Obama Gives Amnesty (aka Deferred Action Process) to Illegal Aliens (Open Thread)

US border fence

© Miri WTPOTUS June 15, 2012  

Today, unilaterally, Barack Hussein Obama II, plans to give amnesty to as many as 800,000 illegal aliens who came to the USA as children.  They will not be deported.  They will be allowed to stay and to work in the USA. 

[Emphasis added.]

President Obama will discuss his administration’s apparent end-run around Congress on immigration policy at 1:15 p.m. on Friday.  … 

Bypassing Congress, the new policy sets the following criteria for young people who came here illegally with their parents:

— Must be under age 30 and have come to the U.S. under the age of 16;

— Must have continuously lived here for at least five years

— Must be in school, or have graduated from high school, have a general education development certificate, or be honorably discharged veterans of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States;

— Must not have felony convictions or “a significant misdemeanor offense,” multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety;

Only those individuals who can prove through verifiable documentation that they meet these criteria will be eligible for deferred action,” the news release said.

The new guidelines take effect immediately, and the Obama administration expects to begin taking applications within 60 days.

Thus creating yet another bureaucracy!  Who said Obama doesn’t create jobs?

Rather amusing is the criterion about “verifiable documentation.”  Speaking for many, I should like to see verifiable documentation for the person formulating rules that ignore the duly-elected, legal, and eligible representatives of We the People.  Will this new bureaucracy accept digital images on the Internet as proof of eligibility?

The new policy will give “work permits” to the illegal aliens who benefit from the “deferred action process” (aka, AMNESTY).  What is being “deferred?”  Deferred implies that consequences will happen, sooner or later.  Or is it citizenship that’s deferred, until Obama gets another term?

Will deferred-action-process (DAP) illegal aliens be allowed to donate to Obama’s campaign via text message? Can they use their work permits as identification to register to vote for Obama in November

This is simply another way to gin up Obama’s base, exactly like when they play the race card. 

By any means necessary.   Their Alinsky, communist motto.

Obama dares the Romney campaign to speak out. Let’s hope that Romney accepts their challenge and does forcefully speak out for the rule of law and for all legal U.S. citizens and legal immigrants, especially those who will be displaced by allowing illegal aliens to take jobs that all legal persons need. 

A recent news story reported that U.S. teens have great difficulty finding jobs these days because the jobs usually available to teens are currently held by older citizens who’ve lost jobs in the Obama economy.  Will these citizen teens now have to also compete for jobs with 800,000 DAP illegal aliens?  Seems so.  That will not help them to pay off their college loans!  

Who are Obama’s true constituents?  He is the president of whom?  US citizens or illegal aliens? 

The AP states that this new policy by Obama mirrors a proposal by Senator Marco Rubio, although I seriously doubt that Rubio’s plan was to IMPOSE his plan by executive fiat.

The extraordinary step comes one week before President Barack Obama plans to address the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ annual conference in Orlando, Fla. Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney is scheduled to speak to the group on Thursday. …

The change is likely to cause an outcry from congressional Republicans, who are sure to perceive Obama’s actions as an end run around them. Republicans already have complained that previous administration uses of prosecutorial discretion in deportations amount to back-door amnesty. Romney and many Republican lawmakers want tighter border security measures before considering changes in immigration law. Romney opposes offering legal status to illegal immigrants who attend college but has said he would do so for those who serve in the armed forces.

Most US citizens want tighter border security, as all polls show.  If there were a vote today, most US citizens would oppose amnesty and any “path to citizenship” for ILLEGAL aliens.

Once again, the media and the Democrat party assume that citizens of Hispanic descent march in lockstep with progressives like Obama and don’t believe, as most other citizens do, in the rule of law or don’t similarly resent those who come here illegally to take jobs, benefits, and resources that rightfully belong to US citizens and legal immigrants.  The countries of origin of these illegals in no way would consider amnesty for persons who illegally entered their countries

Why is the United States, alone among nations, expected to ignore its own laws and give amnesty to those who flout our laws and our sovereignty? 

Why is this announced today?  Friday is traditionally the day for “document dumps” but one must wonder if this leak had something to do with it:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency charged with guarding the U.S. borders, has written a secret draft policy that would let its agents catch and release low-priority illegal immigrants rather than bring them in for processing and prosecution.

The policy, which has not been signed off on, would be the latest move by the Obama administration to set new priorities for the nation’s immigration services, and would bring CBP in line with other Homeland Security Department agencies that already use such “prosecutorial discretion.”

The policy was detailed in an internal memo obtained by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith and reviewed by The Washington Times, which confirmed the document.

According to the memo, the draft policy “provides circumstances when to pursue enforcement actions … and includes detailed discussion of several factors CBP personnel should consider when exercising discretion.”

Opponents say it amounts to another “backdoor amnesty” for illegal immigrants and could give the administration a tool to pressure Border Patrol agents not to pursue some people.

Why exactly do we have laws? 

If we are not going to enforce the laws, then why doesn’t the Obama Administration save us all money and disband the Border Patrol?  The bureucracy remains; the purpose does not.  Does that make sense to you?

Backdoor amnesties upon backdoor amnesties.  We the People are extraneous, as are our representatives. 

Time for a new regime.  Time for a personnel dump in DC.

212 responses to “Obama Gives Amnesty (aka Deferred Action Process) to Illegal Aliens (Open Thread)

  1. Has anyone heard about the date Sheriff Joe will hold his presser?

    Whatever he’s got (and it seems to be a ton of new, damaging info) needs to get out there NOW! This adminstration is waaaay out of control and doing whatever they please, illegally.

    C’mon, Sheriff Joe; deliver the goods. America is depending on you!

  2. From Russia, with Death
    June 15, 2012
    Ralph Peters Snips

    The low point of the American presidency over the past half-century wasn’t Watergate, which is almost trivial compared to the corruption of the Obama administration, from treasonous leaks of classified material to the Justice Department’s assault on honest elections. No, my fellow Americans, the lowest point of the presidency occurred a few months back when President Obama, caught by a microphone he didn’t know was hot, told Russia’s then-president, now prime-minister, Dimitry Medvedev to relay to strong-man Vladimir Putin a request for patience. Essentially, Obama said he needed time to fool the American people until the November elections then he could cut the deals that Putin wanted.

    When an American president trusts Russia’s leaders more than he trusts our country’s voters, things in the Oval Office are rotten to a degree far beyond a bunch of clumsy burglars breaking into a campaign office. This is a betrayal that would have been unthinkable even to Bill Clinton.

