate background checks for private gun transfers and outlaw magazines over 15 rounds – may prove nearly irrelevant across much of the state’s rural regions.

Some sheriffs, like Sheriff Cooke, are refusing to enforce the laws, saying that they are too vague and violate Second Amendment rights. Many more say that enforcement will be “a very low priority,” as several sheriffs put it. All but seven of the 62 elected sheriffs in Colorado signed on in May to a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the statutes.

The resistance of sheriffs in Colorado is playing out in other states, raising questions about whether tougher rules passed since Newtown will have a muted effect in parts of the American heartland, where gun ownership is common and grass-roots opposition to tighter restrictions is high.

In New York State, where Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo signed one of the toughest gun law packages in the nation last January, two sheriffs have said publicly they would not enforce the laws – inaction that Mr. Cuomo said would set “a dangerous and frightening precedent.” The sheriffs’ refusal is unlikely to have much effect in the state: According to the state’s Division of Criminal Justice Services, since 2010 sheriffs have filed less than 2 percent of the two most common felony gun charges. The vast majority of charges are filed by the state or local police.

In Liberty County, Fla., a jury in October acquitted a sheriff who had been suspended and charged with misconduct after he released a man arrested by a deputy on charges of carrying a concealed firearm. The sheriff, who was immediately reinstated by the governor, said he was protecting the man’s Second Amendment rights.

And in California, a delegation of sheriffs met with Gov. Jerry Brown this fall to try to persuade him to veto gun bills passed by the Legislature, including measures banning semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and lead ammunition for hunting (Mr. Brown signed the ammunition bill but vetoed the bill outlawing the rifles).

“Our way of life means nothing to these politicians, and our interests are not being promoted in the legislative halls of Sacramento or Washington, D.C.,” said Jon E. Lopey, the sheriff of Siskiyou County, Calif., one of those who met with Governor Brown. He said enforcing gun laws was not a priority for him, and he added that residents of his rural region near the Oregon border are equally frustrated by regulations imposed by the federal Forest Service and the Environmental Protection Agency.

This year, the new gun laws in Colorado have become political flash points. Two state senators who supported the legislation were recalled in elections in September; a third resigned last month rather than face a recall. Efforts to repeal the statutes are already in the works.

Countering the elected sheriffs are some police chiefs, especially in urban areas, and state officials who say that the laws are not only enforceable but that they are already having an effect. Most gun stores have stopped selling the high-capacity magazines for personal use, although one sheriff acknowledged that some stores continued to sell them illegally. Some people who are selling or otherwise transferring guns privately are seeking background checks.

Eric Brown, a spokesman for Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado, said, “Particularly on background checks, the numbers show the law is working.” The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has run 3,445 checks on private sales since the law went into effect, he said, and has denied gun sales to 70 people.

A Federal District Court judge last month ruled against a claim in the sheriffs’ lawsuit that one part of the magazine law was unconstitutionally vague. The judge also ruled that while the sheriffs could sue as individuals, they had no standing to sue in their official capacity.

Still, the state’s top law enforcement officials acknowledged that sheriffs had wide discretion in enforcing state laws.

“We’re not in the position of telling sheriffs and chiefs what to do or not to do,” said Lance Clem, a spokesman for the Colorado Department of Public Safety. “We have people calling us all the time, thinking they’ve got an issue with their sheriff, and we tell them we don’t have the authority to intervene.”

Sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun laws around the country are in the minority, though no statistics exist. In Colorado, though, sheriffs like Joe Pelle of Boulder County, who support the laws and have more liberal constituencies that back them, are outnumbered.

“A lot of sheriffs are claiming the Constitution, saying that they’re not going to enforce this because they personally believe it violates the Second Amendment,” Sheriff Pelle said. “But that stance in and of itself violates the Constitution.”

Even Sheriff W. Pete Palmer of Chaffee County, one of the seven sheriffs who declined to join the federal lawsuit because he felt duty-bound to carry out the laws, said he was unlikely to aggressively enforce them. He said enforcement poses “huge practical difficulties,” and besides, he has neither the resources nor the pressure from his constituents to make active enforcement a high priority. Violations of the laws are misdemeanors.

“All law enforcement agencies consider the community standards – what is it that our community wishes us to focus on – and I can tell you our community is not worried one whit about background checks or high-capacity magazines,” he said.

At their extreme, the views of sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun laws echo the stand of Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff and the author of “The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope.” Mr. Mack has argued that county sheriffs are the ultimate arbiters of what is constitutional and what is not. The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, founded by Mr. Mack, is an organization of sheriffs and other officers who support his views.

