09/25/15

Is the Pope Committing a Sin of Omission?

By: Merrill McCarthy

Pope1

Is the Pope Making Money Moving Bodies into America?

This week marks the historic visit of Pope Francis and his speech before a joint session of Congress. To showcase charity and humility, he is choosing to dine with the homeless rather than attending a luncheon with Congressional leaders, and is being ferried around in a tiny Fiat rather than a limousine.

Pope2

The optics and the message are registering, but are they misleading?

The Pope’s message to Congress was clear. We are all refugees somewhere in our backgrounds and it important to do everything possible to make the refugee’s lives easier and we must welcome them to our midst. He has already gone on record in Europe announcing the Vatican will welcome two refugee families and he wants every diocese to follow suit.

But maybe the Pope should embrace transparency and divulge the obvious conflict of interest he has when asking for more help for refugees. The Catholic Church profits financially.

Pope3

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is one of the nine contractors that handle all the placements in the Refugee Resettlement (RR) program which has been underway for thirty five years in the U.S.A. On their website, you will find they take credit for handling the placement of 30% of the refugees that come here every year. 

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is well paid for their efforts. The USCCB is paid with tax dollars from U.S. citizens who are in the dark about how this program works. People are ill-informed about a program that has been going on since the 1980’s with little-to-no oversight from the elected officials in DC who rubber stamp and renew it on an annual basis. There are no public hearings and little publicity until people wake up one day to find their town has been flooded by refugees who are very dependent on the community for schools, public safety, medical care, translators and a myriad of other needs.

Refugee Resettlement in the U.S. Is a billion dollar a-year industry. The contractors are paid by the head to get refugees set up in a community. Once this brief orientation of just a few months is over, the refugees are on their own, but not really, because the orientation period has been used by the resettlement contractor to line up all available federal and state welfare programs to act as a safety net. It is so much of a safety net that it has had the effect of making people dependent on government handouts and many remain on welfare indefinitely.

Because the refugee problem is so lacking in transparency, the stakeholders, the U.S. taxpayers have not had an opportunity to make their voices heard. There has never been a public examination or debate about the most desirable strategies to deal with refugees. Many of the best solutions are being overlooked because people don’t even know enough to ask the right questions. Those who profit from the Refugee Resettlement program tend to be guarded and secretive. The resettlement industry spends time and effort to strategize how they will deal with “pockets of resistance” or in other words, the private citizens who have a group of strangers dumped on their doorstep and choose to resist. This is a global program with the UN in charge and calling the tune, and yet it affects every taxpayer for not only the original placements, but also the ongoing needs of a population of immigrants that rarely become totally self-sufficient and integrated within the community. There is a marked lack of assimilation and recent refugees do not even pay lip service to assimilation.

If the Pope would ever hope to have moral authority on the refugee question, he must divulge his clear conflict of interest as a paid contractor through the participation of the Conference of Catholic Bishops. This is not charity. It is big business with a big payday as evidenced by six figure salaries for the contractors and high priced lobbyists in Washington DC. The idea that the Pope would come to this country, always top-of-the-list in charitable donations, and lecture citizens who may have been negatively affected by a flood of both legal and illegal immigrants, is offensive in light of the Catholic Church’s obvious financial stake in keeping the RR program in place and growing.

Pope4

What can you do? Go to Ann Corcoran’s excellent site, and learn all you can. Be sure to sign the petition that calls for local control for refugee resettlement linked to her site and share it with all your contacts. Talk to your elected officials at every level. Encourage them to get up to speed and start to exercise some local control. We cannot allow our lives to be impacted by officials at the UN rather than our elected officials. We should call a halt to RR until we can study the problem for the best solutions. If you just remember “local” rather than “global” as the guiding principle you will be on the right track. We do not want influence from the less-than-truthful globalists at the UN or the Vatican.

Pope5

08/1/15

Thank God Mr. Cruz is in Washington

By: Lloyd Marcus

Ted Cruz

My email account was on fire, everyone excited about Sen Ted Cruz calling Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell a liar on the Senate floor. Cruz cited each of Obama’s unprecedented unlawful power grabs and repeals of our freedoms that the GOP promised to block, only to stab us (We the People/Tea Party) in the back. http://bit.ly/1CZmZCj Immediately, I thought, “Thank God Ted Cruz is in Washington.”

