The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal

The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal – American Spectator

.

Marco Rubio.

Paul Ryan.

The IRS.

Illegal immigration.

And fraud to the tune of billions..

Now there’s a combustible mix.

Let’s start with the IRS, illegal immigration and fraud. We’ll come back in a minute to Senator Rubio and Congressman Ryan.

For those who came in late, a year before the IRS scandals burst onto the scene in early May of 2013, an alert investigative reporter for WTHR-Indianapolis (Channel 13), Bob Segall by name, produced a stunning piece of journalism. Segall’s video report is found here and we will quote from his story for the basics. The tale begins when an Indiana tax preparer, who requests anonymity, comes to Segall to alert the investigative reporter to a major league tax fraud.

“We’re talking about a multi-billion dollar fraud scheme here that’s taking place and no one is talking about it,” he (the tax preparer) said.

The scheme involves illegal immigrants – illegal immigrants who are filing tax returns.

How it works

The Internal Revenue Service says everyone who is employed in the United States – even those who are working here illegally – must report income and pay taxes. Of course, undocumented workers are not supposed to have a social security number. So for them to pay taxes, the IRS created what’s called an ITIN, an individual taxpayer identification number. A 9-digit ITIN number issued by the IRS provides both resident and nonresident aliens with a unique identification number that allows them to file tax returns.

While that may have seemed like a good idea, it’s now backfiring in a big way.

Each spring, at tax preparation offices all across the nation, many illegal immigrants are now eagerly filing tax returns to take advantage of a tax loophole, using their ITIN numbers to get huge refunds from the IRS.

The loophole is called the Additional Child Tax Credit. It’s a fully-refundable credit of up to $1000 per child, and it’s meant to help working families who have children living at home.

But 13 Investigates has found many undocumented workers are claiming the tax credit for kids who live in Mexico – lots of kids in Mexico.

“We’ve seen sometimes 10 or 12 dependents, most times nieces and nephews, on these tax forms,” the whistleblower told Eyewitness News. “The more you put on there, the more you get back.”

The whistleblower has thousands of examples, and he brought some of them to 13 Investigates. While identifying information such as names and addresses on the tax returns was redacted, it was still clear that the tax filers had received large tax refunds after claiming additional child tax credits for many dependents.

“Here’s a return right here: we’ve got a $10,300 refund for nine nieces and nephews,” he said, pointing to the words “niece” and “nephew” listed on the tax forms nine separate times.

“We’re getting an $11,000 refund on this tax return. There’s seven nieces and nephews,” he said, pointing to another set of documents. “I can bring out stacks and stacks. It’s just so easy it’s ridiculous.”

20 kids = $30,000
WTHR spoke to several undocumented workers who confirmed it is easy.

They all agreed to talk with WTHR investigative reporter Bob Segall and a translator as long as WTHR agreed not to reveal their identity.

One of the workers, who was interviewed at his home in southern Indiana, admitted his address was used this year to file tax returns by four other undocumented workers who don’t even live there. Those four workers claimed 20 children live inside the one residence and, as a result, the IRS sent the illegal immigrants tax refunds totaling $29,608.

13 Investigates saw only one little girl who lives at that address (a small mobile home). We wondered about the 20 kids claimed as tax deductions?

“They don’t live here,” said the undocumented worker. “The other kids are in their country of origin, which is Mexico.”

He later explained none of the 20 children have ever visited the United States – let alone lived here.

So why should undocumented workers receive tax credits for children living in a foreign country, which is a violation of IRS tax rules?

“If the opportunity is there and they can give it to me, why not take advantage of it?” the worker said.

Other undocumented workers in Indiana told 13 Investigates the same thing. Their families are collecting tax refunds for children who do not live in this country. Several of the workers told WTHR they were told it was legal for them to claim the tax credit for a child who does not live in the United States.

Stop here.

So what Segall uncovered is massive tax fraud by illegal immigrants through the use of the Additional Child Tax Credit.

Segall then goes to a man who, barely a year later, would become a familiar face to Americans. The Inspector General of the Treasury Department, Russell George. George, on camera, says this of his repeated warnings to the IRS about this problem:

“The magnitude of the problem has grown exponentially,” said Russell George, the United States Department of Treasury’s Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

And he says the IRS has known about the problem for years.

George has repeatedly warned the IRS that additional child tax credits are being abused by undocumented workers. In 2009, his office released an audit report that showed ITIN tax filers received about $1 billion in additional child tax credits. Last year, the inspector general released a new report showing the problem now costs American taxpayers more than $4.2 billion.

“Keep in mind, we’re talking $4 billion per year,” he said. “It’s very troubling.”

What George finds even more troubling is the IRS has not taken action despite multiple warnings from the inspector general.

“Millions of people are seeking this tax credit who, we believe, are not entitled to it,” said the inspector general. “We have made recommendations to [IRS] as to how they could address this, and they have not taken sufficient action in our view to solve the problem.”

Stop again.

After noting that filings for the ACTC have soared since 2001, the cost skyrocketing from $161 million in 2001 to $4.2 billion – say again, billion – in 2010, Segall goes to the IRS for comment.

What he gets is this:

The law has been clear for over a decade that eligibility for these credits does not depend on work authorization status or the type of taxpayer identification number used. Any suggestion that the IRS shouldn’t be paying out these credits under current law to ITIN holders is simply incorrect. The IRS administers the law impartially and applies it as it is written.

That was all. Repeated requests for on camera interviews with IRS officials were denied. Period.

Inspector General George, however, took immediate issue with that statement issued by the IRS. Reports Segall:

George disagrees with that position and believes the IRS should be doing more to prevent undocumented workers from getting billions in U.S. tax dollars.

“The IRS is not doing something as simple as requesting sufficient documentation from people seeking this credit,” he said. “Once the money goes out the door, it’s nearly impossible for the IRS to get it back.’”

End of story.

What does this one snapshot of massive tax fraud captured so vividly by reporter Segall have to do with Senator Rubio and Congressman Ryan?

Everything.

Senator Rubio is in fact aware of the problem and has introduced legislation to stop the fraud. For this he has been attacked by Hispanic left-wing activists as reported here in the Miami Herald in May of 2012. So too is Congressman Ryan aware of the problem and, in this May 2012 story from WTHR Bob Segall reports:

“This is where our taxpayer money is going, to the [additional] child tax credit,” said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) Thursday morning during Congressional debate. “One investigation in Indiana said illegal immigrants in Indiana are getting $29,608 for 20 children they claimed for the tax credit who live in Mexico and have never visited the United States before!”

Rep. Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, wants tax credits for illegal immigrants stopped, and so do many other lawmakers who saw WTHR’s investigation. They debated it Thursday morning on the floor of the House after being bombarded by phone calls and e-mails from constituents who watched the Eyewitness News report online.

