Judge Rules Against Insane Homeowner’s Association That Tried To Force Family To Take Down Purple Swingset

They Gave Their Little Girls A Purple Backyard Swing Set. Then The Jail Threats Started Coming – Independent Journal Review

When Marla Stout put up a new swing set in her family’s backyard, her two daughters pleaded with her to paint it the color of bubblegum. Marla wasn’t a fan of the pink swing set idea, but she agreed to paint it purple.

Now, she and her husband have been threatened with jail time because of it.

According to Fox News, the Stouts painted the swing set two years ago, but it wasn’t until this summer that the Raintree Lake Subdivision Homeowners Association (HOA) decided to make a stink about it.

.

.
While there are no distinct rules about swing set colors, the HOA dictates that they must be “harmonious with the community and with nature.” In the HOA’s opinion, the purple swing set wasn’t “in harmony” with the others in the community.

“We got very frustrated,” Marla said. “There’s somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 homes in our community. There’s all kinds of colors. There’s people with bright purple doors. There’s trees that are the color of this swing set.”

Marla and her husband were told that if the swing set wasn’t removed, they would be fined or jailed.

The HOA claimed that the Stouts were in the wrong for not getting their swing set color pre-approved. They tried to dissuade the Stouts from filing a lawsuit, claiming that the costs would be “far greater than any principle [they] are trying to prove.”

But after an initial hearing on August 21, a Missouri judge ruled a week later that the swing set can stay purple. While the Stouts are thrilled with the judge’s decision – they had a barbecue Friday to celebrate – they believe that the HOA should apologize to the entire community.

“It’s been very embarrassing for our community and it’s cost every resident in this community a lot of money and reputation,” Marla said.

.

.

.

*VIDEO* Judge Jeanine Pirro Explains In Detail How Hitlery Has Committed Multiple Crimes


.

.

*VIDEO* Judge Andrew Napolitano Explains Why Hillary Clinton Is Screwed


.
H/T Western Journalism

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

Related article:

.
ABC, NBC Ignored Hillary’s Above Top Secret Email News – Sweetness & Light

After all, what is more important? That Hillary was giving up secrets that could get people killed or the ‘Republican War On Women’?

From NewsBusters:

ABC, NBC Punt on News Two Hillary E-Mails Have Been Found to Be ‘Top Secret’

By Curtis Houck | August 11, 2015

On Tuesday night, ABC’s World News Tonight and NBC Nightly News ignored a new development in the growing Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal with news just prior to the newscasts that two of Clinton’s e-mails were found to have been “top secret” by the intelligence community’s inspector general.

Meanwhile, the CBS Evening News was only able to scour together a 27-second news brief on the story… On CBS, anchor Scott Pelley explained how: “Late today, we learned that the intelligence community inspector general has found that two e-mails on Hillary Clinton’s private server should have been classified top secret.”

Not to pick nits, but they are now classified to compartmentalized. Which, as we have noted, is actually above top secret.

Pelley further noted that this IG “had earlier revealed that at least four e-mails contained classified information” and that “[t]op secret is one of the highest security classifications.” The CBS anchor concluded with the caveat that “the e-mails were not classified at the time they were created.”…

This is an absurd point that Hillary and her media minions have latched onto. It is physically impossible for the people who classify documents to classify everything in real time, or even within hours. The top officials who handle sensitive information have to use their own common sense. And they are told what to look for when it comes to things that should be kept secret. (Such as any information that would reveal intelligence sources or methods.)

The Hillary emails in question have now been classified at such a high level it’s clear it would have taken a true idiot to not realize they contained highly secret information. (That is, their current classification shows that they revealed sources and/or methods.)

Instead of covering this Clinton scandal on Tuesday during its report on the 2016 campaign, ABC’s chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl played up on World News Tonight Hillary’s criticism of Donald Trump and the rest of the 2016 GOP field from the day before: “While what Donald Trump said about Megyn Kelly is outrageous, what the rest of the Republicans are saying about all women is also outrageous.”…

Naturally.

.

.

Leftist Corruption Update: Judge Who Blocked Anti-Planned Parenthood Videos Raised $230,000 For Obama

Judge Who Blocked Planned Parenthood Videos Raised $230,000 For Obama – Right Scoop

.

.
Well damn it looks like the fix is in. The good people at the Federalist found out that the judge who has blocked footage from being released in the fourth Planned Parenthood is not only an Obama appointee, but he raised a whole lotta money for his campaign:

A federal judge late Friday granted a temporary restraining orderagainst the release of recordings made at an annual meeting of abortion providers. The injunction is against the Center for Medical Progress, the group that has unveiled Planned Parenthood’s participation in the sale of organs harvested from aborted children.

Judge William H. Orrick, III, granted the injunction just hours after the order was requested by the National Abortion Federation.

Orrick was nominated to his position by hardline abortion supporter President Barack Obama. He was also a major donor to and bundler for President Obama’s presidential campaign. He raised at least $200,000 for Obama and donated $30,800 to committees supporting him, according to Public Citizen.

Even though the National Abortion Federation filed its claim only hours before, Orrick quickly decided in their favor that the abortionists they represent would, ironically, be “likely to suffer irreparable injury, absent an ex parte temporary restraining order, in the form of harassment, intimidation, violence, invasion of privacy, and injury to reputation, and the requested relief is in the public interest.”

You think maybe Judge Billy might be slightly biased towards the left? Sounds mighty suspicious to me.
.

.

Obama Crime Syndicate Update: Regime Violates Executive Amnesty Injunction… AGAIN!

‘OOPS!’ Feds Violate Executive Amnesty Injunction… Again! – Breitbart

.

.
The government has once again violated a federal court’s injunction prohibiting the implementation of President Obama’s executive amnesty plan. The action comes right before high-ranking federal government officials, including the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), have been ordered to appear in an August hearing to show why they should not be held in contempt for prior failures to comply with the injunction.

The litigation began in December 2014 when the state of Texas and 25 other states filed a federal lawsuit to halt President Obama’s amnesty plan.