Before I go on, I wish to address a guy whom I will call Ned. Whenever I praise a conservative, Ned emails to correct me, claiming the conservative is a deceitful traitor. When I share reasons for optimism, Ned vehemently disagrees, even seeming a bit angry that I would think our efforts could possibly make a difference in America’s corrupt political environment. Ned always sees the glass less than half empty. I guess we need people like Ned to keep us balanced. Although, I am not quite sure about that.

Sure enough, in response to patriots’ giving Cruz rave reviews for speaking truth to Washington power, Ned ripped into Cruz about questionable votes. Folks, I realize Ted Cruz is not perfect. But then, which presidential candidate is? Jesus is not running for president in 2016.

As a member of the Tea Party since it began, Cruz going down the list of GOP betrayals brought back memories. Remember how we fought and worked our butts off to give the GOP the House, then the Senate? We worked to elect Republicans to stop Obama from rolling out the welcome mat to illegals.

Over a million of us showed up in DC to protest Obamacare.

I thought of all the travel miles, funds, blood, sweat and tears sacrificed by Tea Party Americans; patriots who simply want lawful Constitutional government.

I thought about how Obama sent out his liberal mainstream media air force to bomb us with accusations of racism against the first black president; hoping to soften and diminish our ranks. The Tea Party is not racist, nor do we hate anybody.

In his speech, Cruz did two things that were quite remarkable. First – Cruz exposed the good-cop, bad-cop personal and corporate enrichment scam both parties have been playing on the American people. Second – Cruz spoke with unprecedented clarity. He did not say McConnell misspoke or McConnell was disingenuous. Cruz said McConnell lied.

Cruz has been on a roll speaking the truth, making mincemeat of Obama minions http://bit.ly/1GRt3Hy and Leftist ideologues. http://bit.ly/1Im0bbu He really exposes DC insider political corruption in his book, “A Time For Truth.”

It was refreshing that when pressed by the liberal bias media, Cruz refused to jump on the destroy Donald Trump bandwagon. This tells me that Cruz has backbone and will not automatically play by the Left’s rules of engagement.

It is fair game for GOP presidential contenders to express their disapproval of Trump’s style and tactics. However, when a GOP presidential contender joins the MSM in its evil attempt to brand Trump a racist for simply addressing illegal immigration, red flags go up regarding the character of that contender.

It tells me the contender will say whatever necessary to win. I call that “soulless” politicking.

Such behavior has the awful stench of what happened in Mississippi. In the primary, Republican Thad Cochran’s camp joined Democrats in branding the Tea Party racist. To beat the Tea Party conservative, Cochran’s people despicably made lying phone calls to black voters saying the Tea Party candidate would turn back the clock on racial progress. This is the kind of deplorable evil divisive totally self-serving politicking Cruz exposes in his book.

The GOP presidential field is rich with honorable contenders. I ask myself the following question.

When I lay my head on my pillow at night which candidate winning the WH will cause me to sleep the most peacefully? Who is most likely to remain true to their promises to We the People; fight to repeal Obamacare, end the invasion of our borders, defend life and traditional values?

Who believes in Conservatism enough to throw a lifeline of inspiration to those drowning in the treacherous deep dark sea of Obama’s welfare state America? Who will pray as the song says, “Lord lift us up where we belong” as Americans?

Currently, I believe that candidate is Sen Ted Cruz.

Realizing the fruitlessness of trying to instill a bit of hope/sunshine into Ned, I delete his emails without opening them. Ned has gotten creative. After lunch the waiter brought the check and my fortune cookie. The message inside said, “Ted Cruz sucks! – Ned” (Just kidding)

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

07/28/15

For Kate and America’s Sake, Don’t Let Them Get Away with It.

By: Lloyd Marcus

Kate Steinle

C’mon Nancy, are you really going to go there? How could you stoop so low? Haven’t you the slightest bit of compassion for murdered Kate Steinle and her grieving family? Must scoring political points even trump American lives?

