Category Archives: U.S. Constitution

Speaker Ryan’s Resolution on Defining Power

Posted on by

Pathetic that this has to be done…but it is interesting especially considering what the House has for future legislative action. One significant item where a deadline is looming is the budget and the deportation issue.

Paul Ryan: Resolution on Obama deportation amnesty brief coming Thursday
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan says he’s bringing a resolution to the House floor on Thursday authorizing him to file a brief in the ongoing legal dispute over President Obama’s deportation amnesties.

“If we are going to maintain the founding principle of being a self-governing people, if we’re going to maintain the founding principle of government by consent of the governed, the legislative branch of government needs to be the one writing the laws — not the executive branch,” Mr. Ryan said Tuesday.

Politico: The House Freedom Caucus will oppose a $1.07 trillion budget backed by Republican leaders, likely assuring that the fiscal package will fail if put up for a vote on the House floor.

Leaders of the conservative group said Monday night that they plan to vote against the package because it does not go far enough to cut spending. It’s a crippling blow for GOP leaders, who repeatedly said passing a budget was a major goal for 2016.

“The Freedom Caucus is officially a no,” said Idaho Rep. Raul Labrador. “We’ve been talking to leadership for several weeks, giving them the opportunity to make some good pitches to us, and so far everything we have heard has been less than stellar.”

Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price of Georgia and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) have labored to gain the support of the far-right caucus over the last six weeks but the top-line budget numbers are still too high to pass conservative muster.

Price plans to hold a markup on the budget Wednesday.

Members of the Freedom Caucus have pushed for $30 billion in immediate budget cuts in exchange for their support. Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, said Monday that the group has offered proposals to Ryan and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) that could bring the hardliners on board but those offers were rejected.

Here is the hearing calendar for March.

Speaker Ryan Just Introduced His First Resolution. Here’s Why.

On Monday, Speaker Ryan introduced a resolution that launches an unprecedented defense of Congress’s Article I powers under our Constitution. Read H. Res. 639.

Here’s how he described the resolution—his first as Speaker—at a press conference today:

“We are the branch of government that is closest to the people. We are defending the people not only against executive overreach. We are defending the people of this country against a growing branch of unelected bureaucrats who are writing our laws.

“There is a problem in this country. . . . We have unelected bureaucrats who are writing our laws. That means we the people, through our elected representatives, are not the final arbiters or drafters of the legislation that we have to live under.

“This is very important. If we’re going to maintain the founding principle of being a self-governing people, if we’re going to maintain the founding principle of government by consent of the governed, the legislative branch of government needs to be the one writing the laws—not the executive branch. . . .

“This is why we’re filing an amicus brief—to defend our Article One powers. . . . We’re going to defend Article One, because we believe passionately in the principle of being a self-governing people, of government by consent of the governed, of putting back in the box this growing fourth branch of government that is becoming more and more and more unaccountable to the people of this country. By restoring the separation of powers, we can reclaim these ideals.”

Here’s what you need to know about H. Res. 639, which the House is scheduled to take up on Thursday:

  • Article I vs. Article II. In United States v. Texas, the Supreme Court asked whether the president’s executive amnesty violates the president’s duties under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”? This is a question the House is uniquely qualified to answer: under Article I, “all legislative powers” are vested in Congress. Neither the president nor unelected bureaucrats are permitted to write laws. Only Congress is.
  • The resolution. H. Res. 639 authorizes Speaker Ryan to file a brief on behalf of the whole House defending Congress’s Article I powers. The decision to file these briefs is usually made by the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, not the full body. This is the first time any Speaker has taken this step.  Given that this overreach is a direct attack on Congress’s Article I powers, it is essential for the institution to respond as a whole.
  • Next steps. Should the House pass this resolution, outside counsel will draft a brief and ask the Supreme Court for time during oral argument. In addition, Republicans will advance ideas to restore the separation of powers and the Constitution as part of a bold and specific policy agenda.

To cap it off….the other matter with regard to immigration are the ranchers. They are making demands, and should.

‘Almost America’: Ranchers in New Mexico Demand That the Federal Government Provide Protection as Chaos Takes Over the Border Region

More than 700 people showed up to a rally this week at a high school auditorium in Animas, New Mexico, population 237. Speakers stood at a podium decorated with a sign emblazoned with the phrase “A Stolen Life” and a photo of Robert Krentz, murdered by an illegal alien on his nearby ranch in 2010, a crime that remains unsolved.