A federal judge in Brownsville, Judge Andrew Hanen, issued an injunction in early February temporarily stopping the implementation of the executive amnesty plan.

In April, Judge Hanen issued a scathing rebuke directed at government lawyers and the DHS for misrepresentations made in the case, ordered the government to produce related documents, and warned the government against destroying any of this evidence, as reported by Breitbart Texas.

On July 7th, Judge Hanen ordered top Obama administration officials to personally appear in his court.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, and all other federal defendants, were ordered to attend a hearing on August 19th at 10 a.m. to show why the judge should not hold them in contempt of court.

Other defendant top officials ordered to appear include: R. Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Leon Rodriguez, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; Sarah R Saldana, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Ronald D. Vitiello, deputy chief of U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border of Protection.

The judge said he would cancel the hearing if a report ordered filed on July 31st satisfied him that the situation had been remedied. “Otherwise, the Court intends to utilize all available powers to compel compliance.”

The government’s latest report, and supplemental report, were filed just a few weeks before the July 31st compliance date.

Lawyers for the federal government have been working on the reports, called an “advisory,” to update the judge.

When compiling the report, the government found yet another failure by the federal government to follow the federal judge’s orders. The government has had to scurry in an attempt to avoid further wrath by the judge.

A government contractor mailed approximately 500 cards extending work and stay authorizations.

The executive amnesty plan would expand from two to three years, work authorizations and stays in the U.S.

The cards had been mailed prior to the injunction but were returned because of a problem with the addresses. The contractor updated the addresses and then mailed them out again – this time after the court’s injunction.

The government assures the Court that it is taking immediate actions to address the new violations.

The government says they have attempted to remedy this new problem by sending letters to these individuals demanding that they return the cards.

In his July order, Judge Hanen warned the government if violations which had been committed as of that time had not been corrected, and corrected by the end of the month, “the only logical conclusion is that the Government needs a stronger motivation to comply with lawful orders.”

He continued, “Neither side should interpret this Court’s personal preference to not sanction lawyers or parties as an indication that it will merely acquiesce to a party’s unlawful conduct.”

The judge noted in his July 7th order that there had been “approximately 2,000 individuals that were given various benefits in violation of this Court’s order after the injunction was issued.”

He wrote, “The Court was first apprised by the Government of the violations of its injunction on May 7, 2015. It admitted that it violated this Court’s injunction on at least 2,000 occasions – violations which have not been fixed.”

The judge warned U.S. Department of Justice lawyers and federal officials that “no reasonable person could possibly consider a direct violation of an injunction a side issue.”

He also wrote, “the Court is shocked and surprised at the cavalier attitude the Government has taken with regards to its ‘efforts’ to rectify this situation.”

He noted that the situation had not been corrected six weeks after the government admitted it had violated the orders on May 7th and promised it would mend the situation.

In ordering federal officials to the August 19th hearing in Brownsville, he also ordered that “the Government shall bring all relevant witnesses on this topic as the Court will not continue this matter to a later date.”

At that time, the Court stated that the administration “has not remediated its own violative behavior,” despite the passage of two months. The judge wrote, “That is unacceptable and, as far as the Government’s attorneys are concerned, completely unprofessional.”

Judge Hanen warned, “To be clear, this Court expects the Government to be in full compliance with this Court’s injunction. Compliance as to just those aliens living in the Plaintiff States is not full compliance.”

It is unknown how the Court will take yet another violation of its orders.

.

.

North Carolina Supreme Court Kicks Leftists In The Teeth; Upholds Private School Voucher Program

Huge Win For School Vouchers In North Carolina – Daily Caller

.

.
Backers of private school vouchers won a huge victory Thursday as the North Carolina Supreme Court narrowly endorsed a program that allows public school money to be spent providing vouchers to attend private schools.

North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship program, created in 2013, allows for up to $4,200 per family to help pay for private school tuition. The scholarships are only available to low-income families, with the threshold pegged to 133 percent of the income required to qualify for free and reduced-price school lunches.

Demand for the program has been high, as only 2,400 scholarships are available and more than twice that number have applied, necessitating the use of a lottery system.

Shortly after the program’s creation, a coalition of public school teachers, parents, and school administrators sued, claiming the voucher law unconstitutionally supported religious schools and failed to spend public money on an exclusively public purpose, as required by the Constitution.

Writing for a 4-3 majority, Chief Justice Mark Martin said otherwise, overruling a lower court that had struck down the program.

“Our review is limited to a determination of whether plaintiffs have demonstrated that the program legislation plainly and clearly violates our constitution,” Martin wrote. “Plaintiffs have made no such showing in this case.”

The decision means that students will be able to receive vouchers in the upcoming school year.

National advocates for school choice have been quick to praise the ruling.

“With more than double the applications for scholarships in the first year of the program – approximately 5,500 applications for 2,400 scholarships – parents are making it abundantly clear that they want and demand more power over their children’s education,” said Kara Kerwin, president of the pro-voucher Center for Education Reform, in a statement sent to The Daily Caller News Foundation. “This is a giant step in the right direction for parent empowerment in North Carolina.”

The ruling is a big win for voucher supporters, especially as it helps make up for a ruling in Colorado in June which struck down a major voucher program in that state.

.

.

Wisconsin Supreme Court FINALLY Stops Nazistic John Doe Investigation Against Conservatives

Wisconsin Supreme Court Stops John Doe Investigation Against Conservatives – Legal Insurrection

.

.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has effectively killed the “John Doe” case which led to home raids and intimidation of a wide range of Wisconsin conservative activists.

The decision is embedded at the bottom of this post.

Here is the key finding, which completely shreds both the legal theories and motives of the prosecutors, completely vindicates the targets, and praises those who fought back legally against prosecutorial misconduct (emphasis added):

¶133 Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points. It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation.

