Presidents and the Rule of Law

The Law

Once again, the Obama administration proves that it has no respect for the rule of law.  [emphasis added]

The Justice Department [DOJ] is resisting a judge’s order to provide ethics training for its lawyers and is objecting to turning over to the court the names of illegal aliens who were granted what amounts to administrative amnesty (“deferrals”) in stark violation of an injunction issued by the court. …

Given the extensive evidence that [Judge] Hanen cited in his order of the misrepresentations made by the government lawyers, as well as the extensive opportunity he gave the DOJ to present its side in the briefs it filed with the court, the claim that the DOJ was somehow unfairly judged or unable to present its defense is extremely dubious.

The DOJ also claims that the “sanctions imposed exceed the court’s authority.” Given the severity of the violations of the code of professional conduct that govern lawyers, including government lawyers, this is another problematic claim by the department.

Given that the judge could have imposed even more severe sanctions, such as dismissing the defensive pleadings filed by the government (which would have caused them to lose the case) or making the government pay the attorneys’ fees of the states, the sanctions imposed seem almost mild. …

The strangest claim made by the Justice Department is that Hanen’s order to produce a state-by-state list of all of the illegal aliens unlawfully granted deferrals would “breach the confidence of these individuals (and of others who submit information to USCIS) in the privacy of such records.”

An affidavit filed by León Rodriguez, the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at the Department of Homeland Security, claims this would violate the internal privacy policy of DHS even though he admits the federal Privacy Act “does not applyto non-U.S. persons.”

Not only does the Privacy Act not apply to “non-U.S. persons” (Illegal aliens), but federal law (8 U.S.C. §1373) specificallyrequires the federal government to provide “citizenship or immigration status” information on any individual in response “to an inquiry by a federal, state, or local government agency.” And this requirement applies “notwithstanding any other provision of federal, state, or local law.”

Thus, states are statutorily entitled to this information and the DOJ’s claim that it is confidential has no basis in the law whatsoever.

The DOJ and Barack Obama (since this is his DOJ, after all) ignore or deliberately flout laws they do not want to follow, despite that the law, the Constitution, and the judges say that they must follow the law and any legally promulgated judicial orders. At the same time, the DOJ and Obama apply laws to illegal aliens, whom these laws specifically do not protect, all at the expense of U.S. citizens and the sovereign states!

Obama and his DOJ have been flouting, ignoring, misinterpreting, and deliberately rewriting laws from the beginning of his administration. But suddenly, the mainstream media, the progressives, and anti-Trumpers of all stripes are near hysteria contemplating a Trump presidency. They laughably fear from Trump what we have already been experiencing under Obama for nearly eight years!

Consider this story. Below is a list of what these people claim to fear from a Trump presidency. These are direct quotes from the story. They fear …

Trump’s “views on presidential powers.”

That Trump “seems to think he can do whatever he wants and disregard rules and conventions that constrain other political candidates.”

That Trump “would act unbounded in the presidency, in a way that doesn’t follow the law.”

That Trump “would give military officers unlawful orders and expect them to comply.”

How Trump has “repeatedly given indications he has no appreciation for the rule of law.”

That Trump’s “personal criticism of a judge undermines judicial independence.”

The last complaint about Trump’s personal criticism of a judge (not as a president, mind you, but as a defendant in a lawsuit overseen by a judge he believes is biased) is particularly amusing, and hypocritical.

The media and the Democrats have their panties in a wad about Trump’s completely valid criticism of Judge Curiel, a Hispanic-American. Trump, as everyone knows, is under attack by pro-illegal-alien activists because of his support for building a wall along the border with Mexico and for strictly enforcing our laws against illegal immigration. Trump’s views, by the way, are supported by the vast majority of U.S. citizens, much to the dismay of the media, the Democrats, and many of the elite in the Republican Party.

As a party to the litigation, Trump is certainly within his rights as an American citizen to question the judge’s potential conflicts of interest.

Consider that Judge Curiel is associated with a segregated “Latino” legal association (San Diego La Raza  Lawyers Association, aka SDLRLA) which itself is associated with a radical Hispanic-supremacist, separatist organization (La Raza, which is a part of SDLRLA’s “community”); that Judge Curiel sat on a committee that awarded scholarships to illegal aliens; that Judge Curiel mistakenly” released the “sealed” names of witnesses who were subsequently quoted in the media and by Hillary Clinton to politically damage Trump ahead of the California primary; and that Judge Curiel appointed a legal team to represent plaintiffs in the Trump case who have paid $675,000 to Hillary and Bill Clinton!