As their region transforms into a war zone, ranchers along the New Mexico border are fed up with the indifference that Washington has shown to their plight. The recent carjacking and kidnapping of a ranch hand by drug-smuggling thugs served as the latest event to rattle this group of Americans. Exasperated with being ignored, the group resorted to prayer, pleading for some type of intervention to alleviate the attack on their existence.
Amid cries of “walk the border” and “come down here,” the kidnapped ranch hand’s employer, Tricia Elbrock, told the crowd “We got problems here. They don’t want it known. They don’t want people to know.” She spoke about increased insurance premiums as the border descends into lawlessness along with her inability to keep her workers safe under federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration mandates.
Frank Krentz, son of murder victim Robert Krentz, told the crowd a familiar tale: he has had 200 head of cattle and dozens of vehicles stolen and brought into Mexico and his home is routinely ransacked. When he calls his representatives in Washington, they tell him to move, even though his family has been working this land for five generations.
The problem is so out of hand that Loren Cushman, local school superintendent, said his district sometimes has to delay school dismissals due to Border Patrol incidents on local roads and highways. “What are my students learning from people who are allowed to act in a completely lawless nature, with no repercussion or punishment?” he said.
The nature of scofflaws who cross the border is also changing. The number “of people in the area that are smuggling people and drugs seems to be increasing,” said Lawrence Hurt, whose ranch runs for almost 30 miles along the border. “We see a lot less of the people who are looking for a job.”


Susan Tully, national field director at FAIR, attended the rally to support the organizers, the New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association, with whom she has worked for many years to help get their voices heard.
“I am here in solidarity with the ranchers and people of this area, many of whom are our members and associates,” said Tully. “We discussed how FAIR can help them amplify their call for Washington to get engaged in border enforcement that is meaningful and meets the needs of the people.”
Veterinarian Gary Thrasher expressed concern over the spread of Chagas disease, Dengue fever and bovine tuberculosis, which can be passed from animal to human and vice versa, all of which are being brought into the country by illegal aliens who are unscreened by health officials.
The Border Patrol came under fire for pulling back their agents to the main highway, I-10, creating a buffer zone between the thoroughfare and the border, which can be anywhere from 10 to 60 miles inside U.S. territory. The ranchers call this “Almost America.”
The local Border Patrol station at Lordsburg station is understaffed, moreover, and illegal migrants and criminals know that it is easier to cross into New Mexico than other border areas. Attendees urged officials to patrol on horseback and helicopter, the most effective way to cover this rugged terrain.
Sue Krentz, widow of murder victim Robert Krentz, implored the federal government to “secure the border. We’re demanding the right to live free and safe on our own land and in our own homes. Everything is relative – until it’s your relative.”

 

Obama, He Freed Them and They Kill

Posted on by

How about next we pass a law in Congress, that it is against the law not to follow and apply the law? Imagine the government savings….and especially the lives saved….

Free to Kill: 124 Criminal Aliens Released By Obama Policies Charged with Homicide Since 2010

Vaughn, CIS: In response to congressional inquiries, ICE has released information on some of the criminal aliens who have been released by the agency since 2010. Specifically, ICE provided information on aliens who were charged with homicides after being released and aliens who were released multiple times by ICE.

The criminal aliens released by ICE in these years — who had already been convicted of thousands of crimes — are responsible for a significant crime spree in American communities, including 124 aliens charged with 135 new homicides. Inexplicably, ICE is choosing to release some criminal aliens multiple times.

Only a tiny percentage of the released criminals have been removed — most receive the most generous forms of due process available, and are allowed to remain at large, without supervision, while they await drawn-out immigration hearings. They are permitted to take advantage of this inefficient processing even though they are more likely to re-offend than they are to be granted legal status.

There is a human cost to the Obama administration’s careless catch and release policies for criminal aliens, euphemistically known as “prioritization”. These policies have led to 124 new homicides since 2010, and thousands of other crimes that harm citizens and degrade the quality of life in American communities.

124 Aliens Charged With Homicide After Release Since 2010

A total of 121 criminal aliens who were freed by ICE over the five-year period between 2010 and 2014 were subsequently charged with homicide-related crimes within that time frame. (Three more were charged in 2015; see below.) These 121 accused murderers were associated with 250 different communities in the United States, with the most clustered in California, New York and Texas.

 

Source: ICE information provided to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
View Image of Map

Some aliens had multiple zip codes associated with them in ICE’s system, so the records include more zip codes than the 121 individual criminal aliens charged through 2014. (Three more were charged in 2015; ICE did not provide their zip codes.)

These aliens were charged with a total of 135 homicide-related crimes after release. Two of them had homicide-related convictions even before they were released.