Now.

Here’s the problem – and it’s potentially a very big problem for Rubio and Ryan.

The two men, Rubio in the Senate as a member of the so-called Gang of Eight, and Ryan in the House, have aggressively gone out front on the issue of immigration.

Ryan has even declared that “I will debate anybody who tries to suggest that these ideas that are moving through Congress are amnesty. They’re not. Amnesty is wiping the slate clean and not paying any penalty for having done something wrong.”

Over at National Review Mark Krikorian calls the Florida Senator’s Gang of Eight bill “Rubio’s Amnesty” in this piece and says this of the Rubio Senate bill:

The result of all this is S.744, a sprawling, 844-page measure legalizes most of the illegal population (plus many who were deported and are currently living abroad), promises tougher enforcement in the future, and hugely increases all forms of legal immigration, low- and high-skilled, temporary and permanent…

Then we got to see the actual text of the legislation. Rubio’s promised provisions are absent. Regarding back taxes, for instance, the bill requires only that applicants “satisfy any applicable federal tax liability” that has previously been “assessed” by the IRS. But a tax is “assessed” only after a tax return has been submitted or after the IRS has conducted an audit. Since neither of those things happens with illegal immigrants working off the books, there aren’t any back taxes to be paid.

The fine for legalization is small – just $500 up front and $500 paid in installments, in return for lifetime legal access to the U.S. labor market. And while $500 can be a lot for an illegal immigrant, in a certain sense it isn’t a fine, since the money would go into a slush fund for DHS to dole out to groups such as La Raza, which are in turn to provide services for the very amnesty beneficiaries who paid the fines. (Conservative writer John Fonte has called this the Alinsky Fund.) Even such a modest penalty is absent for crooked employers. They get amnesty for free – amnesty from prosecution for knowing employment of illegal aliens, non-payment of wages, non-payment of payroll taxes, and facilitation of identity theft.

As for learning English, the language requirement applies only to already-amnestied immigrants seeking the upgrade to full green card, and even then, requires only enrollment in a class, not demonstration of actual proficiency (which is what is required for citizenship).

Moreover, the bill provides for a huge increase in legal immigration – and not just increased numbers but increased complexity, in a system already excessively complex. It has special provisions for guest workers, farm laborers, and foreign technology workers, doctors, and nurses, as well as retirees, entrepreneurs, and foreign students graduating with technical degrees. The Schumer-Rubio bill simply seeks to placate every interest group at the table by handing out more visas. Numbers USA has estimated the number of green cards that would be issued during the first decade of the bill’s operation at 33 million. About one-third of those would be illegal aliens receiving amnesty, so new immigration would go from about 1 million per year to 2 million.

…Finally, securing the Mexican border. The benchmark given in the bill is called “effective control” and means surveillance of 100 percent of the border and apprehension of 90 percent of attempted infiltrators. This is absurdity many times over.

So.

What does the reality of the Rubio bill, and the aggressive defense of Ryan have to do with that year-old investigative piece out of Indiana?

Everything. And while we like both Senator Rubio and Congressman Ryan, their actions raise troubling red flags both on the immigration bill and their respective potential runs for president in 2016.

Why?

At the core of the Indiana story about tax fraud by illegal immigrants is yet again the realization that Big Government has gone off the rails. It is so far from the original vision of the Founders as expressed in the Constitution as to be hell-and-gone.

What the Indiana story of massive IRS fraud by illegal immigrants vividly illustrates is yet another story of corruption and government gone wild. It is the same story as the IRS – Tea Party scandal. It is the same story as the NSA-Edward Snowden issue. It is the same story as Benghazi. It is the same story as State Department cover-ups of tales of State Department employees involvement with prostitutes, sexual assaults, and illegal drugs.

Time and time and time again this always comes back to the incompetence and/or corruption of a government that is seen as being run by arrogant mandarins of the ruling class elite.

Knowing all of this, both Rubio and Ryan are out there actively selling the idea that this time government will get it right. That this time their solutions to an out-of-control illegal immigration problem – which relies 100% on a Big Government that has failed over and over and over again and can’t even manage to control the border – are going to work. Really. Honest.

In truth? This is nonsense on stilts.

Both men are in the process of developing the immigration reform issue into a serious credibility problem with their own conservative base.

Nor is the immigration issue helped when Senator Lindsey Graham says the whole point of the exercise is to “get back in the good graces” of Hispanics. (Note: this is the same Senator Graham who went after Pennsylvania conservatives – Pat Toomey in particular – for allegedly driving then-GOP Senator Arlen Specter from the party. Graham’s candidate: liberal ex-Governor Tom Ridge. Suffice to say, Toomey won. Graham’s notion that a conservative was a loser in Pennsylvania was flat dead wrong.)

When Congressman Ryan hotly declares that the “bipartisan” immigration bill is not amnesty – and the bill is revealed to be more of the same of the 1986 Reagan immigration bill – which Reagan himself considered to be amnesty – his credibility plunges.

The other day in the Wall Street Journal, Karl Rove tried to pass off a version of this same idea and was instantly challenged in the WSJ by former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese III. Wrote Meese, bold print for emphasis mine:

Karl Rove’s recollection of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (“Immigration Reform and the Hispanic Vote,” op-ed, June 6) is, shall we say, highly selective. That law, he writes, “essentially told those here illegally that if they had arrived in the U.S. prior to 1982 and wanted to become citizens, simply raise your right hand.” He asserts that the Gang of Eight bill is different because it “has plenty of penalties and hurdles for those here illegally who seek citizenship.”

Well, I was there in ‘86. I read that bill carefully. (We did that back then.) And I can tell you that Mr. Rove’s blithe description of the bill is way off the mark.

The 1986 act didn’t turn illegal immigrants into citizens on the spot. It granted temporary resident status only to those who could prove they had resided continuously in America for five years. After 18 months, their status could be upgraded to permanent residency, and only after another five years could they become U.S. citizens.

But advancement to citizenship was not automatic. Immigrants had to satisfy various requirements along the way. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.

Sound familiar? It’s pretty much the same “penalties and hurdles” set forth by the Gang of Eight. Today they call it a “roadmap to citizenship.” Ronald Reagan called it “amnesty.”

The ‘86 reform bill also had supposedly “rigorous” border security and immigration law enforcement provisions. So how did that pan out? On the day Reagan signed “comprehensive” reform into law, only one thing changed: Millions of unlawful immigrants gained “legal” status. The promised crackdowns on security and enforcement never happened. Only amnesty prevailed.

Since the ‘86 amnesty, the number of illegal immigrants has quadrupled. That should teach Congress a very important lesson: Amnesty “bends” the rule of law. And bending the rule of law to reach a “comprehensive” deal winds up provoking wholesale breaking of the law. Ultimately, it encourages millions more to risk entering the country illegally in the hope that one day they, too, might receive amnesty.