For my relatives who only get mainstream media spin, here is what’s really going on. An illegal alien shot and killed complete stranger, 32 year old Kate Steinle, while enjoying strolling with her dad along a San Francisco pier. Kate’s scumbag murderer had been convicted of 7 felonies and deported five times. And yet, this criminal kept returning to the US without consequence.

The reality is many bad people are entering our country illegally unabated. Heck, Obama even rolls out the welcome mat. Uneducated and unskilled, Obama is confident he can woo them with taxpayer funded handouts, making them future Democrat voters. Consequently, the Obama Administration has released thousands of criminal illegal aliens. http://bit.ly/1HNRNo0

While the coddling of criminal illegals has been going on for many years, Kate’s senseless murder was the straw that broke the camel’s back in the hearts and minds of many Americans.

In his heart-wrenching appeal to congress to pass Kate’s Law, Kate’s dad said the last words he heard his daughter say before she died was, “Help me dad.” http://fxn.ws/1HWucj7

In a nutshell, Kate’s Law says when these deported illegal criminals get caught sneaking back into the US, they get a mandatory five years in jail. Politicians/officials who disobey this law also go to jail. Makes sense? Of course. Will Kate’s Law save Americans lives? Absolutely.

Like the wicked witch of the east (or was it the west), Democrat Nancy Pelosi enters the conversation. Rather than compassionately expressing reservations about Kate’s Law for whatever reasons, Pelosi attacked it.

Here’s the deal folks. Donald Trump is polling high in his bid for the WH by addressing illegal immigration. Pelosi and her fellow Democrats want to protect their illegal-immigrant-future-voters-scheme. So, in typical Democrat fashion, Pelosi and her MSM partners are trying to brand Trump a racist and hater for simply talking about illegal immigration.

Throwing the late Kate Steinle, her family and future American victims under the bus, Miss-ice-water-in-her-veins Pelosi tried to tie Kate’s Law to Trump. Nancy Pelosi said Kate’s Law should be called the “Donald Trump Act”, meaning it is nothing more than hate inspired legislation. http://bit.ly/1DBUfdo

Really, Nancy? Have you no shame?

In the Democratic Party, Pelosi’s win-the-issue-at-any-and-all cost mindset is the norm. This is why it drives me nuts that Democrats get such high marks for their faux compassion.

Even media typically supportive of Democrats was a bit taken a back when Democrat Senate Majority leader Harry Reid said he would not allow a vote to ensure that kids with cancer would get their meds during a budget debate. http://fxn.ws/1FIjZe9 As cold and unbelievable as this sounds, Reid obviously considered the kids’ lives acceptable sacrifices in his quest to beat the Republicans.

Pat Smith is the mother of Sean Smith who was killed at our US consulate in Benghazi. At the casket ceremony, Ms Smith said Hillary Clinton gave her a big hug and lied to her; vowing to punish the person who produced the anti-Muslim video which supposedly caused the attack. http://bit.ly/1AYG0fM

Emails later revealed that Hillary, Obama and other Administration officials knew the attack had nothing to do with a video. http://bit.ly/1g9zW2d The attack on our consulate happened 9-11-2012. It was election time folks.

Obama and his minions were out there telling the American people that terrorism was no longer a threat. So when our Benghazi Ambassador Stevens anticipated an attack due to the anniversary of 9/11, he pleaded for extra security. His request was denied. Ambassador Stevens, Pat Smith’s son Sean and two other Americans were killed in the Islamic terrorist attack. Those guys were sitting ducks folks. Sitting ducks.

And yet, the mainstream media continues to hide these truths about the Democrats, awarding them gold stars for compassion.

So Nancy Pelosi taking the below-the-gutter low road while claiming the high road regarding Kate’s Law is par for the Democrat course. My prayer is that we cease allowing them to get away with it.

Kate’s Law is a very, very, very good thing.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

06/4/15

Jeh Johnson Responsible for Illegal Criminal Release

By: Denise Simon
FoundersCode.org

The House is taking some positive steps this year as they did last by taking away Obama’s money defending the illegals.

House votes to block Obama legal defense on immigration actions yet Jeh Johnson is acting quietly on his own. Just consider what Jeh Johnson did in 2013 releasing thousands of prisoners.