Andrew Grossman, who filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case and who has served as counsel to Eric O’Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth (two of the targets of the investigation) in various federal civil rights litigation against the prosecutors, provided me with the following statement:

Today’s decision puts an end to one of the worst abuses of power ever seen in Wisconsin law enforcement. The next step will be holding those responsible accountable for their actions. The Court’s recognition that the John Doe was a politically motivated “dragnet” of Gov. Walker’s allies provides strong support for Cindy Archer’s civil rights action against the Milwaukee prosecutors and lawsuits by potentially any of the other John Doe targets.

Background on John Doe abuses:

We have been covering the John Doe cases for a year and a half. You can read all out posts in the John Doe (WI) Tag.

Here are some key posts:

* Revealed: Wisconsin John Doe investigation was full-blown anti-conservative fishing expedition
* Exposed: How Prosecutors targeted Scott Walker and conservatives
* Was Prosecutor’s union-operative wife behind “John Doe” investigation of Scott Walker?
* Wisconsin “John Doe” War on Walker wins “Nastiest Political Tactic of the Year”
* Wisconsin Dems used battering rams against Scott Walker supporters – literally
* Former Scott Walker Aide Sues prosecutors for WI John Doe “Home Invasion”

.

.
Analysis:

The court found that Wisconsin statutes did not limit “issue advocacy,” and that any attempt to so limit speech was unconstitutional:

¶7 We can resolve the original action, Two Unnamed Petitioners, by first examining whether the statutory definitions of “committee,” “contributions,” “disbursements,” and “political purposes” in Wis. Stat. §§ 11.01(4), (6), (7), and (16) are limited to express advocacy[4] or whether they encompass the conduct of coordination between a candidate or a campaign committee and an independent organization that engages in issue advocacy. Second, if the definitions extend to issue advocacy coordination, what then constitutes prohibited “coordination?”

* * *

¶41 We turn first to Two Unnamed Petitioners, the original action filed with the Wisconsin Supreme Court. This case requires us to interpret Wisconsin’s campaign finance law, Wis. Stat. Ch. 11. By its very nature, this task involves fundamental questions regarding the scope of the government’s ability to regulate political speech. To resolve this case, we must engage in statutory interpretation of the phrase “political purposes,” which includes all activities “done for the purpose of influencing [an] election.” Wis. Stat. § 11.01(16). We conclude, consistent with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 3 of the Wisconsin Constitution, that the plain language of “political purposes” in Wis. Stat. § 11.01(16) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague if it is not given a limiting construction and applied to only express advocacy and its functional equivalent. This conclusion invalidates the special prosecutor’s theory of the case and ends the John Doe investigation. Therefore, we agree with the Unnamed Movants and grant their requested relief.

The Court ripped into the investigating prosecutors (emphasis added):

¶68 Having reached our conclusion about the scope of conduct regulated by Chapter 11, we now turn to the special prosecutor’s theories of coordination and whether the alleged conduct is regulated under Wisconsin law.[23] The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection. The special prosecutor’s theories, rather than “assur[ing] [the] unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people,” Roth, 354 U.S. at 484, instead would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished. In short, the special prosecutor completely ignores the command that, when seeking to regulate issue advocacy groups, such regulation must be done with “narrow specificity.” Barland II, 751 F.3d at 811 (quotations omitted).

¶69 The limiting construction that we apply makes clear that the special prosecutor’s theories are unsupportable in law given that the theories rely on overbroad and vague statutes. By limiting the definition of “political purposes” to express advocacy and its functional equivalent, political speech continues to be protected as a fundamental First Amendment right.

The court made clear the investigation was stopped cold in its tracks:

¶76 To be clear, this conclusion ends the John Doe investigation because the special prosecutor’s legal theory is unsupported in either reason or law. Consequently, the investigation is closed. Consistent with our decision and the order entered by Reserve Judge Peterson, we order that the special prosecutor and the district attorneys involved in this investigation must cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization, and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation. All Unnamed Movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation.

The Court went on in addition to uphold a lower court’s quashing of a subpoenas and search warrants sought by the prosecutors, finding that the John Doe powers did not allow “a fishing expedition”:

¶91 Reasonableness and particularity are not just requirements of search warrants, however. Subpoenas issued by courts, and by extension John Doe judges, must also satisfy these requirements of the Fourth Amendment. In re John Doe Proceeding, 272 Wis. 2d 208, ¶38. A John Doe proceeding, with its broad investigatory powers, must never be allowed to become a fishing expedition.

¶92 It is difficult, if not impossible, to overstate the importance of the role of the John Doe judge. If he does not conduct the investigation fairly, as a neutral and detached magistrate, the risk of harm to innocent targets of the investigation-and we remain mindful that all such targets are presumed innocent-is too great. Through the use of a John Doe proceeding, “law enforcement officers are able to obtain the benefit of powers not otherwise available to them, i.e., the power to subpoena witnesses, to take testimony under oath, and to compel the testimony of a reluctant witness.” Washington, 83 Wis. 2d at 822-23. Such powers, if not wielded with care and skill may serve to transform a John Doe proceeding into an implement of harassment and persecution by a vengeful or unethical prosecutor. Thus, John Doe judges must be mindful of this danger and zealously guard the rights of all citizens against over-reach.

The Court then summarized its holdings, just so there was no doubt that it had completely rejected the prosecutors’ legal theory on coordination of issue advocacy (emphasis added):

¶133 Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points. It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation.

¶134 In Two Unnamed Petitioners, we hold that the definition of “political purposes” in Wis. Stat. § 11.01(16) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 3 of the Wisconsin Constitution because its language “‘is so sweeping that its sanctions may be applied to constitutionally protected conduct which the state is not permitted to regulate.’” Janssen, 219 Wis. 2d at 374 (quoting Bachowski, 139 Wis. 2d at 411). However, a readily available limiting construction exists that we will apply and that will prevent the chilling of otherwise protected speech; namely, that “political purposes” is limited to express advocacy and its functional equivalent as those terms are defined in Buckley and WRTL II. With this limiting construction in place, Chapter 11 does not proscribe any of the alleged conduct of any of the Unnamed Movants. The special prosecutor has not alleged any express advocacy, and issue advocacy, whether coordinated or not, is “beyond the reach of [Ch. 11].” Barland II, 751 F.3d at 815. Accordingly, we invalidate the special prosecutor’s theory of the case, and we grant the relief requested by the Unnamed Movants.