In other words, what Meese is saying here is that what he sees ahead is a government that refuses to learn from experience when dealing with immigration – and learning from experience is basic to conservatism.

Increasingly and dangerously Rubio and Ryan are being seen as sons of the Republican Establishment who, if they ever were elected president, would spend their time in Bush-like tinkerings at the margin of Big Government when not expanding it outright. Their inability to learn from the Reagan immigration experience is a startling admission that perhaps neither man is as conservative as once thought.

Are they good men? Yes. Talented and conservative in many respects. But alas, what is on display right this minute from both is the same old Republican Establishment flirtation with Big Government.

Trust the government, say Rubio and Ryan. Really. This time it will work. Honest.

The problem?

After an endless series of stories about incompetence or outright corruption in one government scandal after another, not to mention the massive failure of the 1986 Reagan immigration law, there are conservatives aplenty who listen to Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan and simply don’t believe a word they say on immigration.

Not good.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Yet Another Reason Why States Need To Begin Ignoring The Federal Government

Supreme Court: Arizona Law Requiring Citizenship Proof For Voters Is Illegal – Fox News

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot on their own require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.

.

The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona’s voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “Motor Voter” voter registration law.

Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

The court was considering the legality of Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “motor voter” registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

“Today’s decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.

“The Supreme Court has affirmed that all U.S. citizens have the right to register to vote using the national postcard, regardless of the state in which they live,” she said.

The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states — Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee — have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.

The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas said in his dissent.

Opponents of Arizona’s law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say they’ve counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004. They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.

Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, called the decision a victory. “The court has reaffirmed the essential American right to register to vote for federal election without the burdens of state voter suppression measures,” she said.

But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans to show identification before voting.

The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission “recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver’s license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form,” Scalia said.

The case is 12-71, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

*AUDIO* Mark Levin Eviscerates The RINO Establishment

.

Your Daley Gator Saturday Op-Ed Roundup Featuring John Hawkins, Mark Steyn, Stephen Hayes, Thomas Sowell, Michelle Malkin, Walter E. Williams And Jonah Goldberg

Everything You Need To Know About The Rubio/McCain Amnesty Catastrophe In 15 Quotes – John Hawkins

.

1) This is President Obama’s number one political agenda item because he knows we will never again have a Republican president, ever, if amnesty goes into effect. We will perpetually have a progressive, liberal president, probably a Democrat, and we will probably see the House of Representatives go into Democrat hands and the Senate will stay in Democrat hands. – Michele Bachmann

2) The bill is worse than universal healthcare. Listen to me, it is worse than universal healthcare, and in the coming days as we get closer, we will explain why it’s worse than universal healthcare. It is the death knell of the country, there is no recovery from this one. None. No recovery. – Glenn Beck

3) If Republicans are opposed to what mass immigration is doing to the country demographically, ethnically, socially and politically, there are, as Reagan used to say, “simple answers, just no easy answers.”

Those answers: No amnesty, secure the border, enforce laws against businesses that hire illegals, and impose a moratorium on new immigration so wages can rise and immigrants enter the middle class and start voting as did the children and grandchildren of the immigrants of 1890-1920 by 1972.

So what are the Republicans doing?

Going back on their word, dishonoring their platform, and enraging their loyal supporters, who gave Mitt 90 percent of his votes, to pander to a segment of the electorate that gave Mitt less than 5 percent of his total votes.

Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad. – Pat Buchanan

4) The nation’s plutocrats are lined up with the Democratic Party in a short-term bid to get themselves cheap labor (subsidized by the rest of us), which will give the Democratic Party a permanent majority. If Rubio’s amnesty goes through, the Republican Party is finished. It will be the “Nancy Pelosi Democratic Party” versus the “Chuck Schumer Republican Party.” – Ann Coulter

5) Instead of cracking down on the Administration’s abuse of power, S. 744 places unprecedented new restrictions on interior enforcement – making the current situation much worse and much more hazardous. It is as if S. 744 were explicitly written to handcuff law enforcement officials – binding their hands while giving virtually unchecked authority to executive branch officials to prevent future removals, including removals of criminal aliens. – ICE Council president Chris Crane

6) It doesn’t stop illegal immigration. If anything it makes the problem worse by not securing the border and by incentivizing future illegal immigration. – Ted Cruz

7) Creating more than 30 million new immigrants, including 11 million former illegals, and supplanting their numbers with another 20-odd million guest workers is from a sociological and demographic point of view quite radical: 30 million is roughly a tenth of the current population of the United States. How we handle immigration is of fundamental importance to questions ranging from national security to economic growth to the character of our nation itself. That we cannot get a couple of small-time performance benchmarks written into the bill suggests that this issue is not being treated with the intelligence and the prudence it deserves. – The Editors at National Review

8) This is the administration that has refused to enforce the law… they have created new law out of nothing. They’ve violated the law in a number of ways. And our guys are counting on the administration to all of a sudden actually keep their word on something like securing the border when they’ve never done it before and they believe it’s in their political interest to continue not to secure the border even if there’s a deal? I mean that’s crazy to think they’re going to start securing the border and until we secure the border everything else is completely meaningless. – Louie Gohmert

9) Should this be grounds to primary challenge every Republican who voted for this bill, and I mean every single one? I don’t care if they just got re-elected. Next time they’re up for re-election. Ann Coulter’s right. This is a single issue – this is a single-issue primary challenge. You know why? Because this is it. As Bill Kristol said on this show, as he said on this show, once you give this pathway to citizenship all these benefits, all this discretion to [Janet] Napolitano, it’s over. It’s too late to complain about it. It’s over. – Laura Ingraham

10) The federal judge in Crane v. Napolitano has ruled that the ICE agents are likely to prevail in their argument that the Obama administration is ordering them to violate federal law. Think about that: This administration is ordering career law enforcement personnel to break the law. Now, the administration is pushing for an amnesty bill that contains almost nothing to improve immigration enforcement. All that the American citizens will get in return for the amnesty is the promise from the Obama administration that they will try harder to enforce the law. The administration has already shattered that promise, doing exactly the opposite. This is a stark warning to Congress. I sincerely hope that they hear it. – Kris Kobach

11) Almost every requirement in this bill can be waived by Janet Napolitano: for instance, the time limits on when people can be legalized, the requirements on criminal activity or even the enforcement triggers. Those basically don’t mean anything if any of them is held up in court, still. …The litigation over the 1986 bill didn’t end until just a few years ago. The ACLU has been quite clear that it intends to sue to stop mandatory e-verify and probably sue to stop a bunch of other things. If, for instance, mandatory use of electronic verification is still in the courts 10 years after the bill passes, it’s entirely possible the Secretary of Homeland Security can just give everybody Green Cards on her own – and there are hundreds of other examples of that kind of discretion. It’s not too much of an exaggeration to say that this 1,000 page bill after all of the amendments could be boiled down to, “We trust you, Obama; just do the right thing.” – Mark Krikorian