However, the media and the Democrats persist in ignoring these valid complaints about Curiel and instead redefine the issue as simple racial or ethnic bigotry on Trump’s part. They falsely report that Trump accuses Curiel of bias solely because he’s Mexican-American. The complicit media prefer to paint Trump as a bigot, in any way possible, ignoring the facts, for purely political reasons. Why? Because they’re puppets of global progressivism.

Consider the hypocrisy of the media and Trump’s opponents, who claim to believe that because Trump criticized a federal judge in public, that proves that Trump has no respect for judicial independence and would have none as president.

Do they remember this moment in history?

Yes, it’s 2010. Obama’s very first State of the Union address, wherein he criticized the decision of the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case. As president. To their faces. Humiliating them.

So much for respect. So much for undermining judicial independence. So much for respect for judicial independence.

We currently have a president who has expansive (and wrongheaded) views on presidential powers; who seems to think that he can do whatever he wants and who disregards rules and conventions that others must follow; who acts in an unbounded way that doesn’t follow the law; who (arguably) gives military officers unlawful orders; who repeatedly proves that he has no appreciation for the rule of law (or for those who are charged with enforcing it); and who undermines judicial independence.

Why, then, are the media and progressives so worried about Trump? Do they suddenly realize the precedent that has been set by Obama? Do they comprehend now what we’ve been screaming about and warning them about for the past eight years:  The reality that someday that guy in the White House may not be “their” guy? Chickens coming home to roost. The shoe may be on the other foot now. Too bad.

It’s a little too late for them to worry about the Constitution and the rule of law. They should have joined us in the beginning, when Obama first flouted the Constitution. They should have joined us when we first asked him, while he was still a candidate

birth-certificate-wnd - Copy

#####

Advertisements

37 responses to “Presidents and the Rule of Law

  1. http://blog.dilbert.com/post/145456082991/my-endorsement-for-president-of-the-united-states

    Consider that one. I do believe it’s snark, but many a truth was said in jest. It’s certainly not conducive to one’s health to openly support Trump, especially if one is in the public eye. Sheriff Clark recently pointed out that the anti-Trump THUGS are using the same tactics that the KKK did in the Old South–all in order to violate the civil rights of blacks, to make them fearful and to interfere with their Constitutional right to participate in the political process. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/sheriff-clarke-doj-fbi-identifying-thugs-beat-trump-supporters-san-jose/

  2. http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_29985412/donald-trump-san-jose-police-plan-arrest-people

    Multiple comments giving various reasons why the cops stood down and why there won’t be any or at least many arrests. Sure, they didn’t want to bust any heads because they KNEW the busted heads would be “Latino” and then their illegal voters might vote against them. So, the usual DemoncRAT inner city political reasons. Another reason: How many of those deserving to be busted are not only “Latino” but also ILLEGAL? Whoops. Double whammy. Local “Latinos” might get angry that Latinos busted but on the larger scale, the AMERICAN PEOPLE will have it pointed out to them, given that they probably won’t be able to HIDE this, that the rioters are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Exactly what Trump is saying. So to arrest the illegals will bring publicity, which will further fire up Trump’s base, and so, given that the powers in San Jose are themselves avowedly ANTI-TRUMP, they’re not going to do anything to help him. Thus, the illegal criminals will, once again (how many times?), go free as birds but guilty as hell. This is so like in Ferguson. Stand down. Give them room to destroy (wasn’t that Baltimore? Whatever.) The problem is that these cities are all run by the complicit DemoncRATS.

    • Just recently, in St. Louis, a judge decided to turn over to the Michael Brown family the TESTIMONY of the supposedly secret witnesses to the Grand Jury that did NOT indict Officer Wilson. Now, the black-grievance-industry lawyers in the civil case are SUPPOSEDLY under orders (oooh, quaking in their boots, contempt of court) NOT to reveal any of the NAMES of the witnesses who came forward after being PROMISED secrecy. Their sealed names have now been turned over to the lawyers in the civil case. Do you imagine that the lawyers will NOT share the names with the family or anybody who will then turn around and sneak the names to the media? They’re supposed to not use email to send the documents. Presumably that means no digitization of the paperwork that includes the names of the witnesses. But we’ve seen in the Trump U case how “mistakes were made.” Additionally, supposedly only the lawyers and limited “staff” are supposed to see the testimony paperwork and, I assume, the names of the witnesses, which apparenlty ARE NOT being redacted. We all know how “secret” Linda Tripp’s personnel file was and also how “secret” Mr. Ryan’s, Barry’s erstwhile opponent’s, divorce and child custody papers were. DemoncRATS and progressives and race baiters with an agenda have NO MORALS. Just as they believe that violence and rioting is fair and just because they are RIGHT, they believe that there’s no immorality, lack of ethics, or dishonor in violating judicial secrecy. They think they’re right. The worst kind of enemy to have–the one who believes his being “right” justifies ANYTHING he does.