These aliens had 464 criminal convictions prior to release by ICE, ranging from drug crimes to DUI and other driving offenses to larceny and theft.

Another three aliens who were released by ICE during that time were charged with homicides during the first 10 months of FY2015, bring the total number of criminals aliens released by ICE who subsequently were charged with homicide to 124.

This tally does not include aliens who were released by sanctuary jurisdictions, nor those aliens that were released by local law enforcement agencies after ICE declined to take them into custody due to Obama administration prioritization policies. This list includes only those aliens that ICE arrested and then released.

The names of the criminal aliens were redacted by the Judiciary Committee, but the list presumably includes murderers like Apolinar Altamirano, an illegal alien who was arrested by ICE in 2013 following his conviction on local charges involving a burglary and abduction, but who was released on a $10,000 bond and permitted to remain free and elect to have deportation proceedings that would take years to complete. In January 2015 Altamirano shot and killed 21-year-old Grant Ronnebeck while he was working at a convenience store where Altamirano had come to buy cigarettes.

Aliens Released By ICE on Multiple Occasions Since 2013 Commit Hundreds of New Crimes

ICE reported that there are 156 criminal aliens who were released at least twice by ICE since 2013. Between them, these criminals had 1,776 convictions before their first release in 2013, with burglary, larceny, and drug possession listed most frequently.

The vast majority (124) of these criminal aliens were released in California. In addition, 16 were released in Arizona, six in Texas, three in Florida, two in Georgia, and one each in North Carolina, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Washington, and Oregon.

These criminal aliens racked up a total of 243 additional convictions after being freed by ICE. The largest number (24) were for drunk or drugged driving, but they also included drug offenses, burglary, theft and larceny, and sex offenses.

ICE further disclosed that 47 of the recidivist aliens who were released at least twice had since been charged with an additional 106 crimes since their most recent release. So far, 20 have been convicted of crimes including burglary, dangerous drugs, DUI, fraud, and assault on a police officer.

Why Were They Released?

ICE has previously disclosed that 75 percent of the homicidal criminal aliens were released due to court orders, including the so-called Zadvydas cases, in which the alien’s home country would not take them back. The rest were released by ICE’s choice.

Of the 156 recidivists that ICE released at least twice, fewer than half (67) were released because their home country would not take them back, 16 were released on bond by an immigration judge, and 73 were released by ICE’s choice. ICE says it tried to contest only one of the releases ordered by an immigration judge — meaning that ICE essentially consented to more than half of these releases.

Of the 156, a total of 88 were released under “supervision”, 40 were released on bond, and 28 were released on an order of recognizance (without supervision).

In a separate communication, ICE provided a list of the countries that currently are uncooperative in accepting their deported citizens: Afghanistan, Algeria, Burundi, Cape Verde, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, India, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, and Zimbabwe.

Criminal Aliens Released in 2014 Were Convicted of 2,560 New Crimes

In 2014, ICE released a total of 30,558 criminal aliens from its custody. These aliens had already been convicted of 92,347 crimes before they were released by ICE.

As of July 25, 2015, a total of 1,895 aliens have been charged with a crime after being freed by ICE. As of that date, 1,607 aliens had been convicted of a crime after being freed by ICE. The total number of new crimes for which these aliens were convicted after ICE released them was 2,560.

These 2,560 new crimes by aliens ICE released instead of deported in 2014 include: 298 dangerous drug offenses, 185 assaults, 40 weapons offenses, 28 sex offenses, 10 sex assaults, four kidnappings, two arsons, and one homicide. There were 1,044 traffic offenses included in the list.

Only 3 percent of the Criminal Aliens Released in 2014 Have Been Removed

As of July 25, 2015, only 974 (3 percent) of the 30,558 criminal aliens freed by ICE in 2014 have been removed. Presumably some of these aliens are again incarcerated or in ICE custody following conviction for the 2,560 new crimes after their release by ICE.

However, ICE reports that 28,017 still had a pending immigration case as of July 25, 2015, suggesting that many of these released criminal aliens will remain here for some time under Obama administration policies that allow them to elect for drawn-out immigration court proceedings rather than accelerated forms of due process and removal.

In addition, there were 1,567 of these released criminal aliens who have been allowed to stay in the United States.

ICE’s full response to the Judiciary Committee’s inquiries can be found here.

Improved Reporting on Immigration Status of Criminals Needed

The public should not have to rely on members of Congress to demand information from federal immigration agencies about criminal aliens. Immigration status should be reported on a routine basis by all law enforcement agencies, so that federal authorities can respond appropriately when an alien is arrested, and so that the public can determine the true public safety impact of immigration policy. Legislation has been introduced by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) that would remedy this problem.