    Now we see the fruits of the poisonous seeds Obama planted yet again: Despite public pleas from Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Moscow not only won’t help stop the slaughter in Syria, but is now supplying the Assad regime with additional attack helicopters-perfect weapons to employ against civilian neighborhoods that have no self-defense capabilities. Unlike our own attack helicopters, which emphasize precision, Russia’s helicopters, old and new, are built to maximize destruction.

    Moscow backs the Assad regime for several reasons (not least, just to rub our snouts in our cowardice and impotence, thanks to President Obama’s dreadful deal-making). Syria is Russia’s last major Arab client-state. Syria buys more than three-quarters of its weapons from Russia’s ailing arms industry. The Assad regime has provided a naval base at Tartus to Moscow, allowing Russia’s rusty fleet to operate in the Mediterranean. And Russia desperately wants to preserve Iran’s influence in the Middle East as a counterbalance to America’s oil-state allies. So.Russia protects and supports Iran; arms and shields the Assad regime; and gives us the middle finger.

    Obama’s response? Nothing.

    It gets worse. Even in the wake of Russia’s latest rigged election and Putin’s “victory,” brave Russians continue to protest in the streets. And Russia’s “Tea Partiers” aren’t just having their say on a sunny day on the Mall: Russia’s pro-democracy protesters face beatings, arrests, imprisonment, constant harassment, the loss of jobs, eviction, and denied access to education. These are courageous human beings struggling against a cynical regime with the odds stacked terribly against them.

    Obama’s response? Nothing.

    For all his rhetoric, Obama has been inculcated with the hard-left’s fondness for dictators, from Caracas to the Kremlin. When the old left spoke of the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” the emphasis was always on the word “dictatorship.” The core belief of the hard left is that the members of its inner circles are immeasurably smarter than the average benighted citizen-and you see powerful vestiges of that in the Obama administration, in which inept academics inflict disastrous programs on the productive members of our society (while pandering to the most-parasitical elements). As we saw in the-thankfully failed-Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election, the left doesn’t respect the will of the majority when the majority rejects the left. Once elected, leftist regimes don’t want to be bothered with the electorate.


  3. open… “Latino voters” … a HOT photos of O-DICK (comments good)

    • That’s an excellent article, chock full of history that we need to remember. The Republicans and all conservatives need to get these facts out to the general public, by any means necessary, given that they are ignored or downplayed by the lamestream, complicit media.

  4. Is President Obama wiping out all the back taxes for any American that was born here, that they may owe? What he has done in essence is told the illegal immigrants it is OK that you didn’t pay taxes while you were in our country illegally. If this in fact happens, and he gives them amnesty, then he should wipe out all back taxes owed to the IRS for any American Citizen and let them start clean too.

    • Owed?????????? I want a refund!

      • Never underestimate the power of obot lawyers. I’ve looked at WND and at Obama Release Your Records to see if there’s some explanation, but none so far.

      • Me, too. That’s a good point, abrellbama. Welcome! I wonder what Rubio’s real plan was (besides to actually put it to a vote by the eligible, duly-elected representatives of the people). Most of the similar plans by Republicans required people to pay PENALTIES and go to the BACK of the line of people waiting for permits. The spin is that this isn’t “permanent legal residency” but they get away with NO PENALTY of any kind AND with a JOB that rightfully should go to CITIZENS first and then LEGAL IMMIGRANTS second. Even with the LEGAL immigration policy, they REQUIRE the employer to first attempt to find CITIZENS for the jobs. This new policy is YET ANOTHER WAY for Obama to put ILLEGALS AHEAD of legal immigrants who are subject to first seeing the jobs advertised to citizens. There’s NOTHING in this policy that I can see that requires jobs to first be offered to citizens or legal immigrants. Of course, we don’t SEE anything because he’s NOT TRANSPARENT and as usual nothing is worked out yet–such as the bureaucracy required to police the eligibility criteria. But he has an Alinsky answer for that, too: He will say they are too understaffed to do any checking so they will simply ignore these bogus criteria they put out there in the first place and give the work permits to anybody who asks for one. IF Congress tries to stop them from funding the bureaucracy needed to do the checking, he’ll say the same thing. They don’t have the money and it’s Congress’s fault so he’s just going to hand out the permits like candy and if you don’t like it, blame Congress. They have no REAL plan to make these people jump through ANY hoops. Already it’s reported that some group associated with Project Vote is mailing out thousands upon thousands of voter registration forms, targeted to Hispanics. When asked how they determine whether or not the person they mail the form to is LEGALLY HERE, they said they don’t. They pretended to be astounded by that “hypothetical” and said that the onus is upon the recipient to be honest and to not register to vote if they’re ineligible. But you see the trick here? They know a goodly number of the people WILL VOTE (it’s been proven already that they do), and in addition, Barry’s new policy combined with these groups sending the forms will make a goodly number of them BELIEVE that they ARE eligible to vote now. How many uneducated illegal immigrants know the US laws on voting? Do you know the voting laws in Mexico? In Poland? In Russia? In China? I would love to see a copy of this form. Do they make it look OFFICIAL? Or is it, in fact, official because these groups can pick up the forms at the elections office to mail them out? Obviously, they likely coordinate with the campaign. Why do they only target Hispanics? It’s outrageous and Soros’s Secretary of State project is working on ensuring that the elections offices are overwhelmed with new registrations, so they can’t check thoroughly (how CAN they check illegal status, anyway?), ensuring that these new registrations come in at the last minute, ensuring that lawyers will be there at the polls to scream immediately should anybody even attempt to question a “new” voter. It’s a coordinated plan to steal elections. When will the Republicans wake up? http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/campaign-solicits-foreigners-to-register-to-vote/?cat_orig=politics

    • Will all of the illegals who have used stolen social security numbers now get their very own number? This could be a major problem for them with their employers when they try to change that number. It will prove they were illegal, and the employers could be in real hot water too. Oooooh lots of consequences could be forthcoming. These are issues that the Democrats didn’t think about or if they did, they could care less about what happens to these people after they get their vote. Hispanics should be really careful how they take Obama’s new policy directive, as should employers who are supposed to use E-verify to check the citizenship of their employees before hiring. False documents will be in the files of the employers, and red flags will go up when the SS# is changed, I think.

      • These are all good points that they have not explained. What will they do when they present false documents? What will they do when people who already have been working or already have given other identification to schools and employers suddenly turn up with NEW identification? How will anybody know WHO the REAL person is? (Just like with Barry!) These people will get out of jail free. If this is NOT amnesty, then what is it? They will certainly want to consolidate their SS accounts so they get credit for the money they and their employers paid in already, if any of them did pay in. If they did not, then what’s going to happen to them? Are they exempt from EVEN MORE LAWS THAT WE THE PEOPLE MUST FOLLOW? There is still no executive order laying out the process. So how will anyone know how this is going to work? Part of the policy will probably be to prevent employers from hassling them at all when they try to change their ID #’s. Oh, I have a life-sized picture of Holder and his peeps going after the employers but not the illegals who provided bogus documents!