“The Supreme Court does not run my office,” Mr. Mack said in an interview. “Just because they allow something doesn’t mean that a good constitutional sheriff is going to do it.” He said that 250 sheriffs from around the country attended the association’s recent convention.

Matthew J. Parlow, a law professor at Marquette University, said that some states, including New York, had laws that allowed the governor in some circumstances to investigate and remove public officials who engaged in egregious misconduct – laws that in theory might allow the removal of sheriffs who failed to enforce state statutes.

But, he said, many governors could be reluctant to use such powers. And in most cases, any penalty for a sheriff who chose not to enforce state law would have to come from voters.

Sheriff Cooke, for his part, said that he was entitled to use discretion in enforcement, especially when he believed the laws were wrong or unenforceable.

“In my oath it says I’ll uphold the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Colorado,” he said, as he posed for campaign photos in his office – he is running for the State Senate in 2014. “It doesn’t say I have to uphold every law passed by the Legislature.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Fraud, Identity Theft And Forgery: Study Lists Laws Routinely Broken By Illegal Aliens

Fraud, Identity Theft, & Forgery: Study Exhaustively Lists Laws Broken By Illegal Immigrants – Big Government

A new report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), provided exclusively to Breitbart News ahead of its release, seeks to counter the talking point that America’s at least 11 million illegal immigrants are “otherwise law-abiding.”

.

The 21-page report, titled “The Myth of the ‘Otherwise Law-Abiding’ Illegal Alien,” analyzes which key laws the authors allege illegal immigrants regularly break and other illegal activity they purportedly engage in on a frequent basis.

“For years advocates of amnesty and high levels of immigration have described the illegal alien population as one made up of ‘otherwise law-abiding’ people who have committed no violation other than the simple act of crossing a border illegally or overstaying a visa,” report author Jon Feere writes in the introduction.

“Journalists routinely invoke this language when writing about amnesty, conspicuously avoiding any discussion of the various crimes the average working illegal alien commits. Many politicians have also embraced the myth of the otherwise law-abiding illegal alien in an effort to promote amnesty, arguing that illegal aliens are no threat to the United States.”

Specifically, this new CIS report details how illegal aliens regularly engage in violations of laws regarding identities and Social Security numbers. What Feere describes as “examples of oft-violated but under-enforced laws” include the “False Personification of a U.S. Citizen,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 911, “Fraud and False Statements,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and “Social Security Fraud,” a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408.

When describing the how illegal immigrants often illegally falsely personify a U.S. citizen, Feere notes that they frequently “present themselves as U.S. citizens, an act punishable by up to five years in jail, a felony. This law is often cited in immigration prosecutions and may involve, for example, an alien claiming U.S. citizenship to his employer.”

“It is common for illegal aliens to make false statements to the government or on official documents,” Feere added when describing how illegal immigrants often engage in activity that involves fraud and false statements. “An illegal alien violates this law when claiming to be a U.S. citizen on an I-9 Employment Eligibility form and faces a fine and up to five years imprisonment.”

Regarding Social Security fraud, Feere writes that illegal immigrants will often have “provided a false Social Security number for the purpose of acquiring a job, where an illegal alien used a fraudulent Social Security number for the purpose of acquiring a driver’s license, and when an illegal alien used a Social Security card belonging to a citizen in order to obtain Section 8 housing, for example.”

“Violation of this statute can result in a fine and/or imprisonment up to five years,” Feere writes. “The court can also require violators to provide restitution to the victims.”

This new report does not get into crimes that some illegal immigrants commit, like gang activity, murders, and drug-related offenses. It focuses solely on the series of laws they break just by entering the country illegally. The report is divided into four sections detailing all the laws illegal aliens break frequently just entering America illegally.

The first report section deals with how illegal immigrants break laws “involving entry [to the United States], presence [in the country], and travel [throughout].” Violations of U.S. Code frequently committed by such persons include, according to Feere, “improper entry by alien” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325, “registration of aliens,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1302, “high speed flight from immigration checkpoint,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 758, “unlawful bringing of aliens into United States,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1323, “overstaying duration of stay,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B) & (C)(i), “reentry of removed aliens,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, “willful failure or refusal to depart,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1253, “civil penalties for failure to depart,” relating to 8 U.S.C. § 1324d, “failure to comply with terms of release under supervision,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1253(b), “bringing in and harboring certain aliens,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324, aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter,” a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1327, and “civil penalty for failure to depart under voluntary departure,” relating to 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d).” This section of the report also details how illegal aliens frequently engage in activity that constitutes violation of state and local laws, like “driving without license,” “driving without insurance,” “driving without a valid vehicle registration,” and giving “false statement[s] to law enforcement.”