12) The ‘Gang of Eight’ bill is not immigration reform. It is big government dysfunction. It is an immigration Obamacare. All advocates of true immigration reform – on the left and the right – should oppose it. – Mike Lee

13) Okay. So what does that mean, the republic is at stake? This is the ball game. I remember people saying that about Obamacare. Now they’re saying it about immigration reform. And they’re both right. In the case of immigration reform, it effectively wipes out the Republican Party. – Rush Limbaugh

14) Will they listen? Suicidal Republicans have supported illegal alien amnesties dating back to the Reagan era. They have paid a steep, lasting price. As bankrupt, multiculti-wracked California goes, so goes the nation. The progs’ plan has always been to exploit the massive population of illegal aliens to redraw the political map and secure a permanent ruling majority.

Now, in the wake of nonstop D.C. corruption eruptions, SchMcGRubio and Company want us to trust them with a thousand new pages of phony triggers, left-wing slush-fund spending and make-believe assimilation gestures. Trust them? Hell, no. There’s only one course for citizens who believe in upholding the Constitution and protecting the American dream: Stop them. – Michelle Malkin

15) On every major front, this legislation fails to deliver on its core promises. It delivers only for the special interest groups who helped write it. Should it pass, it would represent the ultimate triumph of the Washington elite over the everyday citizen to whom Congress properly owes its loyalty. – Jeff Sessions

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

More opinion articles:

.
Big Politically Correct Brother – Mark Steyn

Excerpt – Every time I go on his show, my radio pal Hugh Hewitt asks me why congressional Republicans aren’t doing more to insist that the GOP suicide note known as “the immigration deal” include a requirement for a border fence. I don’t like to tell Hugh that, if they ever get around to building the fence, it won’t be to keep the foreigners out but to keep you guys in.

I jest, but only very slightly and only because the government doesn’t build much of anything these days – except for that vast complex five times the size of the Capitol the NSA is throwing up in Utah to house everybody’s data on everything everyone’s ever done with anyone ever.

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

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

Our Disappearing President – Stephen Hayes

Excerpt – One might expect Keith Alexander to advocate on behalf of the two programs at the center of our national debate about terrorism and surveillance. He is, after all, the head of the National Security Agency, which runs them. “It’s dozens of terrorist events that these have helped prevent—both here and abroad-in disrupting or contributing to the disruption of terrorist attacks,” Alexander testified last week.

And it’s not entirely surprising that the four leading members of Congress on intelligence matters would argue on behalf of these programs, known as “215″ and “702,” for the sections of the laws that authorize them.

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

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

Who ‘Needs’ Immigrant Labor? – Thomas Sowell

Excerpt – One of the most common arguments for allowing more immigration is that there is a “need” for foreign workers to do “jobs that Americans won’t do,” especially in agriculture.

One of my most vivid memories of the late Armen Alchian, an internationally renowned economist at UCLA, involved a lunch at which one of the younger members of the economics department got up to go get some more coffee. Being a considerate sort, the young man asked, “Does anyone else need more coffee?”

“Need?” Alchian said loudly, in a cutting tone that clearly conveyed his dismay and disgust at hearing an economist using such a word.

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

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

Barack Onama’s “Social Innovation” Slush Fund – Michelle Malkin

Excerpt – We all know now what the vengeful Obama IRS has been doing to conservative nonprofits the past four years: strangling them in the crib. But do you know how much pampering and largesse far-left welfare-state charities have received while limited-government groups suffered? You don’t know the half of it.

Before President Obama took office, I warned that Democrats planned to steer untold amounts of taxpayer dollars to his shady community-organizing pals. The Dems’ 2008 party platform proposed the creation of a “Social Investment Fund Network” to subsidize “social entrepreneurs and leading nonprofit organizations (that) are assisting schools, lifting families out of poverty, filling health care gaps and inspiring others to lead change in their own communities.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

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

Unasked And Unanswered Questions – Walter E. Williams

Excerpt – Grutter v. Bollinger was the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the University of Michigan Law School’s racial admissions policy. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing for the majority, said the U.S. Constitution “does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” But what are the educational benefits of a diverse student body?

Intellectuals argue that diversity is necessary for academic excellence, but what’s the evidence? For example, Japan is a nation bereft of diversity in any activity. Close to 99 percent of its population is of one race. Whose students do you think have higher academic achievement – theirs or ours?

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

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

Freedom: The Unfolding Revolution – Jonah Goldberg

Excerpt – “Why are there no libertarian countries?”

In a much-discussed essay for Salon, Michael Lind asks: “If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?”

Such is the philosophical poverty of liberalism today that this stands as a profound question.

Definitions vary, but broadly speaking, libertarianism is the idea that people should be as free as possible from state coercion so long as they don’t harm anyone.

Click HERE For Rest Of Article

.

The danger of passing bills that are so big no one can grasp what is in them

The immigration reform being debated in Congress is over 800 pages long. That alone should tell you that it contains far too much, will likely have no real positive effect on actually fixing anything. And it should also tell you that there are likely things in the bill which you would never dream of being there. You know, like putting all of us on a national database

Smile, you’re on Obama-cam. Because buried deep inside the Senate immigration reform plan is a comprehensive national ID system. Wired broke the story last month.

The immigration reform measure the Senate began debating yesterday would create a national biometric database of virtually every adult in the U.S., in what privacy groups fear could be the first step to a ubiquitous national identification system.

Buried in the more than 800 pages of the bipartisan legislation (.pdf) is language mandating the creation of the innocuously-named “photo tool,” a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.

Employers would be obliged to look up every new hire in the database to verify that they match their photo.

This piece of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act is aimed at curbing employment of undocumented immigrants. But privacy advocates fear the inevitable mission creep, ending with the proof of self being required at polling places, to rent a house, buy a gun, open a bank account, acquire credit, board a plane or even attend a sporting event or log on the internet. Think of it as a government version of Foursquare, with Big Brother cataloging every check-in.

Go read the rest at Wyblog. This bill, if passed would give even more power to a government that has shown it cannot be trusted to follow Constitutional constraints.

 

Dumber Than Dirt: Senators Heller And Reid Push To Define Nevada As A ‘Border State’

Heller, Reid Push To Define Nevada As A ‘Border State’ – Big Government

Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered an amendment to the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill that would define Nevada as a “border state” despite the fact that no part of Nevada’s state borders touch Mexico.