    • That’s good. Who is gonna be first to file a discrimination suit over this — It is discrimination for it to be a crime for me NOT to pay taxes but leverage for an illegal to have my jobs that should go to my kids. Crime for me because of my ethnicity and national association. Not a crime for them because of their ethnicity and national association.

  5. The lamestream media admits today that Obama’s ploy is to get him more voters in swing states (as many as 6 to 10) that have large hispanic populations. They also write, almost as if they admire his cleverness, that “right or wrong” his new policy will get him more hispanic votes. And they report that DemoncRATS happily “dare” Republicans to oppose it and look as if they lack compassion.

    It’s easy for the Republicans to oppose it and appear compassionate because it means that as many as 1.4 MILLION ILLEGAL aliens will compete for jobs, in a depressed economy, that poor whites, blacks, AND HISPANIC citizens need. Republicans can easily say that they care about the AMERICAN CITIZENS that they seek to represent. They don’t, like Obama, care more about foreign ILLEGAL ALIENS. Let’s have compassion FIRST for our own people–for those who do things the RIGHT WAY (Obama loves to use the word “right” as in “right thing to do”).

    How do they think this will help him? Those hispanics who love him will vote for him, anyway. Those who now have got from him what they wanted, why should they bother to go vote for him now? Those who are angry will be energized to go vote against him. These will be all the people in the states (like CA, on the brink of bankruptcy) who will have to compete with all these ILLEGAL ALIENS for scarce jobs. And it will be all those people who recognize what a DANGER this guy is to our Constitutional Republic. He’s a totalitarian.

    Here’s my latest fear if he does get reelected: He’s already thumbed his nose at the clear language of the Constitution with regard to eligibility. Do you not believe that he already has lawyers working on HOW they can overthrow the language about how many terms a president can have? His role model FDR already managed to get more than 2 terms. Will Barry EVER LEAVE the WH if he’s reelected? He did, after all, tell Putin that his is his last election. What plans are they working on even now?

    • Has everyone noticed the silence from Congress on this issue? Only a couple are speaking out. Rubio who thinks it is great and King from Iowa saying he is going to sue. Where are the other 500+? Illegals got their tongue? What a friggin’ bunch of mamby pambies! Where are our REPRESENTATIVE VOICES that speak for the USA CITIZENS? Indeed, they don’t know who they work for!

      • I don’t think Rubio thinks it’s great. He was going to go through the Congress, as he’s supposed to do. It was to be decided by our representatives and NOT one man who wouldn’t give a rat’s ass about any of these people unless he wanted to USE THEM and their plight to advance his own political career. If I were one of them, I would not trust them to actually do this in the first place. It’s all for show. Just like his newly released personal moments in the WH with his family is FOR SHOW. Just as the marriage proposal STAGED IN OUR WH by a “transgendered man” asking her girlfriend to marry her is FOR SHOW. And Barry loves this “in your face” stuff, anyway. Anything to tweak those people he hates who cling to guns, religion, and xenophobia, in his opinion.

  6. Barack Obama — a legend in his own mind?

    O Invents Own Legend
    By Michael Goodwin
    June 17, 2012 Snips

    Watching President Obama flop around like a fish out of water, careening from gaffe to desperation to dishonesty, I find myself searching for ways to put his troubling behavior into historic perspective.

    Is this The Unmaking of a President? Or is it The Unmasking? Perhaps we are witnessing an American Tragedy. Or maybe we’re seeing final proof his election was The Great Mistake.

    All those fit the facts, and lead to a shared conclusion. So far, the 2012 election has almost nothing to do with Mitt Romney. Even the GOP doesn’t love its choice, but the race is a dead heat because Obama is so disappointing.

    His fall from grace does more than merely confirm the conventional wisdom that elections are a referendum on the incumbent. Notwithstanding White House efforts to make the race about something or someone else, Obama remains the straw that stirs the drink.

    But what a strange straw he is. Far stranger than we knew.

    The man who campaigned against the “torture” of war prisoners boasts of killing suspects while taking no prisoners. He called rising debts “un-American” before setting a new record for borrowing. He railed against the imperial presidency before stretching it beyond recognition. The former law-school instructor tried to bully the Supreme Court.

    Just who is Barack Obama? The question lingers like an itch that can’t be scratched.

    • Thinking about the possibility that he is the son of FMD, born in Hawaii after his young, underaged mother posed for nude images and engaged in threesomes with Davis and his wife (something that would be quite “embarrassing”), I come full circle to things we discussed years ago, at TD’s: How profoundly sad it would be if true and how his personality, his outsized ego, his inability to deal with any threat to his self-image, his “poetry”, his detached affect, his apparent lack of empathy, his bullying behavior towards Lia– it all fits the profile of an abused child. It also fits the behavior of his mother who may have resented him and took it out on him that he was a constant reminder of her mistakes. It’s sad. We said so at the time but this is not the type of person you want to hand the type of power he now has.

      I also think Kervorkian who, no matter how he pretended to be humanitarian, truly ENJOYED watching his victims die and who rejoiced at the way he manipulated his supporters and was able to GET AWAY WITH MURDER. He was truly a serial killer who found a schtick. I think about Kervorkian when I read about Barry spending hours watching his drone snuff films.

      This theory about FMD MIGHT also explain why so many won’t touch this with a ten foot pole, perhaps even the FL judge. It’s as if he KNOWS the truth. Why did he point out to Klayman that while the bc might be forged, it doesn’t necessarily indicate a foreign birth? Will the change he asked Klayman to make give him the hook upon which he can hang a dismissal? I can’t see how, but I’m just asking the question. It’s like they find loopholes within loopholes and redefine the English language until it sounds like Ambonese.

      But what IF the truth is that he was born in Hawaii to SAD and FMD? Both were US citizens, so he meets the criteria. What if ALL OF THEM know this for certain and they’re looking the other way on the fraud he’s perpetrated on the people because they will be spun as lacking compassion for this poor victim of his parents, through no fault of his own? We see how they fear the racist label. This would be as bad. Now they’re stuck with it because they made the stupid decision 4 years ago to let it go.