Facebook’s Zuckerberg Against Hiring Americans

Posted on by

Record high 91.5 million people not included in labor force, 2014

Senate legislation to stop H1B Visa Abuse.

Zuckerberg to Supreme Court: Give Me More Cheap Foreign Labor

IR: In news that will surprise no one, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg urged the U.S. Supreme Court to allow for the implementation of President Obama’s executive amnesty programs. In a friend of the court brief (known as an amicus brief), Zuckerberg and 60 other business executives asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Fifth Circuit’s injunction blocking the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) and expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) amnesty programs. “The federal government’s recent actions—clarifying its enforcement priorities and making temporary work authorization available to certain low-priority [illegal aliens]—strengthen the American economy by stabilizing the workforce, promoting job creation, reducing deficits and increasing federal, state and local tax revenues,” the brief claims. The business executives continue, “Preventing or delaying these policies will only withhold the tangible benefits of a more diverse, productive business environment.”

The message from Zuckerberg and Co. is clear: we want access to more cheap foreign labor. Rather than “stabilizing the workforce,” implementation of DAPA and expanded DACA would flood the labor market with at least 5 million illegal aliens who would receive work authorization under these amnesty programs. Instead, Zuckerberg and his business pals want to stabilize costs in the form of lower wages to these amnestied illegal aliens in order to further pad their pockets with even higher profits. Unsurprisingly, Zuckerberg’s brief fails to mention that the tech industry has experienced record profits yet wages have flat-lined for years.

Despite the ample supply of native workers at the high-skilled (there’s a glut of STEM degree holders) and low-skilled (workforce participation is at historical lows) levels, Zuckerberg continues to demand amnesty and increased guest worker programs simply because they are cheaper than hiring Americas.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in U.S. v. Texas starting April 18. To learn more about the case, visit FAIR’s resource page here.

**** Then there is the Donald:

In the CNN March 10 debate…..hey Trump is there a right or wrong standard you won’t exploit? See the video here.

Donald Trump, facing questions in tonight’s CNN debate about the H1B visa program, said it’s a program he knows well. “It’s something that I frankly use and shouldn’t be allowed to use,” Trump said. “We shouldn’t have it — very, very bad for workers.””I’m a businessman and I have to do what I have to do,” Trump continued. “When it’s sitting there waiting for you, but it’s very bad. It’s very bad for business. And it’s bad for our workers and unfair for our workers.”

NYT:Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., describes itself as “one of the most highly regarded private clubs in the world,” and it is not just the very-well-to-do who want to get in.

Since 2010, nearly 300 United States residents have applied or been referred for jobs as waiters, waitresses, cooks and housekeepers there. But according to federal records, only 17 have been hired.

In all but a handful of cases, Mar-a-Lago sought to fill the jobs with hundreds of foreign guest workers from Romania and other countries.

In his quest for the Republican presidential nomination, Mr. Trump has stoked his crowds by promising to bring back jobs that have been snatched by illegal immigrants or outsourced by corporations, and voters worried about immigration have been his strongest backers.

But he has also pursued more than 500 visas for foreign workers at Mar-a-Lago since 2010, according to the United States Department of Labor, while hundreds of domestic applicants failed to get the same jobs.

*** Further:

Trump’s modeling agency broke immigration laws, attorneys say

CNN Investigations: Throughout his campaign, Trump has loudly opposed the practice of U.S. companies using foreign workers instead of Americans — specifically the highly-skilled workers brought to the United States through the controversial H-1B visa program.

“These are temporary foreign workers, imported from abroad, for the explicit purpose of substituting for American workers at lower pay. I remain totally committed to eliminating rampant, widespread H-1B abuse,” Trump said in a statement on his website, though he backtracked on his position during a recent Republican debate.

While this visa program is best known for bringing over technology workers like engineers and computer programmers, Trump’s own modeling agency has used the program for years, federal data shows. That’s because federal law surprisingly lumps in fashion models with these other specialized workers — though it’s the only job that doesn’t require higher education. (Instead, models must have “distinguished merit and ability.”)

And now, the use of this visa by Trump Model Management, founded by Trump in 1999, is being questioned.

The agency is currently battling a proposed class action lawsuit filed by Jamaican model Alexia Palmer, who was brought to the country with an H-1B visa.

The suit alleges that the agency recruits foreign models with promises of wages that never materialize and defrauds the U.S. government on visa applications. Palmer is currently the only plaintiff and the suit has not yet been approved as a class-action.