.

“Nevada is a top destination for travelers all over the world and is an international hub through which tens of millions of people pass each year, our state benefits from the cultural diversity of Filipino, Chinese and Armenian communities to name a few and we are couched between two states that border the country of Mexico,” Heller said on the Senate floor when he introduced the amendment.

“Las Vegas is known for McCarran International Airport which sees tens of millions of tourists each year and is merely a short drive away from Los Angeles, San Diego and Phoenix. Nevada’s unique location leaves it highly vulnerable to our flawed immigration system, and open to this exact same problem faced by other southwestern border states like Arizona, Texas, California, and New Mexico. But, despite the fact that Nevada is in many respects a border state that copes with the exact same immigration problems facing states like California, this bill in its current form excludes Nevada from the list of states that are eligible to join the Southern Border Security Commission, so my Amendment, Heller 1227, would include Nevada with other southwestern border states whose governors would comprise the Southern Border Security Commission.”

Heller noted his amendment would include Nevada as a border state. A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat who also hails from Nevada, confirmed to Breitbart News that Reid is a cosponsor on the amendment as well.

“This amendment ensures the commission created in the underlying bill is fully representative of issues affecting southern border and southwestern states,” Heller said. “Although Nevada does not touch the southern border, its current demographics and state issues are reflective of other southern border states and Nevada should have a voice on this commission.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

70 Conservative House Members Risk Careers in Planned Showdown With RINO Leadership Over Amnesty Bill

Revolt Among Republicans On Immigration Bill: 70 House Members Risk Careers In Planned Showdown With Leadership – The Blaze

Seventy House Republicans are planning a politically risky showdown with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to try to force additional debate on an immigration bill they say will mean amnesty for illegal immigrants and have dire consequences for the country.

The 70 members are petitioning for a special Republican conference meeting on the bill, a “highly unusual” move to go head-to-head with the speaker, according to Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), Steve King (Iowa) and Louie Gohmert (Texas), who are serving as spokespersons for the group.

.

Bachmann, King and Gohmert told TheBlaze the group is invoking the Hastert Rule: requiring support from a majority of the majority to bring a bill forward.

The petition is expected to go to the House leadership on Friday, but it’s possible some signatories might remove their names due to political risk, or that Boehner could head off the challenge by striking a deal. Going against leadership in such a way could have harsh political consequences for the signatories, including retaliation such as permanently getting passed over for chairmanship positions.

A Boehner spokesman did not immediately return a request for comment.

Boehner is on a tight schedule for getting immigration reform passed in the House, predicting this week that Congress could finalize a bill for President Barack Obama’s signature by the end of the year. Any major challenge could ignite pushback from the American public that could force lawmakers to scrap the bill, as happened in the 2007 immigration effort.

The three representatives told TheBlaze that more than half of the Republicans in the House were elected after 2007, and have no concept of how strongly the public opposed the bill.

In an interview with World Net Daily this week, Bachmann predicted that if the immigration bill becomes law, “the whole political system will change.”

“This is President Obama’s number one political agenda item because he knows we will never again have a Republican president, ever, if amnesty goes into effect. We will perpetually have a progressive, liberal president, probably a Democrat, and we will probably see the House of Representatives go into Democrat hands and the Senate will stay in Democrat hands,” Bachmann said.

She also said that if it passes, the bill will create a permanent progressive class.

“That’s what’s at risk right now. It may sound melodramatic, I don’t mean it that way, but this is that big and that important,” Bachmann said.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Department Of Homeland Security Halted Background Checks To Meet Flood Of Amnesty Requests

Report: DHS Halted Background Checks To Meet Flood Of Amnesty Requests – Big Government

In advance of his successful reelection, President Obama took executive action to defer, for two years, deportation for illegal immigrants who entered the country as children. The result was a flood of requests to the immigration service for the temporary amnesty. As a result of this demand, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch, the Department of Homeland Security cut back on the legally-required criminal background checks of these immigrants. The revelation raises questions of how the agency could handle a blanket amnesty of all illegal immigrants.

.

In October 2012, Judicial Watch, acting on a tip from a whistleblower, filed a FOIA request with DHS for “all communications, memoranda, emails, policy guidance, directives, initiatives, and any other correspondence respecting the scope and extent of background checks to be performed (or not) on aliens applying to the Obama administration’s DACA program.” [DACA is the acronym for Obama's temporary amnesty directive.]

Memos and emails obtained through the FOIA reveal that the agency suspended conducting full criminal background checks on illegals applying for the program and, instead, instituted a “lean and lite” process, which allowed the applicant to continue moving through the system.

DHS staff were even informed that that an immigrant’s failure to produce valid identification should not be a reason to delay their application for amnesty. In an October 3 memo, agents were told “Biometric processing should not be refused solely because an applicant does not present an acceptable ID.”

Interestingly, on November 9th, three days after President Obama won reelection, DHS staff were told to stop taking applications for the temporary amnesty. It was somehow no longer necessary to expedient the granting of temporary amnesty.

“The Obama administration seems to be throwing public safety and national security out the door in implementing its illicit and unilateral amnesty program for illegal aliens. The costs and security lapses of this program show that this administration can’t be trusted to implement any of the new security measures in the amnesty bill in the Senate,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said in a statement.

Supporters of the Senate amnesty bill promise that no illegal immigrants will be placed on the path to citizenship without being a full criminal background check. If the agency couldn’t handle applications from several hundred thousand immigrants, how can it handle the 11 million would will be legalized after the bill passes?

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Marco Rubio On Securing The Border: Lying In English, Lying In Spanish, Or Channeling The Palestinians?

Marco Rubio On Securing The Border: Lying In English, Lying In Spanish, Or Channeling The Palestinians? – Yid With Lid

.

Senator Marco Rubio appeared on “Al Punto” the Sunday morning news program on Univision. Rubio was asked to respond to the concern that legalization might be delayed and therefore be subjected to the policies of future administration.

Let’s be clear. Nobody is talking about preventing the legalization. The legalization is going to happen. That means the following will happen: First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence. What we’re talking about here is the system of permanent residence. As for the legalization, the enormous majority of my colleagues have accepted that it has to happen and that it has to begin at the same time we begin the measures for [the border]. It is not conditional. The legalization is not conditional.

That’s different from what the Junior Senator from Florida says in English. He has always said the bill must secure the borders first.

In April he told Chris Wallace that border security is a trigger for the legalization process:

Yes. Let me tell you why it’s a trigger because, basically, homeland security will have five years to meet that goal. If after five years, Homeland Security has not met that number, it will trigger the Border Commission who will then take over this issue for them. So, they’ll have five years to get it done. They have to create these two plans – a fence plan, there has to be a fence component to this, and a border security plan.