The second section of the report details the workplace statutes these individuals violate, as well. According to Feere, they include: “False Personation of a U.S. Citizen,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 911, “Fraud and False Statements,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, “Falsely claiming citizenship,” a violation of both 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii) and § 1227(a)(3)(D), “fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546, “penalties for document fraud,” relating to 8 U.S.C. § 1324c, “penalties for Social Security fraud,” relating to 42 U.S.C. § 408, “aggravated identity theft,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A, and “willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax,” a violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203.

The third section of the report details how illegal immigrants frequently break “other document laws,” as well. According to the report, such laws include: “misuse of evidence of citizenship or naturalization,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1423, “procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1425, “reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1426, “sale of naturalization or citizenship papers,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1427, “naturalization, citizenship, or alien registry,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1015, “fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028, “possession of false papers to defraud the United States,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1002, “false statement in application and use of passport,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1542, “forgery or false use of passport,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1543, and “misuse of passport,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544.

The fourth section of Feere’s report deals with various other “additional laws” that illegal immigrants frequently break. According to the report, they frequently violation “Selective Service registration” laws, engage in “voting by aliens,” a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 611, and in “violations of state laws” like “identity theft, forgery, and tax laws.”

The report notes that a lot of these laws are not enforced due to President Barack Obama’s “administrative amnesty.”

“According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency ‘prioritizes the removal of criminal aliens, those who pose a threat to public safety, and repeat immigration violators,’” Feere wrote.

Although low-level illegal aliens engaged in basic identity theft do pose a threat to the public, the Obama administration has directed ICE to ignore such criminality and to focus on the “worst of the worst.” Often called the White House’s “administrative amnesty,” the immigration agenda pursued by the Obama administration is often referred to as a “prioritization” scheme, but it is largely a decision to not deport illegal aliens unless or until a crime of violence has occurred. The policy came into shape through what are known as the “Morton Memos,” a series of directives from former ICE director John Morton. The directives resulted in the union for ICE agents taking a vote of “no confidence” against Morton in June 2011.

Morton resigned this year, after Senate Budget Committee ranking member Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) called for his resignation over those very “Morton Memos.”

Finally, if Congress does end up granting amnesty, or legal status, to illegal immigrants, Feere’s report notes those illegal immigrants will likely get a pass on many of these other laws they have broken, too.

“As written, violation of any of the dozens of laws listed below, such as those involving identity theft, could result in an illegal alien being deported after paying a fine or serving time in jail for the violation,” Feere states.

However, proposed amnesties have been written so as to not render an applicant ineligible even if he has violated certain statutes and committed some misdemeanors. And due to political priorities in the Obama administration, many of the laws listed below are not being enforced anyhow. Taken together, these policy prescriptions make the concept of conducting background checks on illegal aliens applying for amnesty somewhat absurd. Nevertheless, some of these crimes currently being committed by illegal aliens can amount to aggravated felonies and would prevent an alien from having “good moral character,” permanently barring them from naturalization under existing immigration law.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

A Travesty Of Justice In Texas!

Texas Town Changing Nudity Laws To Make Body Paint Unacceptable After Waitresses Served Customers Topless – Daily Mail

A city in Texas has been forced to change its nudity laws after topless waitresses wearing just body paint served customers.

Staff at the Red Neck Heaven Bar in Lewisville have been told they are no longer allowed to wear just body paint and strategically placed pasties covering their modesty.

Until recently the girls at the restaurant would hold ABC days – anything but clothes.

.

The all female staff would wear bikini bottoms and cover their breasts with body paint that had been professionally applied by an artist. Cloth pasties would cover their nipples.

Under ordinance laws in Lewisville, Texas, the risqué attire was perfectly legal.

Despite the servers being near naked, police said they were not in breach of any law.

But the city’s police chief Russell Kerbow said the laws regarding nudity should be re-examined.

But following complaints about the topless servers, city chiefs have now ruled body paint and pasties are unacceptable.

It follows a complaint by local resident Catherine Holliday.

.

.

She was with a friend who wanted to stop and take a photo of the restaurant’s sign.

‘And that’s when we realized there were servers in the parking lot that weren’t dressed!’ she told CBS News.

‘They weren’t for all intensive purposes. They had a tiny bikini bottom that didn’t cover their bottom, their backs were bare and their fronts were painted but bare.’