¶135 To be clear, this conclusion ends the John Doe investigation because the special prosecutor’s legal theory is unsupported in either reason or law. Consequently, the investigation is closed. Consistent with our decision and the order entered by Reserve Judge Peterson, we order that the special prosecutor and the district attorneys involved in this investigation must cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization, and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation. All Unnamed Movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation.

Wisconsin Supreme Court – John Doe Decision

.

.

2015 – The Year In Obamunism So Far


……

.
President Asshat Promises To Keep Doing Everything He Can For Illegal Aliens

Thanks Barack… Obama Regime Released 3,700 ‘Threat Level 1’ Criminal Immigrants Last Year

Obama Lackeys Defend Iran Over Alleged Nuclear Violations

IRS Commissioner Admits Illegal Aliens Can Get Back Taxes Under Obama’s Executive Amnesty

President Asshat To Release 10 More Gitmo Terrorists This Month

George W. Bush Outpolls President Asshat

OSHA Retards Publish Guide Telling Workers To Use Restrooms Of Their ‘Gender Identity’

Obamaconomy Update: Factory Orders Scream Recession, Drop 6% From Year Ago

Obamanomics Update: Economy Shrinks By 0.7% In First Quarter

Emails Show Hitlery Wanted To Arm Libyan Rebels Using Private Security Contractors Despite Prohibitions

Federal Court Deals Blow To President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Ready For Another Obamacare Price Hike? (David Catron)

Thanks Barack… U.S. Welfare Rolls Explode Under Obamacare

Your Daley Gator Hitlery Clinton News Roundup

As Iran And Saudi Arabia Seek To Acquire Nukes, Obama Regime Pressing Israelis To Lose Theirs

Thanks Barack… Regime Granted Amnesty To Accused Child-Sex Criminal

So, How Come Hitlery Isn’t In Jail Right Now?

*VIDEO* Obama Lied About Benghazi Terrorist Attacks – Weapons Moved Through Benghazi To Syria

As A Reaction To Obama’s Iran Deal, Saudis Trying To Buy Nuclear Bombs From Pakistan

Hitlery Personally Took Money From Companies That Sought To Influence Her

Obama DHS Blames ‘Technical Glitch’ For Continuing To Approve Amnesty Applications Despite Judge’s Order

Thanks Barack… Taliban Terrorists Exhanged For Deserter Bergdahl To Be Freed By Qatar In 2 Weeks

Obama VA Illegally Spending $6 Billion A Year

Leftist Nightmare Update: Hawaii Shutting Down $205 Million Obamacare Exchange (Video)

Thanks Barack… Illegals Charged With 200 Counts Of Sexual Assault Against NC Children In March

Email-gate Update: Federal Judge Reopens Case Against Hitlery

Thanks Barack… Federal Regulation Cost American Businesses And Consumers $1.88 Trillion In 2014

Regime Lawyers Finally Admit Obama Violated Federal Injunction By Approving 2,000 Amnesty Applications

The IRS Hates Tax Cheats… Unless They Work For The IRS

Contrary To Democrats’ Promises, Emergency Room Visits Surge Under Obamacare

Infernal Revenue Service Wasted $5.6 Billion On Bogus Obama Stimulus Tax Credits

Obamanomics: Major U.S. Retail Chains Closing 6,000 Stores

U.S. Economy Slows To A Crawl As GDP Grows A Scant 0.2% In First Quarter

Leftist Corruption Update: IRS Watchdog Recovers Thousands Of Missing Lois Lerner Emails

Thanks Barack… ‘Dreamer’ Accused Of Multiple Murders Was Spared Deportation By Obama

Leftist Corruption Update: Multiple Clinton Charity Donors Got State Department Awards Under Hillary

Obama-Backed Islamist Mohamed Morsi Sentenced To 20 Years In Prison For Torturing Protesters

Shocker! California’s Obamacare Exchange Plagued By Incompetence, Mismanagement

USSC Shuts Down Obama’s Attempt To Force Christian Groups To Pay For Their Employees’ Abortion-Inducing Drugs

FL Governor: Obama Resorting To Extortion In Attempt To Force State Further Into Obamacare

Thanks Barack… Over Half A Million Illegals Have Received Social Security Numbers Since 2012 Executive Order

Hillary Deleted Emails After Congressman Issa Asked Her About Private Email Addresses In 2012

AZ Sheriff Says He Can’t Get The Names Of 500 Criminal Illegal Aliens Released In His County By Obama

VA Officials Illegally Accessing Medical Records Of Whistleblowers In Order To Harass And Discredit Them

Obama’s Insane Nuke Deal Causes Russians To Lift Ban On Missile Sales To Iran – Israelis Not Happy Campers

Amazing Douchebaggery: Defense Dept. Claims Bible, Constitution And Declaration Of Independence Perpetuate Sexism

Federal Judge Slaps Down Obama Regime’s Request To Let Executive Amnesty Move Forward

Tehran Will Start Using Fastest Centrifuges On Day Obama Nuke Deal Takes Effect

Social Security Administration Approved Disability Benefits For Puerto Ricans Because They Can’t Speak English

The Bats And The Bees: Obama’s Easter Sunday Nightmare (Video)

Just Hours After Obama Boasts About Historic Nuke Agreement, Iran’s Lead Negotiator Calls Him A Liar

Leftist Incompetence Update: Obama Regime Capitulates To Nearly All Iranian Demands In Nuke Deal

Impeachable Offenses Update: Obama Using Taxpayer Money To Fly Central American Minors To U.S.