In her case, Palmer says she was paid only a few thousand dollars over three years despite being lured with the promise of more than $200,000 in earnings in that same time period.

That salary was also what was listed by Trump Model Management as part of the visa application.

“Ms. Palmer will receive compensation of at least $75,000 per year,” the agency’s president Corinne Nicolas said in a letter to immigration officials. “She is a model whose services have been in great demand, and whose proposed temporary presence in the United States has stirred great anticipation by Trump Model Management and its clientele.” (Nicolas did not respond to a request for comment).

alexia palmer court doc

Government data analyzed by Howard University professor Ron Hira shows that since 2008, Trump’s agency has successfully brought over around 30 foreign models — from countries like Brazil, Latvia and China — using the H-1B program. Almost half of these applications indicated the same $75,000 annual salary, while others went as high as $416,000.

CNNMoney asked a dozen attorneys and other immigration experts to review facts and documents from the case, and the vast majority said Trump’s agency appears to have violated immigration law.

“It seems pretty clear to me that there was a violation… and a pretty egregious violation,” said New York immigration attorney Jeffrey Feinbloom.

Experts say that the U.S. government requires that full-time H-1B workers like Palmer be paid a high enough wage that they aren’t being exploited or displacing American workers — regardless of how much they end up working.

Experts say that the firm was required by law to pay the amount stated on Palmer’s visa — in this case, $75,000 a year. Even more egregious, they say, was that the Trump agency didn’t pay the “prevailing wage” determined by the U.S. government (which is based on the industry and location).

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency (USCIS) confirmed that a sponsoring company “must pay the actual wage or the prevailing wage, whichever is higher” — meaning it was illegal to pay Palmer below either listed wage. “Employers may never pay below the prevailing wage,” the agency said in a statement.

For Palmer, the prevailing wage acknowledged by the Trump agency on the visa application was roughly $45,000 a year. Instead, she made less than $30,000 over three years from modeling jobs for clients ranging from Conde Nast to Saks Fifth Avenue.

And she didn’t even get to keep that full amount. It was almost entirely eaten up by taxes, a 20% commission to the Trump agency, administrative fees and modeling-related costs like $75 walking lessons and a $200 dermatology visit.

In the end, Palmer netted $4,985 over three years (which included cash advances and a $3,880.75 check), a figure acknowledged by the Trump agency. Much more here.

Silenced workers who lost jobs to H-1B visa abuse (quietly) speak out

WashingtonExaminer: The Senate Judiciary Committee recently held a hearing into abuses of the H-1B skilled guest worker visa program. Lawmakers heard experts describe how the use of foreign workers has come to dominate the IT industry, with many tech giants using the program to fire well-paid current workers and replace them with workers from abroad at significantly lower pay.

“The current system to bring in high-skill guest workers … has become primarily a process for supplying lower-cost labor to the IT industry,” two experts who testified at the hearing, Howard University’s Ron Hira and Rutgers’ Hal Salzman, wrote recently. “Although a small number of workers and students are brought in as the ‘best and brightest,’ most high-skill guest workers are here to fill ordinary tech jobs at lower wages.”

Exhibit A in the abuse of H-1Bs was the case of Southern California Edison, which recently got rid of between 400 and 500 IT employees and replaced them with a smaller force of lower-paid workers brought in from overseas through the H-1B program. The original employees were making an average of about $110,000 a year, the committee heard; the replacements were brought to Southern California Edison by outsourcing firms that pay an average of between $65,000 and $75,000.

 

 

 

Expectation of Lynch to Prosecute Hillary Dashed?

Posted on by

Would there be major chaos and embarrassment if FBI Director James Comey resigned over the Hillary Server-gate scandal? Is Comey at odds with his boss Loretta Lynch? He threatened to resign during the Bush administration….he is his own principled man.

Comey’s FBI makes waves

TheHill: The aggressive posture of the FBI under Director James Comey is becoming a political problem for the White House.

The FBI’s demand that Apple help unlock an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino killers has outraged Silicon Valley, a significant source of political support for President Obama and Democrats.

Comey, meanwhile, has stirred tensions by linking rising violent crime rates to the Black Lives Matter movement’s focus on police violence and by warning about “gaps” in the screening process for Syrian refugees.

Then there’s the biggest issue of all: the FBI’s investigation into the private email server used by Hillary Clinton Obama’s former secretary of State and the leading contender to win the Democratic presidential nomination.

A decision by the FBI to charge Clinton or her top aides for mishandling classified information would be a shock to the political system.