      FMD was a communist, but they helped Barry hide this fact, too. What if they bought the argument that the obots likely spun? Why should Barry, a promising lawyer, a brilliant orator and genius, who overcame this terrible beginning to become the first AA president of the Harvard Law Review–why should he be denied a political career just because his parents were perverts? I can see them cowering in fear over that question and the inevitability of how they would be treated by the media if they dared to expose him for who he is. White guilt. Whatever. It makes sense and perfectly fits nearly all we’ve seen, WHICH IS THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES ME THINK THAT IT’S BOGUS, TOO. Every time they come up with a theory that PERFECTLY EXPLAINS ALL THE ANOMALIES, MY RADAR GOES OFF. Even so …

      • I heard the end of Peter Boyles’ interview with Joel Gilbert this morning on the radio…it should all be available at khow.com. What I heard was interesting, if not brand new (?) there are at least some topics (speculation?) that maybe haven’t been discussed for a while or I hadn’t heard yet.

        He claimed that the reason BO Sr. came back in 1971 was that Punahou wouldn’t accept Barry as an affirmative action entry because his BC said “Unknown” under “Father” and w/o a father all they had was a white mother and no evidence for “african-american” AND that it may have been the first time he met Barry OR Ann.

        Like I said, I only heard the end but it was an interesting interview.

        • Whoa! Now that is interesting and it makes sense that they would try to get special treatment for Barry by hook or by crook. That was among the MOST EXPENSIVE schools in the entire county. I remember way back when FactCheck posted their pictures of the SFCOLB. They deliberately photographed one image with a big flare of light across the very area where the father’s name would appear. I messed with that image and came to the conclusion that there was NOTHING there where the father’s name would appear. It’s foreshortened and illegible, but other areas from the SFCOLB where there WAS data printed showed black splotches. Illegible, but there. Where the father’s name should appear, there was NOTHING. No black splotch indicating that ANYTHING was printed there. So, would they truly, these days, print “unknown” or would they simply leave the area blank where no father was put onto the BC? Politically correct answer: They wouldn’t make up a name and they probably wouldn’t print “unknown”, so best case would be a blank space. Now, other photos do show a father’s name, but those could be photos AFTER the image was modified. The one with the flare of light was the one showing the embossed seal. So perhaps was THAT the only TRUE photo of a SFCOLB that the campaign did have from Hawaii? And there was no father’s name on it, which fact they obscured by that flare of light?

          • So, just trying to refresh my memory on things FMD related. His bio says he had five kids starting at age 44, which would be starting anytime in 1949. The bio’s always list the kids starting with Lynn, then the other 3 girls, then Mark. Does anyone know if that is just because they are all girls, he’s the only boy? Usually kids are listed in order by age, but the other way could make sense to someone.
            Can’t find dob’s for any of them except Mark’s blog says he was born 11-09-1950 at Kapiolani. And there’s a picture of the couple with Lynn as a baby, (at Obamafile i think) where she is described as their first child. So, she was born in 49, and he would have to be the next in line…just trying to fill in the holes.

            • Thanks, SEO. I wondered about Mark’s age, too, so probably it will be argued that he never ran across Barry because he was already out of the house when his dad got visitation with The One, whom Pele favors. 🙂

          • But SEO if Frank was the father, not necessarily would BHO have to fit into Frank’s original family. He could spread his sperm whenever with whomever, and it wouldn’t matter where BHO would fit into the sequence of children in Frank’s main family. Illegitimate is just that. If Frank was screwing around, he wouldn’t necessarily have to acknowledge BHO as his kid.

            Any psychologist looking at the dynamics of the purported Obama family would say it was dysfunctional in a multitude of ways. The fake family has been tutored to say what they say. How could they all come up with the identical information and say it in the same way – including dates when things were supposed to occur? If you asked my 5 brothers about a specific incident, I doubt they could name a date, or tell the story the same way. Nothing makes sense as it is pure fabrication just like his book and him.

          • OK, I don’t know how to reply so my response ends up below Bridgette’s comment on this, so…it’s up here! 🙂
            I’m not that convinced of the FMD paternity in general, although Joel Gilbert makes a good case (I personally don’t see that strong a physical resemblance), I was just trying to follow up on what seems like another possible “detour” from the story as given…I don’t think Mark Davis would have a reason to lie about his birthdate, but every bio seemed to list them as Lynn, Beth, Jeanne, Jill and Mark. Would IMPLY he’s the youngest (in which case, 1950 would be impossible with the other info given) but nothing is definite.

  7. http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/06/author-tom-ballantyne-interviews.html
    This might have already been linked but Ballentyne mentions butterdezillion in this video, which is a rather odd interview of Detective Zullo. More than half of it is Ballentyne naming all the people who show no interest in Arpaio’s investigation. You know, I don’t CARE if Barry is a NBC; what I care about is how serious it is if they FORGED documents and presented them to voters as legitimate (and our entire government looks the other way). How can they all stand by and let this happen? It’s outrageous. Those documents are beyond doubt not legitimate. Do they truly think that it’s fine for a man to pretend to be who and what he is not and to then TRICK people into voting for a nonentity? What is his legal name? Who swore the oath to the Constitution the second time, in Roberts’s chambers? WHO DID THE PEOPLE ELECT? If they elected Barack Hussein Obama II and that person DOES NOT LEGALLY EXIST, then this person in the WH is NOT the president. His lawyers claim he’s not the nominee, even though his name appears on the ballots. So he’s not the elected potus, if the name that appeared on the ballot is not HIS LEGAL NAME.

    • Hi Ron, Do you know who is the “old man ” ?

    • Excellent article, Dr. P. This part

      “All powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution,
      nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the

      makes me go hmmmm.

      There is nothing specific in the Constitution that delegates to the federal goverment the VETTING of presidential candidates. That’s our problem, isn’t it? How many times have we heard that there’s no federal law that spells out the process by which candidates PROVE their eligibility? There’s language about objections and if someone has “failed to qualify” but there’s no law or process spelled out on the federal level for HOW a person “qualifies”.

      If states have nothing in their laws or Constitution that addresses how to vet presidential candidates so that they meet the qualifications laid out in the Constitution, then it seems obvious that that “power” is “reserved” for and “to the people.”

      So We the People ALONE have the power and the STANDING to require Obama to show his qualifications for the office, beyond ANY doubt.

  8. “Wrongheaded

    From Fox News: “HBO has apologized for using a model head of former President George W. Bush in a grisly decapitation scene for its hit drama ‘Game of Thrones.’

    “It’s not a choice, not a political statement!” one of the writers insisted. “We just had to use what heads we had around.”

    Sure, totally understandable. Heads of presidents are lying around and just end up on stakes. Happens all the time.”

    The above is from the article from the NY Post that Bridgette linked above. At least we’re not the only ones who don’t buy their explanation.

    • They already made their statement by using the head, didn’t they? Apologies not accepted. Why didn’t they use Obama’s head? They didn’t have it available? Too costly for HBO to make another one, really? The Bush haranguing and blaming should be over, but they don’t have another scapegoat and it has been 3 1/2 years.