Timeline Puts Lie To President Asshat’s Story About Bowe Bergdahl

Infernal Revenue Service Ignoring Over 60% Of Taxpayer Phone Calls

Maryland Obamacare Exchange Wrongly Billed U.S. Taxpayers $28M

Clinton Crime Update: Private Emails Reveal Ex-Hillary Aide’s Secret Spy Network

*VIDEO* General Michael Flynn: Obama Has A “Policy Of Willful Ignorance” Regarding The Middle East

Clinton Crime Update: Hillary Scrubbed Email Server Clean After Being Subpoenaed To Turn Over Emails

Even NBC Thinks Obama Is Completely Incompetent When It Comes To Middle East Policy (Video)

Obama Regime Declassifies Top-Secret Document That Reveals Israel’s Nuclear Secrets

About Freakin’ Time! Obama’s Favorite Army Deserter To Be Court-Martialed

Republicans Verbally Bitchslap FDIC Chairman Over Despicable ‘Operartion Choke Point’ (Videos)

Over 100,000 Federal Employees Owe Back Taxes Totaling $1.4 Billion

State Department Had No Permanent Inspector General During Entirety Of Hillary Clinton’s Tenure

Leftist Corruption Update: Hillary’s Aides Emailed Her About Benghazi From Their Private Email Accounts

Border Patrol Agent To Congress: We Are Punished If We Report Too Many Illegals (Videos)

President Asshat Enjoys Women’s College Basketball Game As U.S. Troops Flee Yemen

A Complete Timeline Of Obama’s Anti-Israel Hatred (Ben Shapiro)

Supreme Leader Of Iran Calls For ‘Death To America’ As Traitor John Kerry Hails Progress On Nuke Deal

Half A Billion Dollars Worth Of American Weapons Fall Into The Hands Of Islamo-Nazis… Again

Veterans Still Struggling To Get Medical Treatment As Obama Regime Continues To Lie To Congress

Your Daley Gator Obama-Is-Pure-Evil Diplomatic Catastrophe Update (Videos)

Federal Judge Not A Happy Camper After Being Lied To About Excutive Amnesty By Obama Regime

President Asshat Humiliated As Allies Rush To Join China’s New Bank

Thanks Barack… 167,527 Illegal Alien Murderers, Rapists And Child Molesters Loose In The U.S. (Video)

Federal Government Shelled Out $125B In Bogus Payments Last Year

Iran Nuke Deal Update: Obama Regime Goes Full-Blown Batshit Crazy

U.S. State Department Uses British IslamoNazi’s Pro-Sharia Law Photograph To Promote Free Speech (video)

In 2008, Candidate Obama Sent Secret Emissary To Iran Telling Them Not To Negotiate With Bush (Video)

Your Daley Gator Hillary Email Shenanigans Update

Obama’s FCC Nazis: The First Amendment Does Not Apply To Internet Providers

Ferguson: A Murderous Mob Incited By Holder And Obama (Joel B. Pollak)

Corruption Update: Hillary’s Top State Department Aides Used Private Emails Too (Video)

Traitor John Kerry Now Says Obama Regime “Not Negotiating A Legally Binding Plan” With Iran

Obama’s ATF Backs Down (For Now) On AR-15 Ammo Ban, Acknowledging Massive Public Outcry

Obama Caught Lying About Hillary’s Illegal Emails (Videos)

Obama Regime Ordered Back To Federal Court To Explain Why It Lied About Executive Amnesty

National Intelligence Director Clapper Admits Obama Arming Terrorists But Calling Them ‘Moderates’ (Video)

Inspector General: 6.5M Dead People Have Active Social Security Numbers

Hallelujah! Unemployment Plunges Due To 354,000 Americans Leaving The Workforce (James Quinn)

26 States Call For Investigation Of Obama’s Executive Amnesty Scheme And Federal Court Perjury

*VIDEO* Obama Comments On Netanyahu’s Address To Congress

Hillary Clinton Exclusively Used Private Email Account To Conduct Official Business As Secretary Of State

Corruption Update: DOJ Shut Down Search For Lois Lerner’s Emails; First IRS Tech Inspector Legally Blind

IRS Inspector General Now Undertaking Criminal Investigation Into Lois Lerner’s “Missing” Emails

Documents Reveal Top Hillary Clinton Advisers Knew Immediately That Benghazi Assault Was Terrorist Attack

Lawless Leftist Update: Obama Attempting To Ban AR-15 Ammo

ObamaNazis At FCC Approve Net “Neutrality” Rules

President Asshat Makes Japanese Internment Camp A National Monument In Attempt To Vilify America

Obama Regime Summit On Violent Extremism Opens With A… Wait For It… Muslim Prayer

*VIDEO* Joe Biden: Our Creepy, Gropey, Pervy, Leftist Vice President

*VIDEOS* Pajama’s Media: Trifecta – Obama’s Insanely Idiotic, Bullshit-Leftist, Anti-War War On ISIS

Federal Judge Slams The Brakes On President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Leftist Politicians Beg Obama To Illegally Change Obamacare Rules So Their Constituents Can Avoid New Tax Penalties

Undocumented Democrats Update: Obama’s Executive Amnesty Creates Easy Loophole For Illegals To Vote

IRS Thanks Iraq War Veteran By Seizing Nealy $1 Million From His Legal Gun Business’ Bank Account (Video)

President Asshat Attempts Internet Power Grab… Again

Obama Regime Continues To Stonewall On IRS Targeting Scandal (Video)

Eco-Nazis At EPA Caught Concealing Controversial Scientific Data, Trying To Silence Skeptics

Buried In The Numbers: Obamacare’s Costs Are Climbing, Not Receding (Sally Pipes)

*VIDEO* The Trillion-Dollar Obamacare Tax Tsunami Is Upon Us

Arizona Sheriff To House Judiciary Committee: Only 44% Of Southern Border Under Operational Control

Thanks Barack… Student Loan Forgiveness Program To Cost Taxpayers $21.8 Billion

The New York Post’s Editorial Board Asks Us A Really Good Question About Obama

Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch Tied To Massive Obama Money-Laundering Cover-Up

Obama “Dreamers” To Get Retroactive IRS Refunds For Money They Earned While Working Illegally

Secret White House Muslim Meeting Guest List Won’t Be Released – What Could Be The Reason For That? (Rick Wells)