In these cases and more, Comey — a Republican who donated in 2012 to Mitt Romney — has proved he is “not attached to the strings of the White House,” said Ron Hosko, the former head of the FBI’s criminal investigative division and a critic of Obama’s law enforcement strategies.

Publicly, administration officials have not betrayed any worry about the Clinton probe. They have also downplayed any differences of opinion on Apple.

But former officials say the FBI’s moves are clearly ruffling feathers within the administration.

With regards to the Apple standoff, “It’s just not clear [Comey] is speaking for the administration,” said Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism and cybersecurity chief. “We know there have been administration meetings on this for months. The proposal that Comey had made on encryption was rejected by the administration.”

Comey has a reputation for speaking truth to power, dating back to a dramatic confrontation in 2004 when he rushed to a hospital to stop the Bush White House from renewing a warrantless wiretapping program while Attorney General John Ashcroft was gravely ill. Comey was Ashcroft’s deputy at the time.

That showdown won Comey plaudits from both sides of the aisle and made him an attractive pick to lead the FBI. But now that he’s in charge of the agency, the president might be getting more than he bargained for.

“Part of his role is to not necessarily be in lock step with the White House,” said Mitch Silber, a former intelligence official with the New York City Police Department and current senior managing director at FTI Consulting.

“He takes very seriously the fact that he works for the executive branch,” added Leo Taddeo, a former agent in the FBI’s cyber division. “But he also understands the importance of maintaining his independence as a law enforcement agency that needs to give not just the appearance of independence but the reality of it.”

The split over Clinton’s email server is the most politically charged issue facing the FBI, with nothing less than the race for the White House potentially at stake.

Obama has publicly defended Clinton, saying that while she “made a mistake” with her email setup, it was “not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

But the FBI director has bristled at that statement, saying the president would not have any knowledge of the investigation. Comey, meanwhile, told lawmakers last week that he is “very close, personally,” to the probe.

Obama’s comments reflected a pattern, several former agents said, of the president making improper comments about FBI investigations. In 2012, he made similarly dismissive comments about a pending inquiry into then-CIA Director David Petraeus, who later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for giving classified information to his biographer, with whom he had a personal relationship.

“It serves no one in the United States for the president to comment on ongoing investigations,” Taddeo said. “I just don’t see a purpose.”

Hosko suggested that a showdown over potential criminal charges for Clinton could lead to a reprise of the famous 2004 hospital scene, when Comey threatened to resign.

“He has that mantle,” Hosko said. “I think now there’s this expectation — I hope it’s a fair one — that he’ll do it again if he has to.”

Comey’s independent streak has also been on display in the Apple fight, when his bureau decided to seek a court order demanding that the tech giant create new software to bypass security tools on an iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook, one of the two terrorist attackers in San Bernardino, Calif.

Many observers questioned whether the FBI was making an end-run around the White House, which had previously dismissed a series of proposals that would force companies to decrypt data upon government request.

“I think there’s actually some people that don’t think with one mindset on this issue within the administration,” said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s top Democrat, at a Tuesday hearing. “It’s a tough issue.”

While the White House has repeatedly backed the FBI’s decision, it has not fully endorsed the potential policy ramifications, leaving some to think a gap might develop as similar cases pop up. The White House is poised to soon issue its own policy paper on the subject of data encryption.

“The position taken by the FBI is at odds with the concerns expressed by individuals [in the White House] who were looking into the encryption issue,” said Neema Singh Guliani, a legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

This week, White House homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco tried to downplay the differences between the two sides. The White House and FBI are both grappling with the same problems, she said in a discussion at the Council on Foreign Relations.

“There is a recognition across the administration that the virtues of strong encryption are without a doubt,” Monaco said on Monday. “There is also uniformity about the recognition that strong encryption poses real challenges.”

But former officials see Comey as wanting to blaze his own trail on the topic.

“I have been very surprised at how public and inflammatory, frankly, the FBI and the Justice Department’s approach has been on this,” said Chris Finan, a former National Security Council cybersecurity adviser.

“That doesn’t tend to be the administration’s preferred approach to handling things.”

The Republican National Committee is suing Hillary and they are on the right track in one case for certain, those communications in her mobile devices.

FreeBeacon: he RNC is requesting communications between Clinton and her key aides, including Bryan Pagliano, her former IT staffer. Pagliano has reportedly received a limited immunity deal from the Department of Justice as part of its investigation into the transmission of classified information over Clinton’s private email server.

The committee is also seeking correspondence between State Department officials and the Clinton campaign that took place after Clinton stepped down from the department.