City chiefs debated the issue on Monday night and heard from professional body painter Kristal White.

She said:’I do consider it a form of art – I consider it a very beautiful form of art.

.

‘If you’ve seen X-Men, you’ve seen Mystique. That was a movie and that was body painting, and it was beautiful.’

Lewisville town chiefs decided body paint, dyes and tattoos cannot be considered decent covering for restaurant servers and voted to change their ordinance.

The Red Neck Heaven restaurant will have to apply for a Sexually Oriented Business permit if the want to continue to hold their anything but clothes day.

A spokesman for the restaurant was unavailable for comment.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Obama Regime Spends $53M On Voter ID Cards In Kenya While Calling Voter ID Laws In U.S. Racist

White House Touts US-Funded Voter ID Program In Kenya Despite Calling Voter ID Laws In America Discriminatory – Weasel Zippers

Funny how that works.

.

Via Weekly Standard:

As President Obama and his family continue their tour of Africa, the White House put out a Fact Sheet entitled “U.S. Support for Strengthening Democratic Institutions, Rule of Law, and Human Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa.” One of the first items highlighted by the White House is a $53 million program in Kenya that helps young people ”obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration.”

Civil society and independent media play a critical role in any vibrant democracy. Across sub-Saharan Africa, the United States supports efforts to ensure civil society organizations and independent media can organize, advocate, and raise awareness with governments and the private sector to improve political processes, transparency, and government performance. Examples include:

• In Kenya, the $53 million Yes Youth Can program empowers nearly one million Kenyan youth to use their voices for advocacy in national and local policy-making, while also creating economic opportunities. In advance of Kenya’s March 2013 general elections, Yes Youth Can’s “My ID My Life” campaign helped 500,000 youth obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration, and carried out a successful nationwide campaign with Kenyan civic organizations to elicit peace pledges from all presidential aspirants. [emphasis added]

Keep reading…

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Missouri Lawmakers Pass Bill To Nullify Federal Gun Control Laws

Missouri Lawmakers Pass Bill To Nullify Federal Gun Control Laws – Fox News

The Missouri Legislature sent the governor a bill Wednesday that would expand gun rights and declare all federal gun regulations unenforceable, in a response to President Obama’s push for gun control legislation.

.

The Republican-led Legislature passed the measure hoping to shield the state from federal proposals that would ban assault weapons and expand background checks. But the U.S. Senate’s defeat of a background check expansion three weeks ago did nothing to assuage the fears of Missouri Republicans who pressed forward with their legislation.

The Missouri House voted 118-36 Wednesday to send the bill to Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon. The Senate passed the measure earlier this month.

Supporters argue the measure protects the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and it includes language condemning the theft and illegal use of firearms. The measure’s sponsor, Rep. Doug Funderburk, said his aim is to ensure Missouri is the only regulator when it comes to firearms.

“We have the authority to enforce these laws. We are trying to position us so that we in this state can have safer neighborhoods,” said Funderburk, R-St. Peters.

Opposition came mostly from House Democrats who said the measure would increase access to guns and make schools less safe. They argued the measure doesn’t address gun violence in urban areas.

“I don’t understand why this body continues to turn their back and ignore gun violence in order to increase access to weapons,” said Rep. Stacey Newman, D-University City.

In addition to declaring federal gun laws unenforceable, the bill would allow concealed weapons to be carried by designated school personnel in school buildings. It would allow appointed “protection officers” to carry concealed weapons as long as they have a valid permit and register with the state Department of Public Safety. The officers would also be required to complete a training course.

The bill would also allow people with a firearms permit to openly carry weapons less than 16 inches in length even in localities that prohibit open-carry of firearms.

Privacy rights of gun owners have been a hot topic this legislative session after lawmakers learned the state Highway Patrol shared the list of concealed weapons permit holders with a federal agent in the Social Security Administration.

The legislation passed Wednesday would prevent people from publishing any identifying information on gun owners. A person who publishes such information would be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. It also would prevent doctors or nurses from being required to ask patients about firearm ownership.

The measure would also lower the minimum age required to obtain a concealed weapons permit from 21 to 19.

Even if Gov. Jay Nixon signs the legislation, it may face legal hurdles that will prevent its implementation. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder sent a letter to Kansas last month saying the federal government would challenge its recent gun law. The Kansas legislation would prohibit federal regulation of guns that are manufactured and remain in the state. It would also criminalize the enforcement of federal gun control laws.

Missouri lawmakers are also considering a constitutional amendment that would declare gun rights “inalienable.”

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.