Two-Thirds Of Reporters Say Obama Regime Spies On Them

President Asshat Equates Muslim Terrorists To Christians During National Prayer Breakfast (Video)

Obamaconomy Update: Number Of Full-Time Jobs As Percentage Of Population Lowest It’s Ever Been

Obama Regime Unlawfully Issued Work Permits To Nearly A Million Illegals; Green Cards To 5.5 Million More

47 Inspectors General Accuse Obama Regime Of Stonewalling In Variety Of Scandal Investigations (Video)

Thanks Barack… Terrorist Mastermind Traded For Bergdahl Is Back At Work

Ted Cruz’s List Of 76 Abuses Of Power And Lawless Actions By The Obama Administration (Ed Brown)

Obama Props Up Muslim Brotherhood In Egypt While Simultaneously Attempting To Oust Netanyahu In Israel

Nevada And Tennessee Join 24 Other States Suing To Stop Obama’s Executive Amnesty

Obama Regime Forced To Pay $570,000 To Pro-Life Legal Group Over Abortion Pill Mandate

Obama Foreign Policy Collapse: Yemen President, Prime Minister Resign After Muslim Terrorists Overrun Government

Day After Obama Mentions eBay As Example Of Booming Economy In SOTU, Company Lays Off 2,400 People

Company Fired By HHS Over Botched Healthcare.Gov Rehired By IRS To Provide Support For Obamacare Tax Program

*VIDEO* Pissed Off Black Folks From Chicago Verbally Bitchslap Obama After 2015 SOTU Address

President Asshat Refered To Himself 75 Times During SOTU Address Few People Watched

*VIDEOS* Even Noted Leftist Douchebags Agree That Obama’s SOTU Foreign Policy Claims Were Bogus

House Democrats Unanimously Agree That Obama Should Be A Dictator

Obama Regime Blows Off Largest Anti-Terrorism Rally In The History Of France (Video)

Leftist Corruption Update: 3.4M Obamacare Subsidy Recipients May Owe Refunds To The IRS

2014 Federal Register: A 26-Foot-Tall Stack Of Neo-Fascist Regulations

.

Federal Judge Sets Trial Date For RICO Case Against Bill And Hillary

Judge Sets Trial For RICO Claims Against Clintons – World Net Daily

.

.
A federal judge in Florida has scheduled a trial for January for a case charging Bill and Hillary Clinton with RICO violations.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations case was filed by Larry Klayman, of Freedom Watch, who alleges over the last decade, the Clintons have participated in “acts” that constitute a “criminal enterprise” that was designed to enrich them.

WND reported earlier this year when the case was filed that it alleged actions by Hillary and Bill Clinton, in coordination with their family foundation, constituted RICO crimes.

Klayman for years has been a Washington watchdog, having engaged Bill Clinton in court battles during his presidency. He’s also taken on terror interests and foreign influences in the United States, and just over the last year or so has won a federal court judgment against the National Security Agency’s spy-on-Americans program as well as bringing a case against Barack Obama over his amnesty-by-executive-memo strategy.

According to Klayman, the Clintons, through mail and wire fraud and false statements, misappropriated documents which he was entitled to receive and possess under the Freedom of Information Act regarding Hillary Clinton’s involvement in releasing Israeli war and cyber-warfare plans and practices.

Hillary Clinton orchestrated this release to harm and thwart Israeli plans to preemptively attack Iranian nuclear sites to stop the Islamic nation’s march to producing atomic weapons, according to Klayman.

The claim also explains Klayman used the nation’s FOIA to try to get details from the State Department regarding waivers to do business with Iran – “acts [that are] alleged to be the result of the defendants selling government influence in exchange for bribes from interests which have donated to The Clinton Foundation, paid huge speaking fees to the Clintons and other means.”

WND’s attempts to obtain a comment from the New York office for Bill Clinton or the foundation have not been successful.

The order comes from Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida in West Palm Beach.

Klayman told WND that it’s time for the Clintons “finally [to] be held legally accountable.”

He alleges their “criminal enterprise” dates back at least 10 years.

It was when the Clintons left the White House in 2000 that, Hillary Clinton has claimed, they were broke.

Estimates are that since that time period, they have been paid well over $100 million, oftentimes in $250,000 and $500,000 increments for speaking.

The Clintons’ foundation also has been embroiled in scandal recently, with details being revealed about how foreign interests made donations to the Clinton-controlled organization during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as a senior government official.

“Defendants have systematically and continuously, over the last ten (10) years and more, conducted a corrupt enterprise in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act,” the filing claims, “all of which acts are continuing in nature.”

Plaintiff sues the defendants, as individuals operating a criminal enterprise, for violating plaintiff’s statutory rights to obtain documents under the Freedom of Information Act… for violating plaintiff’s due process rights, vested property rights, constitutional rights, and for misappropriating property,” the filing says.

The complaint explains, “Plaintiff has filed many Freedom of Information Act requests for public records created or held by the U.S. Department of State… which records are of the public interest and importance to the citizens of the United States… As it has now been revealed, a primary reason that the plaintiff did not receive the records to which the plaintiff is entitled by law is that Defendant Hillary Clinton – upon information and belief together with Cheryl Mills and Defendant Bill Clinton and other Clinton ‘loyalists’ – set up a private computer file server operating a private, stand-alone electronic mail system.”

It alleges Clinton’s “off the books” plan “concealed from the plaintiff public records to which the plaintiff was entitled to under the FOIA Act.”

It continues, “Using those concealed communications held on the private email server, upon information and belief, the defendants negotiated, arranged and implemented the sale of influence and access to U.S. government officials and decision-makers and official acts by State and other instrumentalities of the U.S. government in return for gratuitous and illegal payments – bribes – disguised as donations to defendant The Clinton Foundation and extraordinarily high speaking fees paid to Defendant Bill Clinton and Defendant Hillary Clinton.”

The case filing estimates the Clintons have “amassed a personal fortune (outside of The Clinton Foundation) of over $105 million.”