According to the RNC, it originally submitted public records requests for these documents last October and December, but the State Department has yet to turn over the records. The RNC filed the lawsuits on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“The Obama Administration has failed to comply with records requests in a timely manner as required by law,” RNC chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement on Wednesday. “For too long the State Department has undermined the public and the media’s legitimate right to records under the Freedom of Information Act, and it’s time it complies with the law. If this administration claims to be the ‘most transparent in history,’ and Clinton the ‘most transparent person in public life,’ then they should prove it, release these records, and allow the American people to hold her accountable.”

The State Department is currently facing a number of legal proceedings seeking documents from Clinton’s tenure. The watchdog group Citizens United filed another lawsuit against the department on Monday requesting emails between Dennis Cheng, Clinton’s deputy chief of protocol, and Teneo Holdings, a consulting company run by Clinton confidante Doug Band.

Two lawsuits have been delayed due to the State Department’s discovery of thousands of previously unsearched documents from the executive secretary’s office, the Washington Free Beacon reported last week. The State Department said it could take until next fall to process the newly discovered records and turn them over to the plaintiffs.

AG Loretta Lynch Dodges Questions About Hillary Clinton Email Investigation

PJM: Attorney General Loretta Lynch suggested Wednesday that the Justice Department would not be obligated to pursue charges against Hillary Clinton for her email infractions even if the FBI recommends criminal charges.

 

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) brought up the topic during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday:

“If the FBI were to make a referral to the Department of Justice to pursue a case by way of indictment and to convene a grand jury for that purpose, the Department of Justice is not required by law to do so, are they — are you?” Cornyn asked.Lynch didn’t answer directly, but seemed to indicate the department has some wiggle room, and can consult with officials before deciding what to do.

“It would not be an operation of law, it would be an operation of procedures,” Lynch said in reply. She added that the decision to pursue a criminal case would be “done in conjunction with the agents” involved in the investigation. “It’s not something that we would want to cut them out of the process.”

Lynch declined to answer Cornyn’s questions about the decision to grant immunity to Bryan Pagliano, the former Clinton aide who set up the private “homebrew” server at her home in Chappaqua, NY. Asked Cornyn:

If in fact this was immunity granted by a court, that had to be done under the auspices and with the approval of the Department of Justice, which you head.

Lynch answered:

We don’t discuss the specifics of any ongoing investigation. With respect to the procedure relating to any specific witness, I would not be able to comment. … With respect to Mr. Pagliano or anyone who has been identified as a potential witness in any case, I’m not able to comment on the specifics.

Later, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Lynch about comments made by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest in January that downplayed the FBI investigation. Earnest had told reporters that “some officials” had said she was “not the target of the investigation,” and that an indictment did not seem to be the direction in which the case was trending:

“So when Josh Earnest speaks about the investigation and talks about, basically, to reassure the American people that this is no big deal, do you know where he gets that information from?” Graham asked.“Senator, I do not,” Lynch said.

“Would you tell him that he should just stay silent?” Graham pressed.

“Certainly it’s my hope when it comes to ongoing investigations that we would all stay silent,” Lynch responded.

In January, Fox News’ chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge reported that her sources in the DOJ and FBI were “super pissed off” about Earnest’s comments.

 

Hey John Kerry Read the Genocide Convention

Posted on by

The Genocide Convention, it IS a Treaty:

Article 2 of the convention defines genocide as

…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2

Article 3 defines the crimes that can be punished under the convention:

(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.

— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 3

In part from CNS: “I will make a decision on it as soon as I have that additional evaluation and we will proceed forward from there,” Kerry said.

Kerry was responding to a question put to him by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R.-Neb.), who is the sponsor of a resolution that would declare on behalf of Congress that it is in fact genocide.  The Knights of Columbus and In Defense of Christians are sponsoring an online petition asking Kerry  to “declare that Christians, along with Yazidis and other minorities, are targets on ongoing genocide.”

Feb 25, 2016 – Congressman Rohrabacher slams Secretary of State John Kerry with the truth. Many Americans are proud in supporting Israel while ignoring the slaughter of innocent Christians in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Egypt. They are deaf to the cries of Christians in SE Ukraine (Donbass). They ignore the resurrection of Christianity in Russia. Is America still a Christian nation? If so, then why won’t they defend Christians around the world?

     

Report details ISIS atrocities against Christians, presses State for ‘genocide’ label

FNC: Holding a bloody shirt he carries with him to remember the Islamic State’s crimes against Iraqi Christians, Douglas Bazi described for a Washington audience Thursday how he’s suffered at ISIS’ hands: He was kidnapped, had his teeth bashed in with a hammer and watched as his church was bombed.