Is Marco Rubio adopting the strategy of the Palestinians first championed by Yasser Arafat? Which was talking peace in English but talking war in Arabic? It certainly seems that way.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

House votes to defund Obama’s back door Dream Act

Good for them, I wonder how long until Senator McCain is bashing them as wacko birds over this

The House of Representatives voted 224–201 Thursday morning to deny funding for the Obama administration’s controversial Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy. The policy, which was implemented via executive order in June 2012, effectively assumes the enactment of the DREAM Act, legislation that has failed to pass Congress on multiple occasions, and has raised concerns about executive overreach:

Republicans have argued that these orders amount to the selective enforcement of U.S. immigration laws that discourages enforcement against children who were brought to the United States illegally, or illegal immigrant adults who are not in any legal trouble. Many Republicans have dubbed Obama’s orders as “administrative amnesty.”

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) sponsored the amendment to the 2014 Department of Homeland Security spending bill, and called for its passage in late Wednesday debate by saying Obama’s orders — also known as the Morton memos — violate the Constitution.

“The point here is … the President does not have the authority to waive immigration law, nor does he have the authority to create it out of thin air, and he’s done both with these Morton memos in this respect,” King said.

President Obama works for us, and is bound by the Constitution. Facts he chooses to ignore. 

 

Sen. Chuck Schumer: Here’s An Idea, Let’s Make Illegal Alien Identity Thieves Citizens!

Schumer: Put Aliens Who Forged Documents On Path To Citizenship – CNS

Americans might generally think that if someone forges a document and uses a Social Security number that does not belong to them, they should go to jail.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., believes if you are an illegal alien and you do these things, you should become a U.S. citizen. He made his case for this in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

.

When the committee was considering amendments to its immigration “reform” bill on May 20, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, pointed to a report published by The Associated Press in March.

This report told the story of Candida L. Gutierrez, a Houston schoolteacher, and Benita Cardona-Gonzalez, an illegal alien from Mexico who stole Gutierrez’s identity.

“When Gutierrez’s identity was stolen, the thief didn’t stop at opening fraudulent credit and bank accounts,” the AP reported. “Cardona-Gonzalez assumed Gutierrez’s persona completely, using it to get a job, a driver’s license, a mortgage and medical care for her children. She even put the stolen name on the birth certificates of her two U.S.-born children in the spots where they list who’s the mother.”

The identity theft went on for 12 years. Finally, Gutierrez’s husband, Brenden Marquardt, pushed the case.

“He traced the identity thief to Topeka, and on the Internet he found a press release from the U.S. attorney’s office in Kansas about the prosecutions of other illegal immigrants working at Reser’s Fine Foods, the same manufacturer where Cardona-Gonzalez worked,” the AP reported. “He contacted federal authorities in Kansas, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Brent Anderson took up their case.”

Cardona-Gonzalez, the AP reported, was sentenced to 18 months for possessing fraudulent identification documents. But other illegal aliens who have misused Social Security numbers will get something quite different if Schumer has his way.

After pointing to the victimization of Candida Gutierrez, Grassley explained to the Judiciary Committee a simple amendment he was offering to the immigration bill.

“The secretary (of homeland security) may not grant registered provisional immigrant status to an alien under this section unless the alien fully discloses to the secretary all the names and Social Security account numbers that the alien has ever used to obtain employment in the United States,” said Grassley’s amendment.

According to the immigration “reform” bill, a “registered provisional immigrant” (RPI) is an illegal alien who the secretary of homeland security has been authorized to convert into a legal alien, who can then work and live in the United States.

Grassley’s amendment would not have prohibited illegal aliens from being converted into legal aliens just because they had used names and Social Security numbers that did not belong to them. It would only have required that the illegal aliens make the names and numbers they used known to DHS before they could be granted the right to legally live in the United States.

“If Congress is going to adopt legislation that grants legal status to the 12 million undocumented living unlawfully in the United States, it should not thumb its nose at the millions of Americans who are victims of identity theft, often perpetrated by an undocumented person who steals Social Security numbers to get jobs, benefits, driver’s licenses and more,” said Grassley.

“This amendment will simply require the person applying for RPI status to disclose any previously used Social Security numbers,” said Grassley. “It’s the first step to helping clean up the mess that’s been created for the victim of identity theft. The amendment also authorizes certain federal agencies, upon receipt of this information, to notify individuals who were the victims.”

Schumer dismissed Grassley’s proposal.

“When people are living in undocumented status, there are times, I suppose, when they’ve made up identities, made up Social Security numbers,” Schumer told his Judiciary Committee colleagues. “How are they going to remember all that, and are we going to delay RPI status?

“(The) purpose of this is to bring people out of the shadows,” Schumer said of the “reform” bill. “We all know when they lived in the shadows, they had to forge documents, forge Social Security numbers, et cetera. We want to stop that once and for all so it never happens again. But this isn’t going to help. This is going to leave millions of people still in the shadows and not able to come out of the shadows and won’t solve the problem that we’re trying to solve, which is to have as few people here illegally as possible, put them on RPI, provisional status and then get them on a path to citizenship.”

“I just don’t see how, when you’ve lived here 10 years, and you’ve had many different identities, many different numbers, you’re going to remember them all,” said Schumer.

The committee defeated Grassley’s amendment 8 to 10 on a party-line vote.

As this column has noted before, the inspector general of the Social Security Administration reported in a 2008 audit report that U.S. employers filed 10.1 million W-2s in tax year 2005 on which the name and the Social Security number did not match. In that same year, 1,650 employers filed more than 500 no-match W-2s – and one employer filed 37,375.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Florida Governor Rick Scott Vetoes Leftists’ Bill To Give Drivers Licenses To Illegal Aliens

Gov. Scott Vetoes Bill To Give Drivers Licenses To Illegal Aliens – Space Coast Daily

Governor Rick Scott vetoed House Bill 235, which would have provided “temporary” drivers licenses to illegal immigrants categorized under the “Deferred Action Status” by an executive order from President Obama.

.

The bill which was authored by Rep. Randolph Bracy, D-Orlando cleared the House with a vote of 115-2 and the Senate, with a vote of 36-0. HB 235 would have let the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles accept as a person’s approved application for “deferred action status” which was defined in an Executive Order by President Obama. Governor Scott explained his veto in a cover letter to Florida Secretary of State Kenneth Detzner. Excerpts from Scott’s letter include:

“Florida is home to immigrants of many nationalities, who add to the cultural fabric of our great state, and whose productivity and hard work have contributed to our economic turnaround. Still, our nation struggles with immigration issues every day, as Americans seek to reconcile the fact that at one point our families were immigrants who came, as many do today, to work and live the American dream with the fact that the federal government has failed at enforcing the nation’s laws on this topic…

Deferred action status is simply a policy of the Obama Administration, absent Congressional direction, designed to dictate removal action decisions using DHS agency discretion. It was never passed by Congress, nor is it a promulgated rule…

Given that deferred action status does not confer substantive rights or lawful status upon an individual, Florida is best served by relying on current state law. Already, Florida law allows those with a federal employment authorization card, without regard to their deferred action status, to obtain a temporary Florida driver license…

Although the Legislature may have been well intentioned in seeking to expedite the process to obtain a temporary driver license, it should not have been done by relying on a federal government policy adopted without legal basis.