Klayman had only just filed court papers requesting the judge take control of Hillary Clinton’s email server, because there could be “material evidence that is in imminent danger of being lost.”

“The plaintiff files this motion respectfully requesting that the court order the preservation of that information contained on a private computer file server (‘server’) that then Secretary of State Defendant Hillary Clinton (‘Secretary Clinton) used to conceal the U.S. government records off-site, rather than at a U.S. Department of State facility,” he wrote.

.

.

Federal Court Deals Blow To President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Federal Appeals Court Deals Blow To President Obama’s Amnesty – Washington Times

.

.
A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against President Obama’s new deportation in a ruling Tuesday that marks the second major legal setback for an administration that had insisted its actions were legal.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of Texas, which had sued to stop the amnesty, on all key points, finding that Mr. Obama’s amnesty likely broke the law governing how big policies are to be written.

“The public interest favors maintenance of the injunction,” the judges wrote in the majority opinion.

Mr. Obama had acted in November to try to grant tentative legal status and work permits to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants, saying he was tired of waiting for Congress to act.

The full amnesty, known as Deferred Action for Parental Accountability, or DAPA, had been scheduled to begin last week, while an earlier part had been slated to accept applications on Feb. 18. But just two days before that, Judge Andrew S. Hanen issued his injunction finding that Mr. Obama had broken the law.

Administration officials had criticized that ruling, and immigrant-rights advocates had called Judge Hanen an activist bent on punishing immigrants. But Tuesday’s ruling upholds his injunction, giving some vindication to the judge.

It also could mean Mr. Obama will have to appeal to the Supreme Court if he wants to implement his amnesty before the end of his term.

In the 2-1 decision, Judge Jerry E. Smith and Jennifer Elrod ruled in favor of Texas, finding that the state would suffer an injury from having to deliver services to the illegal immigrants granted legal status, and ruling that it was a major enough policy that the president should have sent it through the usual rule-making process.

“DAPA modifies substantive rights and interests – conferring lawful presence on 500,000 illegal aliens in Texas forces the state to choose between spending millions of dollars to subsidize driver’s licenses and changing its law,” the judges wrote.

Judge Stephen A. Higginson dissented from Tuesday’s ruling, saying he would have left the fight over immigration policy to the White House and Congress, saying Mr. Obama should have broad discretion to decide who gets deported and how he goes about that.

Just Higginson also said the fight was a political battle, not a legal one

“The political nature of this dispute is clear from the names on the briefs: hundreds of mayors, police chiefs, sheriffs, attorneys general, governors, and state legislators – not to mention 185 members of Congress, 15 states and the District of Columbia on the one hand, and 113 members of Congress and 26 states on the other,” he wrote.

.

.

Email-gate Update: Federal Judge Reopens Case Against Hitlery

Federal Judge Makes Massive Ruling Against Hillary Clinton – Conservative Tribune

.

.
One of the more controversial scandals dogging likely Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has been her use of a private email account on a private server to conduct official public business during her tenure at the State Department.

Government watchdog group Judicial Watch had previously sued to gain access to Hillary’s emails, which they claimed should be public record, but Hillary has kept them hidden and a court had tossed out the original lawsuit.

However, federal Judge Reggie Walton has agreed to reopen the lawsuit after Judicial Watch and the State Department reached an agreement stating that Hillary Clinton should have turned over all of the documents she held on her private email server.

It should be remembered that Hillary has claimed to have turned over to the State Department only about half of the emails on her private server, deleting more than 30,000 others she determined on her own to be “private” in nature.

According to Fox News, Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said, “This is the first case that’s been reopened. It’s a significant development. It points to the fraud by this administration and Mrs. Clinton.”

This decision could ultimately result in Hillary being ordered to turn over the server to an independent third party that could objectively sort through whatever traces remained on it.

There are many who suspect Hillary’s private email server contained evidence related to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, as well as of her involvement in a “pay-to-play” scheme that involved the trading of political favors for major donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Thanks to this federal judge, America may finally find out just what Hillary has been hiding on that private server.

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter if you are glad this judge decided to reopen the lawsuit demanding access to all of Hillary’s emails, not just the ones she decided to turn over herself.

.

.

Black Judge Gives Black Home Invader Probation Because White, 3-Year-Old Victim Is A Raaaaacist

Kentucky Judge Gives Armed Robbers light Sentence, Saying 3 Yr-Old Victim Is Too Racist – Gateway Pundit

.

.
Kentucky Judge Olu Stevens gave two armed robbers and home invaders a light sentence because he felt their three year-old baby victim was being racist for fearing black people after the attack.

Judge Stevens went off on the family in court.

Via Right Wing News:

.

.
The American Thinker reported:

Soon after the robbery, the little girl told her mother that she was afraid of black people. And the mother told the judge in her victim’s statement.

Judge Stevens did not care for that.

Like justice coming down like rain, Judge Stevens poured his righteous indignation down on them. The family, that is. Not the criminals. All on video.

“There’s a victim impact statement here that bothers me, to be honest with you,” said Judge Stevens. “I assume the victims in this case are white?” he asked the prosecutor, who was hoping for a 20-year sentence for the miscreant. (The gun-toting home invader, not the infantile racist.)

“It troubles me greatly,” said the judge, as he read the mother’s account of how this robbery has traumatized her child. Again, just for the sake of clarity, the judge was not troubled at the trauma the little girl experienced, he was troubled at the trauma he was experiencing that anyone would could be aware that black crime and violence in Louisville is wildly out of proportion.

The mother and child’s reaction was similar to what the Reverend Jesse Jackson said about black crime: “There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”

“Really?” Judge Stevens asked after reading the mother’s account of her daughter’s fear of black men following the robbery.

“I want to make that part of the record, I am offended by that,” said the judge.

And just in case anyone did not get the message the first several times, the judge took it to a new level: “I am deeply offended by that.”

He blamed the child’s racism on the parents for “fostering” it. And all of sudden the victims of the racial violence were now the perpetrators.

And the perpetrators? They were the victims.