The Department of Homeland Security has a National Terrorism Advisory System that states on the website they effectively communicate information about terrorists threats to the public. The website even asks for your help. Then they have the nerve to have a fact sheet on the ‘broken’ immigration system where suggestions are noted that through Executive Orders, the ‘brokenness’ can be fixed.

So, releasing almost 4000 level 1 foreign national criminals from prison to roam our streets is the answer? Would this include those that are domestic ISIS terrorists?

3,700 illegal immigrant ‘Threat Level 1’ criminals released into U.S. by DHS

Most of the illegal immigrant criminals Homeland Security officials released from custody last year were discretionary, meaning the department could have kept them in detention but chose instead to let them onto the streets as their deportation cases moved through the system, according to new numbers from Congress.

Some of those released were the worst of the worst — more than 3,700 “Threat Level 1” criminals, who are deemed the top priority for deportation, were still released out into the community even as they waited for their immigration cases to be heard.

Homeland Security officials have implied their hands are tied by court rulings in many cases, but the numbers, obtained by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, showed 57 percent of the criminals released were by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s own choice, and they could have been kept instead.

“Put aside the spin, and the fact is that over 17,000 of the criminal aliens released last year were released due to ICE discretion, representing 57 percent of the releases,” said Mr. Goodlatte. “The Obama administration’s lax enforcement policies are reckless and needlessly endanger our communities.”

In a statement to The Washington Times, ICE said it takes release decisions seriously and makes a judgment in each case. That holds true even for Threat Level 1 criminals.

“Not all Level 1 criminal aliens are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond,” the agency said, pointing to mitigating circumstances that can convince agents to release the most serious criminals.

“ICE personnel making custody determinations also take into consideration humanitarian factors such as deteriorated health, advanced age, and caretaking responsibilities. All custody determinations are made on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the totality of circumstances in each case,” the agency said.

ICE officials insist that those who are released are still monitored, often by electronic ankle bracelets but also through a system of phone checks or by paying a bond.

However, nearly all of those released under electronic monitoring broke the terms of their release, according to ICE numbers.

In fiscal year 2014, ICE put about 41,000 immigrants through electronic monitoring, and more than 30,000 of them broke the terms of their release — many of them racking up multiple violations. All told, they notched nearly 300,000 violations in one year alone, or an average of 10 instances per violator.

The rate has gone down slightly so far in fiscal year 2015. Of the 34,002 immigrants put into electronic monitoring, 27,317 have broken the rules a combined 162,322 times.

ICE said violations can include what they deem minor problems, such as someone lacking a strong enough cell signal for voice verification by phone or someone calling in too early or a few minutes late. Low batteries or jostling an electronic bracelet during sports can also cause a monitoring alarm to go off incorrectly, ICE said.

Of the more than 30,000 detainees who broke the conditional terms of their release and monitoring in 2014, only 2,420 were deemed to have been serious enough breaches to rearrest them.

Part of ICE’s problem is that it doesn’t have enough beds to go out and pick up violators, according to an inspector general’s report released earlier this year.

Agency officials said they would like to be able to hold those who willfully break the rules, but they haven’t requested more beds. Indeed, Mr. Obama’s 2016 budget request actually asked for fewer beds to hold detainees next year, arguing that he wants to put more emphasis on the very alternatives that are being violated.

ICE’s treatment of those awaiting their deportation proceedings has been controversial for several years.

In 2013, the agency released 36,007 convicted criminals who were awaiting the outcome of their deportation cases. Those released had amassed 116 homicide convictions, 15,635 drunken driving convictions and 9,187 convictions stemming from what ICE labeled involvement with “dangerous drugs.”

The total dropped to about 30,000 in 2014 — but the seriousness of the offenses increased, with 193 homicide convictions among the detainees and 16,070 drunken driving convictions. There were also 426 sexual assaults and 303 kidnapping convictions, ICE said.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and ICE Director Sarah Saldana said the numbers were unacceptable and imposed new rules requiring releases to be vetted by senior agency officials to make sure they were correct.

Both Mr. Johnson and Ms. Saldana also said many of the releases are required and give them little discretion — particularly those made under a 2001 Supreme Court decision known as the Zadvydas case, when the justices ruled that immigrants couldn’t generally be detained indefinitely.

That means that if a home country won’t take someone back, ICE must release them after about six months.