      They haven’t seen anything yet, if Obama isn’t jailed for all he has done and perpetrated, we the people aren’t giving up raking him over the coals. If they think this eligibility fiasco related to the unlawful usurper is going to go Luo, Irish, English, Scot free, they have another thought coming. You can bet your bottom dollar they are VERY worried what will happen to the complicit go alongs once the Republicans take back the executive and legislative branches of government. The worm is turning and it is turning against the Ismistas! We’ve had enough of their anti-American crap and criminal behavior made to look lawful.

      • Really. That would be real “diversity”. There seems to be a shortage of black, Asian, and hispanic faces/heads on that program, although they do have the “little people” represented. HBO has made millions on that series. But they expect us to believe that they can’t afford a prop that somebody could probably buy at any Halloween-themed store for $50. They did it to be funny but it backfired. Now they’re worried about a boycott, which they should be.

  9. 17,000 call for Holder to resign! The members of the National Border Patrol Council.


    “Border Patrol agents are indoctrinated from day one of their training that “integrity is their most important trait and that without it, they have little use to the agency.” He said agents who lie or show a lack of candor are disciplined quickly.

    “The standard that applies to these agents should at a minimum be applied to those who lead them,” Mr. McCubbin said. “If Eric Holder were a Border Patrol agent and not the attorney general, he would have long ago been found unsuitable for government employment and terminated.”

  10. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_TRIBAL_CASINO?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-06-18-10-14-37

    The SCOTUS allows a lawsuit against an Indian casino to proceed against Sotomayor’s lone dissent. A loss for some of Barry’s peeps. The issue is that this “tribe” didn’t exist until they wanted to make a casino. Then land was put into trust by the government and the new “tribe” set up a casino. I wonder whose land it was prior to this event?

    From this old story, it becomes apparent that the plaintiff was said to not have “standing”, that he argued that the casino affected his property values, and that the elite professors thought the SCOTUS would not allow the lawsuit to go forward. Their bad. Maybe the worm is turning. http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/allegan_county/supreme-court-takes-wayland-casino-case

  11. From Judicial Watch email – June 18, 2012

    Last Friday, President Barack Obama once again exhibited the lawlessness that is the hallmark of his presidency.

    And he also showed that nothing will stop him in his drive to retain power …including the United States Constitution!

    His politically-driven decision to effectively grant amnesty to under-30 year old illegal aliens is an insult to all law-abiding American citizens and to foreigners who are waiting in line, following the rules and taking the necessary steps to do the right things to enter the United States legally.

    Even more importantly, Obama’s new amnesty policy may be an unconstitutional power grab violating the separation of powers, since he is unilaterally making this decision to change the law that was passed by Congress and that he swore to uphold!

    Judicial Watch lawyers are right now examining the President’s action…and I can assure you that we will be prepared take whatever actions we can to investigate and challenge this assault on the rule of law!

  12. Really, for the headline – 6 yr old illegal held rather than a human smuggling operation involving 16 people! How misleading! Get caught in AZ by Joe – and the law will be followed fools!

    Sheriff Arpaio detains six-year-old illegal immigrant
    June 18, 2012

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office detained a group of undocumented immigrants, including a six-year-old girl who was not with her parents.

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office detained 16 people believed to be in the United States illegally–including a six-year-old girl. The arrest took place Friday night in Maricopa County as part of a human-smuggling investigation, the Arizona Republic reported. While the other 15 suspected illegal immigrants have been booked into jail, the young girl was turned over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement so authorities can figure out where she’s from, an Arpaio spokesman told the Republic.

    The immigrants had paid between $300 to $3500 to be smuggled to seven different states in the US, ABC reported. Officials claim that the young girl was not with any legal guardian and that the whereabouts of her parents is unknown. As a result, they insist that they had to detain her for her own safety.
    The detention of the six-year-old girl came Friday night, just after President Barack Obama had announced a new plan in which undocumented immigrants could become immune from deportation if they are under 30 and brought to the US before they turned 16, the Associated Press reported.

    While Arpaio openly criticized Obama’s plan, he insisted to the Arizona Republic that his detention of the six-year-old following Obama’s announcement was just a coincidence.


    • So Sheriff Joe RESCUED A POSSIBLY KIDNAPPED CHILD DESTINED FOR WHAT? THE SEX TRADE? TO BE SOLD TO MIDDLE EASTERN PERVERTS AS A WIFE? Thank you Sheriff Joe for upholding our laws. He deserves praise for this. Will they report the truth when it comes out? Who is this child and why did human smugglers have her?

  13. Of course, Calderon is thankful – because the money they earn will be shipped back to Mexico keeping that nation afloat! But if Americans cross their border without papers – what happens to them? [Why would they – but that isn’t the question!] From one socialist to another! Redistributing our wealth to Mexico via the illegals that work here ILLEGALLY and who send money back home! Billions of dollars are sent to Mexico and not spent in the US to enhance and support our economy. Instead we prop up by proxy the nation of Mexico who can’t sustain itself or its people without the US dollars that flow back into Mexico.

    Mexico’s president is praising President Barack Obama for having the ‘courage’ and valor [He says Obama has valor? Valor?] to limit the deportation of some young illegal immigrants living in the U.S. President Felipe Calderon thanked Obama on behalf of the Mexican [illegals in the USA] people.
    (June 18)

    • Mexican president: Muchos gracias, Señor Obama
      June 18, 2012 at 3:01 pm by Meredith Jessup

      Mexican President Felipe Calderon personally thanked President Obama Monday for his executive decision to stop deporting young-adult illegal immigrants. As the Group of 20 international summit began today, Calderon praised Obama’s “valor and courage” for bypassing Congress to implement “unprecedented” short-term immigration reform that many Americans have criticized as amnesty.

      In the meantime, another notable Latino is taking a very difference stance against Obama’s orders. Former Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez says the president may have violated his oath of office.

      “To halt through executive order the deportation of some undocumented immigrants looks like a political calculation to win Hispanic votes,” Gonzales said Saturday at the Faith & Freedom Coalition conference, “and subjects him to criticism that he is violating his oath of office by selectively failing to enforce the law.”


    • “Redistributing our wealth to Mexico via the illegals that work here ILLEGALLY and who send money back home! ”

      Should the current trend continue, there’ll be no one left back home for them to send it to. Let’s just hope that the last US dollar doesn’t find itself in Mexico before the last Mexican national finds himself (or herself) here.