“There is not ‘life’ in Iraq,” Bazi said, noting his congregation has been targeted so often it is called the “church of the martyrs, or the church of the blood.”

Bazi joined Middle Eastern Christian leaders and human rights advocates from the Knights of Columbus on Thursday as the group, along with In Defense of Christians (IDC), released a powerful and comprehensive report they say makes the case that the terror campaign against Christians and other minorities in Syria, Iraq and other parts of the Middle East can only be called one thing: genocide.

The report, along with the personal accounts conveyed at the National Press Club in Washington on Thursday, put even more pressure on the Obama administration to officially label the atrocities as genocide.

The State Department and White House so far have not done so, but are facing a congressionally mandated March 17 deadline to make a decision.

“We are forgotten, and we are alone,” Bazi, a former ISIS hostage and now a priest at an Irbil refugee camp, lamented.

Bazi was joined by Irbil-based Dankha Joola, who pointed out that of the 2 million Christians who lived in Iraq before the war, fewer than 300,000 reside there today — many victims of killings and kidnappings, others forced to leave their homes by radicals, Al Qaeda, and now ISIS.

Carl Anderson, head of the Knights of Columbus, which produced the 278-page document with IDC, hopes this report will help advance their cause.

*** Christian population in the Middle East

*** Map of Christian Persecution in the Middle East

 

“The evidence contained in this report as well as the evidence relied upon by the European Parliament fully support — I would suggest compel — the conclusion that reasonable grounds exist to believe the crime of genocide has been committed,” Anderson said.

The report lists 1,131 Iraqi Christians killed between 2003 and June 9, 2014, including where they were killed and when. It also incorporates 24 pages of witness statements collected between February and March of this year, and nearly 200 documented attacks — including destruction of property, sexual assaults, enslavement, torture, imprisonment and killing — in Iraq, Syria and North Africa. Also included is a documenting of attacks on 125 Iraqi churches from 2003 to 2014.

The report also features a legal brief arguing that the crimes committed rise to the level of the Genocide Convention Implementation Act of 1987, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The European Parliament in February already declared that genocide is taking place in the Middle East against Christians, Yazidis and other ethnic and religious minorities at the hands of the Islamic State.

“While we believe this to be the most comprehensive report on this subject to date, covering incidents in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and Yemen, we continue to receive new reports and new evidence,” Anderson said Thursday. But with new reports pouring in every day, he cautioned: “It may only be the tip of the iceberg.”

There have been widespread reports of crucifixions, beheadings and kidnappings, with women and girls forced into marriages with ISIS fighters, or sold into sexual slavery. In Syria, Christians once accounted for 10 percent of the population, but today their numbers have declined to an estimated 1 million or less. Last summer, ISIS kidnapped nearly 300 Christians from Syrian villages and later ransomed them back for $100,000 per person. The money was raised by the Assyrian Christian diaspora.

On March 4, gunmen stormed a Catholic retirement home in Yemen and gunned down 16 people, including four Indian nuns affiliated with the order established by Mother Teresa. According to reports, the city of Aden where the attack occured has seen its Christian population flee.

While groups like the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic organization, press the administration to make the genocide designation, Congress is applying similar pressure.

There are bills with strong bipartisan support in both the House and Senate expressing the sense of Congress that those who commit or support violence against Christians and other ethnic minorities including Yazidis, Turkmen and Kurds for ethnic or religious reasons are committing genocide.

When pressed, Secretary of State John Kerry said in a recent House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing that “you have to get facts from the ground, more than just anecdotal.”

The Knights of Columbus say they were asked to conduct Thursday’s report by David Saperstein, ambassador at-large for religious freedom at the State Department, to give the administration the evidence “on the ground,” and hopes it will clarify matters in Foggy Bottom.

When asked on March 1 why the administration has yet to make the determination, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the word genocide “involves a very specific legal determination that has, at this point, not been reached.”

Advocates say this report proves the legal thresholds have been met, and then some.

“We think the legal question is met and I would reiterate that what is required by the statute is a finding of probable cause, which is not beyond a shadow of a doubt, it that there are reasonable grounds to believe that this crime has occurred and is occurring,” said Anderson, “and I think the facts in this report establish, compellingly, that there are reasonable grounds to believe this crime is being committed.”

The State Department did not return a request for comment, though administration officials have said they recognize and will work to address the violence against Christians and other groups regardless of the words used to describe it.

At least three presidential cadidates — Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz on the Republican side, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the Democratic side — have called on the administration to designate this as a ‘genocide.’