For the reasons stated above, I withhold my approval of House Bill 235, and do hereby veto the same.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Illegal Alien Mother Of Seven Has Received Food Stamps, Meds, Housing And Social Security For 20 Years (Video)

Unreal… Illegal Immigrant Mother Of Seven Given Food Stamps, Meds, Housing, And Social Security… For 20 Years (Video) – Gateway Pundit

It’s Cloward-Piven on steroids.

.

Illegal immigrant and mother of seven, Marita Nelson, receives $240 in food stamps, monthly medications, $700 in Social Security and a housing allowance. She entered the US by swimming the Rio Grande and has been on government assistance for 20 years.

No doubt, an Obama supporter…

Now she’s on a crusade to help other illegals sign up for their free stuff.

You just can’t make this stuff up!

Via Special Report:

.

.
For the record… The Obama administration is paying recruiters to sign up more people on food stamps.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Crazed Leftists’ Recall Effort Against Sheriff Joe Arpaio Fails Miserably

Recall Effort Against Sheriff Joe Arpaio Fails – Breitbart

A liberal group, “Respect Arizona” failed in its effort to recall popular Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Thursday, but a voter group represented by Larry Klayman, is still suing Respect Arizona because he says the recall effort was illegal under Arizona law to begin with.

.

Here is the press release from Klayman’s group, Citizens to Protect Fair Election Results:

Today, predictably, the attempted recall of Sheriff Joe Arpaio by a group which ironically calls itself Respect Arizona, failed in its bid to begin a recall of this respected law enforcement official, who has just been reelected to office for a sixth term. While admitting that they did not get the required number of signatures to begin a recall, obviously because the people of Maricopa County are happy to have Sheriff Arpaio remain in office, the Respect Arizona spokesmen failed to mention that their attempted recall was illegal in any event, as not proscribed by the Arizona Constitution at Article 8, part 1, section 5, which prohibits a recall within six months after an elected official is sworn in. In this regard, the lawsuit filed by attorney Larry Klayman on behalf of the voters of Maricopa County, through his client, the Citizens to Protect Fair Election Results, is set for hearing on June 25, 2013 at 1:30 pm before Judge Michael Herrod.

“Despite Respect Arizona’s miserable failure to get the requisite number of signatures needed to conduct an illegal recall, prohibited by the Arizona Constitution, we maintain that the case must still be decided on the merits, as this abuse of process is capable of repetitive acts – that is other elected officials, including judges, could be subject to similar improper schemes to thwart the will of the voting public and nullify their votes. Moreover, the use of a premature and illegal recall effort to raise funds for an organization such as Respect Arizona, defrauds donors to the recall effort and wastes valuable county and state resources. It is thus no wonder that Respect Arizona has refused to make public the signatures which it claims to have collected, as they were procured under false pretenses,” stated Klayman.

“The case against Respect Arizona and the county agencies which allowed this illegal attempted recall to go forward is thus proceeding in court, as this illegal conduct cannot be allowed to happen in the future. We need a ruling by the court upholding the Arizona Constitution, to protect the voters of this great state and elected officials and judges who won their elections fair and square,” added Klayman.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

*VIDEO* Marco Rubio: Sellout

.

Thanks Barack… DHS Released 622 Illegal Aliens With Criminal Convictions Back Into Community In February

Obama Admin’s DHS Admits They Released 622 Illegal Immigrants With Criminal Convictions Back Into Community In February – Weasel Zippers

At what point will the weight of the scandals and bad decisions sink the Obama ship?

Jim Bridenstine
@RepJBridenstine

The Obama administration and DHS should be held accountable for this reckless decision. goo.gl/CuL8g #tcot pic.twitter.com/qnjLwVsM89
8:24 PM – 9 May 2013
……….
276 Retweets 64 favorites

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Parasitic Leftists Slip “Same-Sex” Provision Into Amnesty Bill

Same-Sex Immigration Reform Amendment Filed By Democrats – Shark Tank

I have been saying that this ‘Gang of Ocho’ immigration reform bill would be dead in the water the minute the liberal faction in the U.S. Senate began to do President Obama’s bidding of imposing their liberal views on the legislation.

.

Rubio had been warned that this would happen, and it has. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has filed two amendments that acknowledge same-sex marriage. Rubio recently said that that if his bill was amended with such a measure, he would not support the bill anymore.

This move by the Democrats gives Rubio that immigration reform life raft he needed.

This is the immigration excrement that the liberal Democrats in the Senate and President Obama wanted Rubio to step into all along. Democrats like Schumer would get Rubio to stick his head out on this issue, basically making him there token Julio.

Then they would insert legislation like Leahy’s same-sex amendment, in hopes that Rubio would back out of the bipartisan bill, effectively dinging him as being against Hispanics and immigration reform.

The only thing Rubio can do now is back out, take the hit, and go back to the drawing board. Rubio, who caused himself significant political damage for standing with Schumer, Durbin, McCain and others on immigration reform, will have a lot of damage control to do with his base after all of the immigration dust settles.

Here is what Buzzfeed just reported:

”For immigration reform to be truly comprehensive, it must include protections for all families,” Leahy said in a statement. “We must end the discrimination that gay and lesbian families face in our immigration law.”

Among Leahy’s amendments is one that would include the Uniting American Families Act – a bill that would create a new category of “permanent partners” to enable a U.S. citizen in a same-sex couple to sponsor a foreign partner – in the larger immigration reform legislation. This amendment had been discussed and was to be filed.

A second amendment, according to a news release from Leahy’s office, “provides equal protection to lawfully married bi-national same sex couples that other spouses receive under existing immigration law.” The provision asserts that a person would be considered a married spouse under the Immigration and Nationality Act if the marriage “is valid in the state in which the marriage was entered into” or, if “entered into outside of any state,” was valid where entered into and would be valid in a state.

Lavi Soloway, an immigration rights lawyer who represents same-sex couples and co-founded The DOMA Project, told BuzzFeed the second amendment was “nothing short of a strategic master stroke.”

Explaining, he said, “It would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act so that all marriages of gay and lesbian binational couples would be recognized for immigration purposes only, thus creating the first ever ‘carve out’ or exception to DOMA under federal law.” – Buzzfeed

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

*VIDEO* Marco Rubio: Republican Star Or Pod Person From Outer Space? (PJTV)

.