  3. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/48595424d62a42e7a5700253f6d685f0/malawi-sees-surge-attacks-albinos-victims-speak-out

    Now there’s an awful story about man’s inhumanity to man. Albinos in Malawi are murdered in horrible ways and then their bones are sold to witch doctors. “Racism” to a new level.

    Check out the first comment:

    “Murdering and dismembering human beings to sell their body parts. Just who in the helll do these people think they are,Planned Parenthood?”

    Oy!

  4. http://www.theamericanmirror.com/housing-authority-demands-ga-man-remove-elaborate-civil-war-display/

    We used to think we had free speech and freedom of expression and the right to do what we wanted on our own personal property. Indeed, isn’t it true that a person CAN burn a cross on their own front yard, just not somebody else’s, because that’s vandalism or a hate crime? So what the heck makes them think they can make this man remove his Civil War diorama? Who the hell cares if somebody is “offended”? Ya know what I find offensive? Precious Moments statues. They’re insipid. I’m offended by them. But to each his own. I will defend to the death your right to buy mawkish porcelain figurines.

    Know what else offends me? Doilies. Yep. Can’t stands ’em. But you can have them.

    Know what else? Pink flamingoes in the yard and cement gargoyles.

    I’ll stop before I get on a roll. 🙂

  5. ~ Indiana Mike • ….^^^^^
    Murdering & dismembering human beings to sell their body parts.
    Just who in the hell do these people think they R, Planned Parenthood?

    first your 2 Black ….& then 2 W H I T E … can’t they relocate & save
    these kids & families? I read this a year + ago so very SAD & SICK

    • Wait a minute, though. I thought only white people could be bigoted. Blacks murdering other “blacks” because they’re too white? It’s beyond sickening that they would kill someone for his body parts to make potions out of them. I hear people like PETA crying out about the rhinos and tigers who are killed for, respectively, muslim and Chinese “medicine” but where’s the outcry about the children? God rest their souls. Too horrible. Like something from a Stephen King novel.

  6. http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-2016-to-talk-trump-riots-migrants-brexit/

    There’s good news. If the globalists are in a panic, I’m doing my happy dance.

  7. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley OR Nimrata “Nikki” Randhawa!!! ha
    said she supports removing the symbol from some public spaces, but does not support the broader effort to remove all references to the Old South.

    The Confederate flag is a “flying, living, breathing, representative symbol,” Haley told the news site. “You can’t have that representation there & have Children Drive by & think they Don’t Be-long.” ??? WTF GROW UP!

    “If you start to go back in history for South Carolina, you’d be replacing every street sign, every building. … Our goal is not to erase history,” she said. “Our goal is to make sure every child Felt welcome at State House grounds.”

    UP-SET FEELINGS ?…. FEEL OK ?….It’s NOT A FLAGS …JOB!!!
    the TEAR JERKERS …. what a frigg’in JOKE!!! READ HISTORY OK!

  8. This follows along with the above. https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2016/06/08/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-offensive-to-minorities/

    “American Millennials are far more likely than older generations to say the government should be able to prevent people from saying offensive statements about minority groups …”

    ABOUT MINORITY GROUPS! But what about majority groups? Are “minorities” allowed to say whatever they want? The government is supposed to SELECTIVELY censor the speech of some people but not others’? Who is teaching these people the Constitution, anyway? What about EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW? EVERYBODY has free speech, not just “minority groups.”

    This makes me sick to my stomach. What the heck is wrong with these people?

  9. You may think this is a joke, but apparently it’s real: https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2016/06/08/tranny-teacher-gets-60k-for-not-being-called-by-her-preferred-pronoun-they/

    “Leo Soell, a “transmasculine” 5th-grade teacher at Hall Elementary School in Oregon elementary school, was awarded $60,000 by the Gresham-Barlow School District as compensation for harassment she claims to have suffered on the job, including being referred to by the wrong pronoun.

    The problem is her preferred pronoun isn’t simple pronouns like “he” or “she” or even “it”. Her preferred pronoun is “they”.”

    Please tell me what in the Constitution (or even in state constitutions) is it written that a public school district has the power to FORCE teachers to call other people by ridiculous pronouns? People have free speech and governments cannot FORCE anyone to SAY anything. Why, even the Pledge of Allegiance and prayer are now either forbidden or optional. Nobody can even be forced to stand for the Pledge. So how can they FORCE teachers to call a female amputee “they”?

    • T H E Y’ just Don’t MAKE- um .. like THEY’ use 2 ~ what fools!
      O’ LORDY ~ LORDY … ^^^^ ..$60,000 … silly suckers!!!