      • Hey! I have a thought. Since Mexico is such a beautiful place, with a wealth of resources, and since it’s currently such a dangerous cesspool of murdering thugs and corrupt officials, after they’ve all run to the border, maybe we all should run south and “reconquista” that country. (We did, after all, once conquer Mexico; but as we are wont to do, we gave it back.) Imagine what we could do with that place, full of resources, if we establish a Constitutional Republic with freedom, including FREE markets, capitalism, and a balance of power that prevents corruption (given that we can keep the progressive commies like the Obots up here in their new “paradise” of el Norte).

        • I really was for that idea of combining the two countries. I read a book a few years ago and will find the name of it, but it suggested that very thing. Many problems would be solved, and a capitalist country and investors would change a third world country into one that would match the US. US investors have already purchased most of the beach fronts on all coastal areas in Mexico. It is the very interior that needs rebuilding or just building. The border problem and immigration problem would be solved as jobs would be created there that could also sustain the people.

          Who would protest? The LaRaza types who live in our country and still want to take back the southern states and absorb them into a country that can’t sustain itself due to socialism and the inability to curtail the drug cartels, and their corrupt government. (We have no room to talk about corruption now that our government matches most third world countries in that aspect). The cartels exist because it is a way of making money (for a few) but it is a life for criminals – yet if you have nothing else, it can look good.

          Ask the illegals if they would rather stay in their own country if they could survive, have worthwhile jobs, and get a good education. There is no doubt they would say yes. What sustains Mexico? Besides the money sent back to their country by their citizens who are living off the USA’s gov’t teat – tourism along the coastal areas and the farming areas add to their economy. We in the US still are their biggest business be it for fruits and vegetables, drugs, or for vacation sites (although the tourist business has taken a beating because of their criminal drug related

          • Excellent commentary and every bit true. I’d actually consider admitting the Mexican States to the United States IF there were safeguards to ensure that our system of government wouldn’t be overwhelmed by the Marxism and corruption that’s endemic there. We’d need some kind of dual-Republicanism where both entities would have to agree by a large majority in EACH entity for major changes to be made. As you say, though, what can we say about corruption NOW? I never thought I’d see the day when corruption would be as rampant as it is today in the Obamanation. The progressives are basically amoral, which is anathema to our system. Amoral. By any means necessary and without shame.

    • Obama looks to be bowing again http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/18/pic-of-the-day-obama-bowing-again/ and I think he deliberately makes a gesture of going in close to hear and/or be intimate look like a bow to taunt and watch the Right point it out. He is showing to be more of a sadist than a narcissist, but of course still a narcissist. The sadist is just his dominant trait. I see him laughing saying to himself or crony, right before he greets someone, “Watch this and count the seconds before it is all the nutjob haters start blogging about it. Ready. One second. Two seconds. Wow, this time (with a satisfyingly snicker) broke the records. (head goes up. chin points towards heaven.)

      • Good analysis and likely true. Or maybe he admires his huaraches. 🙂

      • I can’t imagine where in Los Cabos this group will meet. I am astounded this place was chosen. There is nothing there but tacky restaurants, and some lovely hotels or accommodations. I doubt these people are there for the beach scene and the town was catering to tourists. The investors from the US were building retirement condos, but the town itself wasn’t keeping up with the building. One still had to live off the economy. I noted when I was there that the concierges at various hotels all spoke perfect English, but the others in service spoke minimal English. That was a major problem if they were catering to the English speaking.

        • Do you think the Secret Service is partying down in Los Cabos? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/19/exclusive-secret-service-agents-partied-like-rock-stars-on-obamas-vineyard-vacation/#ixzz1yFl6r5sZ

          “But at least one Vineyard homeowner says that isn’t true.

          She said her husband called the Secret Service in Washington last year to complain about the rowdy behavior of agents and damage they caused to their home, but his gripe was dismissed by officials who told her “that’s what they do on vacation” – even though the agents were on assignment at the Vineyard.

          “If Secret Service says they’ve never received complaints about these same guys, then there is clear evidence to the contrary — if they say that, they’re lying,” the woman told FoxNews.com. “We were the only ones to care, apparently. Nobody else cared about them partying, trashing the house, bringing girls home.

          “We would not rent to them again,” she said.

          She described a wake of destruction left by the commander-in-chief’s bodyguards, including the Counter Assault and Counter Sniper Teams, the same elite groups that got into trouble in Colombia. Antique furniture was destroyed, expensive “locally harvested” wide pine flooring was ruined and beer and liquor bottles were scattered throughout the property after agents stayed in the house, one of several stately million-dollar Victorians with pastel-painted wood shingles and wraparound porches of the exclusive East Chop section of Oak Bluffs.

          The homeowners and several neighbors described another incident where police responded to complaints about a truck parked half on the lawn, half on the driveway. Cops arrived, spoke to the Secret Service agents inside and, moments later, a half-dressed woman came running out, got in the truck and sped off, said neighbors.

          The home police responded to on Aug. 18, 2011, was described by one neighbor as a virtual “party house” for local college girls home for the summer, while another neighbor said she saw young women coming and going during more than one raging Secret Service party.

          The owner of a six-bedroom home rented out the last two summers to the same Secret Service team that got in trouble in South America showed FoxNews.com a bullet he said was left behind by the agents and said CAT agents let neighborhood children and other residents handle their weapons.

          More alarmingly, he said the men told him details of presidential security plans and logistics.

          They left ammo behind, they told me things they shouldn’t have been telling me, things they shouldn’t be telling anyone about the details about how they protect the president. They let us hold their weapons, see all their stuff, they had huge house parties,” said the man, who spoke to FoxNews.com with his wife on the condition they not be named.”

          Actually, considering the speculation about false flag operations in the making, one has to wonder if this is a set-up to blame/explain any close call/failure by the Secret Service? Scapegoating in advance?

          • And just think, The Perfect Parent Role Models, being fully aware of the behavior of the SS as they are very on the inside and their boss, sent not only their own little angel down to Mexico without parents but a bunch of her friends, too — whose parents most likely sent them NOT knowing of the the SS behavior. Wow. Let’s just sacrifice our friends’ daughters up to a bunch of partying, sexing men……….. Yep, The First Pimps, I would say. (Some of the girls looked pretty upset in the photos, if you remember)

  14. http://www.lsnewsgroup.com/2012/06/18/hello-is-anybody-there/
    Immigration a Bloody mess….&…. Uncle Omar’s ….DUI !

  15. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/06/18/WAWA-Is-Medias-Big-Black-Cloud?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+June+19%2C+2012&utm_campaign=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+June+19%2C+2012&utm_term=More

    Andrea Mitchell is trying hard to be the next Dan Rather. Coming from a bunch of people who excoriated James O’Keefe and the Breitbart krewe for allegedly taking comments out of context and/or editing video to make things appear as they are not, this raises hypocrisy to a new level.