.

Marco Rubio: Corrupted By Washington In Only Two Years

Marco Rubio: Corrupted By Washington In Only Two Years – Canada Free Press

It’s hard to believe that Marco Rubio has only been in the Senate since January 2011. With the way he has been going on lately, telling conservatives what a bunch of unenlightened rubes we are for objecting to his immigration reform, you would think he’d been a Senator for 20 years.

.

The once Tea Party favorite, whose chances of being elected President are now on par with Mark Sanford, has been at the forefront of jamming the Democrat’s dream of opening the immigration floodgates through Congress, an effort that shares many the hallmarks of the passage of Obamacare:

Put together in the dead of night by Washington insiders with zero transparency. Check.

Rushing the bill through the legislative process as fast as humanly possible before the opposition can get their act together. Check.

Refusing to accept even the barest hint of cooperation with Republicans who aren’t RINOs. Check.

We’ll have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it! Check.

Representing everything the Tea Party movement has dedicated itself against Rubio is blazing a trail of lies and deceit that must make Obama proud.

Despite Rubio’s assurances that legalization efforts won’t go into effect until after the border is secure, a multitude of analysts have shown this to be a complete falsehood. Once DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano says the border is secure, whether it is or not, the bill goes into effect. Trusting someone who is stocking up on hundreds of millions of rounds of ammo, more than enough to conquer all of Asia Minor, isn’t exactly what most conservatives would call a good bet.

Other fun facts that Rubio has neglected to mention during his magical media tour include:

1, The immediate shutdown of the E-verify system.
2. The potential for 33 million newly minted American citizens in only the first 10 years – a “conservative” estimate, the actual total could be much higher.
3. A permanent voting majority for Democrats guaranteed to last a generation.
4. Making it illegal for law enforcement to arrest and deport anyone who “appears eligible” for legalization.
5. Allowing judges the ability to waive what is now mandatory deportation for certain classes of criminal aliens.
6. Free “Obama phones” for immigrants as they cross the border.
7. A gigantic boon for immigration lawyers as countless appeals, court appearances and so on are granted to illegals before they can be deported.

And that’s just what we know so far. With the endless ability for the DHS Secretary to grant exceptions to not only individuals, but entire “classes of aliens” from conforming to the law, things could get much worse.

The question conservatives are asking themselves lately is why would Rubio serve as a patsy for this clearly dangerous legislation? The answer is he is corrupt. Corrupted by a Washington culture where the elites think they are smarter than us, that they have the power to tell us what to do and who we have to accept into our communities, regardless of the cost to our society and pocketbooks. Where attending Georgetown cocktail parties attended by only the very best sort makes them better than the common people they lord over. A symptom of a government that is no longer of the people, by the people, for the people, but now only for the elite.

From Tea Party favorite to corrupt Washington insider in only two years, ladies and gentlemen, I give you Marco Rubio.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Judicial Watch Uncovers USDA Records Sponsoring U.S. Food Stamp Program For Illegal Aliens

Judicial Watch Uncovers USDA Records Sponsoring U.S. Food Stamp Program For Illegal Aliens – Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch today released documents detailing how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is working with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens in the U.S. food stamp program.

.

The promotion of the food stamp program, now known as “SNAP” (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance. Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”

The documents came in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made to USDA on July 20, 2012. The FOIA request sought: “Any and all records of communication relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals, and migrant communities, including but not limited to, communications with the Mexican government.”

The documents obtained by Judicial Watch show that USDA officials are working closely with their counterparts at the Mexican Embassy to widely broaden the SNAP program in the Mexican immigrant community, with no effort to restrict aid to, identify, or apprehend illegal immigrants who may be on the food stamp rolls. In an email to Borjon Lopez-Coterilla and Jose Vincente of the Mexican Embassy, dated January 26, 2012, Yibo Wood of the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) sympathized with the plight of illegal aliens applying for food stamps, saying, “FNS understands that mixed status households may be particularly vulnerable. Many of these households contain a non-citizen parent and a citizen child.”

The email from Wood to Lopez-Coterilla and Vincente came in response to a request from the Mexican Embassy that the USDA FNS step in to prevent the state of Kansas from changing its food stamp policy to restrict the amount of financial assistance provided to illegal aliens. In a January 22, 2012, article, the Kansas City Star had revealed that the state would no longer include illegal aliens in its calculations of the amount of assistance to be provided low-income Hispanic families in order to prevent discrimination against legal recipients.

The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch in August 2012, include the following:

* March 30, 2012 – The USDA seeks approval of the Mexican Embassy in drafting a letter addressed to consulates throughout the United States designed to encourage Mexican embassy staffers to enroll in a webinar learn how to promote increased enrollment among “the needy families that the consulates serve.”

* August 1, 2011 – The USDA FNS initiates contact with the Mexican Embassy in New York to implement programs already underway in DC and Philadelphia for maximizing participation among Mexican citizens. The Mexican Embassy responds that the Consul General is eager to strengthen his ties to the USDA, with specific interest in promoting the food stamp program.

* February 25, 2011 – The USDA and the Mexican Consulate exchange ideas about getting the First Ladies of Mexico and United States to visit a school for purposes of creating a photo opportunity that would promote free school lunches for low-income students in a predominantly Hispanic school. Though a notation in the margin of the email claims that the photo op never took place, UPI reported that it actually did.

* March 3, 2010 – A flyer advertises a webinar to teach Hispanic-focused nonprofits how to get reimbursed by the USDA for serving free lunch over the summer. The course, funded by American taxpayers, is advertised as being “free for all participants.”

* February 9 , 2010 – USDA informs the Mexican Embassy that, based on an agreement reached between the State Department and the Immigration & Naturalization Service (now ICE), the Women, Infants & Children (WIC) food voucher program does not violate immigration laws prohibiting immigrants from becoming a “public charge.”

As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”

In 2012, Judicial Watch reported that in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions questioned the Obama administration’s partnership with Mexican consulates to encourage foreign nationals, migrant workers and non-citizen immigrants to apply for food stamps and other USDA administered welfare benefits. Sessions wrote, “It defies rational thinking,” Sessions wrote, “for the United States – now dangerously $16 trillion in debt – to partner with foreign governments to help us place more foreign nationals on American welfare and it is contrary to good immigration policy in the United States.”

“The revelation that the USDA is actively working with the Mexican government to promote food stamps for illegal aliens should have a direct impact on the fate of the immigration bill now being debated in Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These disclosures further confirm the fact that the Obama administration cannot be trusted to protect our borders or enforce our immigration laws. And the coordination with a foreign government to attack the policies of an American state is contemptible.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.