        • Oh. Petraeus. I read yesterday that he’s invited to and attending the BILDERBERG THING! “Disgrace”? Don’t think so. Still one of the movers and shakers of the GLOBAL GUMMINT, apparently.

      • I wish I could have pulled off that one at my last job. Wait! We mean our last job.

        I think I see what they’re out for now. They want to confuse the hell out of everybody so we can’t even communicate with each other anymore. How much easier to conquer us if it’s like the Tower of Babel around here?

        I read an article recently that was talking about death benefits. What’s best for the surviving spouse, whether to take the spousal survivor benefit or one’s own earned benefit until (I guess–it all confuses me) the dead spouse would have been old enough to collect full benefits or maybe even wait until the deceased spouse would have been 70. Something like that.

        Anyway, the writer was getting twisted into all kinds of knots because (he, she, they, it) had to preface every pertinent question like this: If it’s a heterosexual couple and the husband dies first …

        … because, as we have learned, with homosexual male couples, both of them are husbands so it’s impossible to say: if the husband dies first …

        This is what stupidity has wrought.

  10. http://vidmax.com/video/141315-Who-are-the-violent-ones-Compilation-shows-Donald-Trump-supporters-being-systematically-attacked-while-the-liberal-media-blames-them

    Rule of law? A video of the attacks on Trump supporters. Still waiting for the arrests. Crickets. I can see so many different crimes that I can’t count them. Assault. Assaulting a juvenile (surely that’s a worse crime). Property damage. Violation of people’s civil rights. Hate crimes. Vandalism. Aiding and abetting. Conspiracy. Rioting.

    Check out how the people leaving the rally had to go through not only one gauntlet to get to their cars but another while in their cars, where they were sitting ducks for the rioters who were vandalizing their cars, rocking them, breaking lights, and writing graffiti on them, even as the rioters surrounded and menaced them. There are excellent photos of the criminal thugs. The cops, of course, won’t be bothering to identify these guys. It’s just like in Ferguson. A tiny handful of people were actually arrested. Fewer were charged, tried, and convicted.

  11. ~ anothercrawfish fahgettaboudit.. •
    And Valerie Jarrett runs Obama,
    George Soros runs Jarrett,
    Satan runs Soros. …….. on & on & on …

    • Could have compromised CIA names? Could have? Hmmm. That sounds familiar. Didn’t the media go ape-sh** when Valerie Plame was “outed”? Scooter Libby would know. Whoops. Never mind. This is a Clinton we’re talking about. Not EVEN a slap on the wrist.

      Mistakes were made. We’ll do better. Let’s Move On.

  12. Talk Grows of Re -placing Trump at GOP Convention …NO WAY !!!

    Jon Ward @yahoo.com

  13. ~ Melvin G Young
    I have heard so many people say that Hillary has so many years of experience–like 25 years. I contend that untrue. What she has is 1 year of experience, 25 times. Think about it.

    ~ RoseAnn
    Melvin G Young, People fail to realize that years of experience doesn’t equal accomplishments. That’s what Mrs. Clinton is lacking.

    ~ Bruce
    She is all that and a vile, disgusting, lying pig whose only claim to fame is that she (ostensibly) possesses a vagina. ….?????
    As reprehensible as she is, we must all be cognizant of fact that “WE” elected obama (twice). And there is a guy who also had/has zero going for him other than a stated desire to “transform: our country into something that as far as I can determine: defies description. It looks more like a wall to wall freak show than a country

    • Mob mentality. (Note that I wrote that article in 2011–over 5 years ago!!!)

      The COPS feared for their lives. Well, that’s because, as in Ferguson (and Afghanistan and Iraq, now that I think about it), DemoncRATS who run the show say “stand down” and have one hand tied behind your back. Can’t look like an “occupying force” (WHY THE HELL NOT?) and can’t look like racists, bigots, anti-hispanic, islamophobes, etc. They didn’t call out the National Guard in SJ, but it wouldn’t have mattered if they did because, as in Ferguson, they would have been made to stand around with their hands up their ….

      Wrote that article almost 2 years ago and if anything, SJ proves that I was right: You can’t count on the cops to protect you. I thought Ferguson was bad because the cops were ordered to stand by and allow looting and arson. SJ was MUCH WORSE because those cops stood by and watched fellow human beings beaten, chased, brutalized, terrorized, SPAT ON (is that a hate crime?), and subject to major MACROAGGRESSIONS. What if the rioters had pulled out a noose and tried to string someone up? Huh? Would they still have just STOOD THERE?

      WHY do the taxpayers pay their salaries? Buy their equipment? Buy their GUNS, if they won’t use them?

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s