    Romney was comparing a man who had to go through 33 pages of bureaucratic bull in order to change his address with a government program to the speed and efficiency of checking out with a sandwich at WaWa (whatever that is)! But Andrea and her bunch edited the speech to make Romeny appear similar to George H. W. Bush, who once expressed amazement at self-checkouts at the local grocery. Remember that? Andrea’s point was to imply that Romney, like H.W., is “out of touch” with the regular grocery shopper.

    And yet, Andrea didn’t similarly point out how BARRY famously asked, during the 2008 campaign, if anybody’s noted the price of ARUGULA at WHOLE FOODS lately?

  16. If you dare use Google books, there’s a preview. Can you believe that page one of Maraniss’s book talks about the “Obama” that Barry drew into the concrete at Punahou? Expect ALL the usual mythological symbols and fantasies to be recapitulated here. OMG. How freaking trite. Repeat the lie, repeat the lie, repeat the lie. Who said that? Some day, scholars will pick apart these obot fabulists and wonder at their mendacity.

    • But wait! In order to deflate the inferred ego, Maraniss states that Barry didn’t do it himself! No putting “KING OBAMA”. No, someone else did it to get him in trouble. So, you see, no blossoming, out-of-control ego to see there, folks. Move on.

  17. Bridgette: Elizabeth Mooney gets a new name! SARA Elizabeth Mooney. And so does Roy/Malik! Now he’s also “Bobby”. Unlike the other biographer, who says that Ruth was the only real “mummy” that Rita (Auma) and Roy (Bobby/Malik) ever knew, Maraniss says that Ruth was “cordial” but never gave “motherly love.” OMG. Which do we believe? He has the story about Kezia being seen with gentlemen friends while BHO Sr. was in Hawaii, but no mention of that pesky pregnancy! Cover up? Let’s guess. Is this interesting? He gives David Opiyo’s dob: September 11, 1967, “just before,” Maraniss says, Ann and Barry left for Indonesia. It appears from a snippet that Babs Nelson INVITED DR. RODNEY WEST to see BHO Sr. when he spoke at the Punahou school. Isn’t THAT special? And no, I see nothing that confirms any person working on the maternity ward remembering Barry’s birth. It appears to be SPECULATION about who MIGHT HAVE told Dr. West about how “Stanley had a baby.” All that nauseating stuff that Babs said to the Buffalo reporter and WND about Barry and his powerful words and how she based a poem upon them is repeated in this fabulous book. Ok. That’s enough for today. I can only take so much pablum.

    • I actually found that recently on ancestry.com.
      Her full name was apparently Sara Elizabeth Mooney (then Kirk)

      • Oh, I’m sorry. My memory is bad lately. I forgot all about that but I do remember that one of the bios called her Esther (wasn’t it?) and others said “Betty” or just “Elizabeth”. Here’s the link to SEO’s find: https://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/obama-mystery-theater-kezias-baby/comment-page-1/#comment-83479

        • I couldn’t remember if I ever posted that, so we both forgot. I was just reading the part in the book about the semester Ann and Barack met in Russian. Seems Neil Abercrombie is STILL the only person who remembers her but the author finds that to be enough evidence for him.

          • It’s laughable if you think about it. He goes out there and apparently interviews the usual suspects, who simply repeat the stories they’ve told before (many times in conflict with each other–Queen’s medical, anyone?) and then he probably dredged up old stories like the Babs Nelson tall tale, which gets more suspicious as more details get added (like Dr. West being at the BHO Sr. talk to students). Did he find that she quickly retracted many of the details when actually QUESTIONED about her memories by WND? Did he bother to FIND that retraction? If not, of what use are his footnotes? A bunch of people could get together and make up a story. Then each could be interviewed and have a story printed about their memories. Then each could be interviewed again by a “journalist” and they could tell him the same story. Then you’d have multiple people and multiple footnotes, but the story is still bogus, all the same. If he didn’t find ANY NEW sources that, for example, saw Ann and Barack together in Russian class, than of what use is his repeating this lie? It’s unlikely that a freshman would be taking RUSSIAN with an upperclassman. She’d be taking her basic prerequisites the first year in college. English composition, not Russian. What I want to know is does plagiarism mean anything to these people or do they all get together in advance and agree that each “biographer” can cadge stuff from the others? Reading what I did read, it all sounded SO familiar.

  18. “obama” had been carved by someone wanting to get O blamed… it said…
    the “king” was missing… devoting 1 page to just that in cement !…. dumb!
    # 1 of the photos…

  19. Miri U got mail…? + bridgette 2 back 2 me….

  20. $465 for Legal Status Under Obama’s ‘Dream Act’
    August 3, 2012

    (WASHINGTON) — The Obama administration will formally begin granting some young undocumented immigrants legal status and work permits later this month under a controversial new policy first announced by President Obama in June.

    The Department of Homeland Security Friday announced details of the application and approval process for the DREAM Act-like program, outlining specific eligibility requirements and a $465 fee. It will begin Aug. 15.

    Illegal immigrants younger than 30 who came to the United States before age 16, have lived here for at least five years continuously, attend or have graduated from high school or college, and have no criminal convictions are eligible to submit requests for so-called deferred action. In other words, they would be exempt from deportation.

    The administration said documentation provided by each applicant will be reviewed individually on a case-by-case basis at one of four service centers run by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service. It’s unclear how long each review will take, but some immigrants are expected to receive temporary legal status before Election Day.

    While the “dreamers” will not obtain a path to citizenship or the right to vote, Obama’s policy shift — circumventing Congress with executive action – has been widely seen as a politically motivated nod to Hispanics who have long sought the change.

    Obama’s Republican critics Friday sharply assailed the new policy as unconstitutional and out of touch with the jobs crisis U.S. citizens face.“Today’s deferred action guidance is another example of how the president’s policies put the interests of illegal immigrants ahead of the interests of U.S. citizens and legal immigrants,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith said. “On the same day the unemployment rate rose to 8.3 percent, the Obama administration announced a requirement for illegal immigrants to apply to be able to work in the U.S.,” the GOP congressman from Texas said. “The administration’s guidelines don’t just encourage illegal immigrants to work in the U.S., they actually require them to apply to do so.”

    Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the process is a compassionate and common-sense approach to a group of individuals who were brought to the United States illegally by no fault of their own and have grown up as Americans.“Our nation’s immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner,” Napolitano said in a statement. “But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual circumstances of each case. “Nor are they designed to remove productive young people to countries where they may not have lived or even speak the language. Discretion, which is used in so many other areas, is especially justified here.

    Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

    • One has to wonder what is the point if it doesn’t lead to citizenship and they can’t vote. I guess it will provide them with a card so they can work. Once again, as Lamar Smith said, Obama puts the rights of ILLEGALS ahead of CITIZENS. He being one of the Illegals.

      The cost to be able to work and not worry about being deported…a mere $465. In another article, the fee is supposed to cover the cost of reviewing some expected 800,000 applicants. Are we going to hear shortly from the organizations representing the illegals that the cost is exorbitant?

      • They are planning to give out waivers and, if things go as they usually do with Obama, they will ALL get waivers. The point is probably so that they will at least TRY to vote. And they already won’t enforce the voting laws, either. No photo ID in most places. No ID at all in some places.

    • For your reading pleasure..the government notice. I wonder why it isn’t written in Spanish.

      Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals SNIP

      Over the past three years, this Administration has undertaken an unprecedented effort to transform the immigration enforcement system into one that focuses on public safety, border security and the integrity of the immigration system. As the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) continues to focus its enforcement resources on the removal of individuals who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety, including individuals convicted of crimes with particular emphasis on violent criminals, felons, and repeat offenders, DHS will exercise prosecutorial discretion as appropriate to ensure that enforcement resources are not expended on low priority cases, such as individuals who came to the United States as children and meet other key guidelines. Individuals who demonstrate that they meet the guidelines below may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals for a period of two years, subject to renewal, and may be eligible for employment authorization.

      You may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals if you:

      Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
      Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
      Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
      Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
      Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;
      Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
      Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

      Does deferred action provide me with a path to permanent residence status or citizenship?
      No. Deferred action is a form of prosecutorial discretion that does not confer lawful permanent resident status or a path to citizenship. Only the Congress, acting through its legislative authority, can confer these rights.


    • New process to defer immigration enforcement for youths will be self-funded
      Fri, 2012-08-03 Snips

      The processing of children and young adults that are eligible for the new, deferred immigration policy announced by President Obama in June will be funded with fees collected from applicants, according to White House officials.
      … Eligibility is based on other criteria, like school enrollment, length of residency and a clean criminal record.

      The fee for the new application for the deferment is $465, said a senior administration official in an Aug. 3 telephone briefing held by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency that is handling the new applications. The official said the staff that would process the forms, beginning Aug. 15, would be supported by the $465 fee. He said the staff to handle processing of the applications would be hired on an as-needed basis depending on the volume of applications received. There are no waivers for the fee, although in extreme instances, some people can apply for exemption, he said. He declined to say how many staff had been hired in the run-up to the Aug. 15 opening date, however.

      The deferral plan has proven to be controversial and potentially extremely popular. In announcing it in June, some White House officials estimated it could draw as many as 800,000 applications from parents of children and young adults looking to remain in the U.S. The official said processing could take as long a month, depending on background checks and other activities. He said background checks would include a scheduled visit to USCIS offices for a biometric ID information.

      Criminals, people that lie about their background and threats to national security would be weeded out in the process, he added.
      He warned that those caught in lies about criminal backgrounds would be subject to criminal prosecution and deportation.


      • No waivers? They better tell the lamestream that because they reported today that there will be waivers. But wait! It all depends upon what the meaning of waiver is. It’s not a waiver; it’s an exemption. See?

        So I assume this means that in two years, they expect to be able to make all these dreamers citizens. Or set up another campaign issue. Who will be so evil as to vote against these hard-working young people (who take JOBS from CITIZENS)?

        Is there any provision for punishing those found to have already used FALSE IDENTIFICATION PAPERS or to have WORKED AND NOT PAID TAXES? They would be criminals, but see! That is covered, too. They discriminate between “violent” criminals as opposed to simple identity thieves, who might have much in common with Barry.

    • Our laws must be enforced, as written, PERIOD. The president has NO POWER to overrule laws, to change laws, to ignore laws, to invent laws.

  21. Federal government’s open-door immigration policy on welfare under fire
    8/06/201 Snip

    The federal government allows immigrants to enjoy America’s vast welfare safety net, from food stamps to housing benefits and Medicaid, and remain immune from repercussions to their immigration status. And on Monday, ranking Republican members of the Senate Finance, Agriculture, Budget, and Judiciary Committees wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding to know why.

    Immigration regulations prohibit individuals “likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence” from legal admittance into the United States. But non-citizens can avail themselves of dozens of welfare programs without the federal government considering them a dependency risk.

    In government-speak, an individual likely to become reliant on the government for survival is termed a “public charge.” While there is a menu of over 80 federal welfare programs in America, that status is triggered by reliance on two federal programs: Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).

    Section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act explains that immigrants are “inadmissible” to the United States if the U.S. Attorney General or any consular officer who interacts with them determines that he or she “is likely at any time to become a public charge.”

    Despite immigration regulations that specifically state individuals may not be legally admitted if that determination is made, the real-world application of those regulations reveals a different story. Acceptance of food stamps benefits, housing benefits, energy assistance, child care services, Medicaid and a wealth of other programs are all inadmissible in the determination of a non-citizen’s “public charge” risk, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

    In a 2011 report based on U.S. Census data, the Center for Immigration Studies — a self-described low-immigration, pro-immigrant research group — found that in 2009, 57 percent of households with children under 18 headed by a legal or illegal immigrant were receiving payments from at least one welfare program, compared to just 32 percent of native U.S. households with children.
    “This interpretation of the law, along with the actions of the USDA to recruit new immigrants to sign up for SNAP benefits, undermines both congressional intent and sound immigration policy,” they write.

    In an interview with TheDC, an outraged Sen. Sessions did not mince words about the resident immigrants who have become public charges. “We would like to know how many [there are], how big the problem is, how much it is costing the United States Treasury — because this is clearly a burden on the Treasury,”Sessions said.


    • The senators are demanding that DHS and the State Department provide answers to five questions no later than August 20.

      Given the extraordinary implications for both our nation’s finances and the standards of U.S. citizenship, we ask that you provide information responsive to the following:

      An explanation of why receipt of most welfare benefits is excluded from consideration of citizenship eligibility, and how this complies with the INA [Immigration and Nationalization Act] and congressional intent.

      From 2001 to 2011, how many visa applicants and applicants for admission through the Visa Waiver Program were denied visas or admission because they were deemed likely to become a public charge?

      From 2001 to 2011, how many visa applicants were found likely to become a public charge but were nevertheless granted a visa and admitted into the United States because they presented an affidavit of support?

      How many aliens issued visas or otherwise admitted into the United States from 2001 to 2011 became public charges as defined by your agency after entering the United States?

      If your answers to the above questions are that your agencies do not track this information, then please explain why this information is not tracked.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s