But the new numbers obtained by Mr. Goodlatte suggest Zadvydas-related releases were fewer than 2,500 in 2014, or only about 8 percent of the total — compared to the 57 percent that ICE admits were completely discretionary.

The rest of the releases were divided between cases where an immigration judge ordered bond or where ICE was unable to obtain travel documents but it wasn’t considered a mandatory release under the Zadvydas ruling.

03/31/15

The Progressive Transformation of Our Federal Government

By: Frank Salvato

Unionize Illegal Immigrants

Protesters participate in a display of civil disobedience as labor organizers escalate their campaign to unionize the industry’s workers. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

With the addition of Ecuador and the Philippines as signatories to “memorandums of understanding,” the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) – effectively acting on behalf of the US federal government – has agreed to engage three foreign countries in international outreach programs designed to teach immigrants how to participate in labor organizing in the United States. Ecuador and the Philippines join Mexico as signatories to the memorandums. The agreements – which do not distinguish between those who have entered the US legally and those who have not, present several questions, including those of jurisdiction, treaty making and purpose.

The NLRB, by charter, is an independent agency of the United States government. Its members are all appointed by the President of the United States with the consent of the US Senate. It is divided into two authoritative entities: the General Counsel and the Board. The General Counsel is tasked with investigating and prosecuting unfair labor practice claims; the Board is the adjudicative body that rules on the cases brought to it.

The NLRB’s authority is legislatively limited to private sector employees (excluding governmental, railroad and airline employees covered by the Adamson Railway Labor Act, and agricultural employees) and the US Postal Service. Yet over the years, many court decisions have allowed for the board’s jurisdictional standards to become so low that almost all employers whose businesses have any appreciable impact on interstate commerce have been absorbed into the its purview, rightly or not.

What is missing from the board’s legislated organizational purview is the authority to extend its power outside the United States. Further, when it comes to agreements between the United States and foreign governments, the exclusive right to create and execute treaties in the name of the United States and/or the American people rests with the Executive Branch, pursuant to the consent of the US Senate, codified by Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution. By entering into agreements with foreign nations – agreements that possess the full legal weight of the United States government, the NLRB has essentially circumvented the constitutional process for entering into treaties and usurped the authorities of both the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of the federal government.

Additionally, the basic functions of the NLRB are meant to be centered on non-partisan arbitration and enforcement. Nowhere in the board’s legislated authority is there a proviso to advance the causes of either employers or organized labor, let alone a provision that grants them the power to teach labor organization to any demographic or faction, nationally or internationally; legally or illegally present in the United States. By entering into an agreement to provide instruction on labor organization, the NLRB has not only abdicated its mandate to be non-partisan, it has demonstrated a decided bias supporting organized labor.

Ronald J. Pestritto, Graduate Dean and Professor of Politics at Hillsdale College, writes in Woodrow Wilson: Godfather of Liberalism,

“Policymaking today, in many areas of national concern such as the environment, health care, and financial regulation, is done primarily by agencies within the bureaucracy to which Congress has delegated broad swaths of legislative authority. Recent battles ranging from rules for greenhouse gas emissions to benefits that must be covered by private health insurance plans have been fought not primarily in Congress, but in or against administrative agencies that are exercising the power given to them by Congress.”

The NLRB is certainly part of the Progressive Movement’s installed bureaucracy; a bureaucracy that functions parallel to the authority of elected government; a bureaucracy that functions even when our elected government does not. By entering into ipso facto treaties with foreign nations, the NLRB has permanently opened the Pandora’s box of transformative bureaucracy, and it is a direct threat to our original form of government.

Frank Salvato is the Executive Director of BasicsProject.org a grassroots, non-partisan, research and education initiative focusing on Constitutional Literacy, and internal and external threats facing Western Civilization. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention. His opinion and analysis have been published by The American Enterprise Institute, The Washington Times, The Jewish World Review, Accuracy in Media, Human Events, Townhall.com and are syndicated nationally. Mr. Salvato has appeared on The O’Reilly Factor on FOX News Channel, and is the author of six books examining Islamofascism and Progressivism, including “Understanding the Threat of Radical Islam”. Mr. Salvato’s personal writing can be found at FrankJSalvato.com.