The judge then faced the one remaining home invader that was left to be sentenced and told him he believed he could be redeemed through the saving power of probation. Not prison.

.

.

Federal Judge Slaps Down Obama Regime’s Request To Let Executive Amnesty Move Forward

Federal Court Slaps Down Request To Let Obama’s Amnesty Move Forward – Daily Caller

.

.
A federal judge denied Tuesday night the Obama administration’s request to allow President Obama’s executive actions on amnesty to move forward.

The Southern District Court of Texas is hearing a lawsuit from 26 states against the Department of Homeland Security over the executive actions President Obama announced in November he would be taking to extend legal status and work permits to 5 million illegal immigrants. Judge Andrew Hanen stayed Obama’s immigration plans in February – and soon after discovered that the Justice Department had misled the court about the details of the plan.

Tuesday night, Hanen denied the Justice Department’s March request to stay his injunction against the plan, meaning the latest amnesty will not move forward for now.

That’s not all. Hanen’s ruling ordered the DOJ to produce all documents and metadata regarding what the department knew about the amnesty plan, and when, in response to the department’s flub with the court.

Part of President Obama’s current amnesty plan, Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), would provide amnesty for about 4 million illegal immigrants who are parents. Another section would upgrade Obama’s 2012 immigration program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), by extending the period illegal immigrants would be exempt from deportation from two to three years.

While DOJ reported to the court that the DACA upgrade would not go into effect until Feb. 18 – two days after Hanen issued a temporary injunction against it – the administration belatedly admitted in March that it had already issued the extended amnesty to 100,000 illegal immigrants.

“Due to the seriousness of the matters discussed therein, the Court will not rule on any other pending motions until it is clear that these matters, if true, do not impact the pending matters or any rulings previously made by this Court,” Hanen wrote of DOJ’s admission that it had moved forward with the program anyway.

DOJ nevertheless filed a motion days later asking the court to lift its injunction, because the freeze purportedly interferes with DHS’ “effort to effectively allocate limited enforcement resources.”

The court ruled that the administration’s actions “were indeed misleading.” Hanen denied the plaintiffs’ request to strike the government’s pleadings entirely, but left the door open to future repercussions, saying the court “may impose some other sanction in response to the misrepresentations made to the Court.”

Now the administration has until Apr. 21 to comply with the court order for information.

“At a minimum, however, Defendants have created special circumstances that necessitate further investigation,” Hanen wrote in the order. The ruling requires that DOJ hand over the documentation of all drafts and metadata regarding editing of the March advisory which misled the court on DAPA’s content – and specified that the agency cannot “destroy” or “erase” any data, just in case.

.

.

Tea Partiers Gear Up For Class-Action Lawsuit As Federal Judge Orders IRS To Turn Over List Of Targeted Groups

Federal Judge Orders IRS To Release List Of Tea Party Groups Targeted For Scrutiny – Washington Times

.
…………

.
A federal judge ordered the IRS this week to turn over the list of 298 groups it targeted for intrusive scrutiny as the agency defends against a potential class-action lawsuit by tea party groups who claim their constitutional rights were violated.

The IRS had argued it shouldn’t have to release the names because doing so would violate privacy laws, but Judge Susan J. Dlott, who sits in the Southern District of Ohio, rejected that claim and ordered the tax agency to turn over any lists or spreadsheets detailing the groups that were targeted and when they filed their applications.

Judge Dlott also ordered the IRS to say whether a partial list of targeted groups reported by USA Today is authentic as a number of tea party groups try to win certification for a class action lawsuit against the IRS.

“The return information sought is directly related to the issue of class certification in this federal court proceeding,” the judge said. “The names of the putative class member organizations and their control dates – the date which the putative class member organizations submitted their applications for tax exempt status to the IRS – are directly related to the issue of class certification.”

The judge has not yet certified the tea party groups as a class, and the information that they’ve obtained so far through depositions remains under seal. But backers say if they can be certified, then they will begin to try to pry loose some of the key information about how the IRS chose which groups it went after in its targeting.

“We’re at the precipice,” said Mark Meckler, a member of one of the tea party groups suing, and also president of Citizens for Self-Governance, which is funding the litigation.

The Ohio lawsuit is the only major legal jeopardy still remaining in the courts for the IRS — though the agency is still facing an FBI investigation, according to documents obtained by True the Vote, a tea party group, under the Freedom of Information Act.

Earlier this week the deporting U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. informed House Speaker John A. Boehner he would not prosecute Lois G. Lerner, the former senior executive who’s at the center of the targeting scandal, for contempt of Congress. The prosecutor said Ms. Lerner didn’t waiver her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination when she delivered an opening statement at a congressional hearing but then refused follow-up questions.

The scandal developed after the IRS acknowledged it singled out tea party groups for special scrutiny, and asked intrusive questions that agency executives later said were inappropriate. The IRS’s inspector general concluded that 298 groups were targeted, with all but a handful of them leaning toward the conservative side.

But the IRS has resisted releasing the official list, arguing that is private information.

“The Internal Revenue Service cannot disclose the identities of the potential class members because that is return information protected,” the administration said in its court filings.

The judge disagreed, saying exemptions in law apply to a case like this.

Several other cases had been filed in Washington, D.C., by tea party groups trying to force a judge to proactively halt any future targeting. The judge tossed those cases, saying that the IRS insists the targeting has ended, so there is no further action needed.

But some groups are still awaiting approval, including one that’s been pending for more than five years, which their lawyers argue means the IRS is still targeting despite its insistence that its program has ended.

Commissioner John Koskinen has said groups that are still waiting could take a deal, promising to limit their political activities to 40 percent of their business, but the groups argue that would mean giving up rights since they believe under current law politicking can be almost 50 percent of their activities.

.

.

Federal Judge Not A Happy Camper After Being Lied To About Executive Amnesty By Obama Regime

Federal Judge Admonished DOJ Over Apparent Deception: ‘I Was Made To Look Like An Idiot’ – Breitbart

.

.
The U.S. Government lied to a federal judge, misrepresented facts and illegally gave 100,081 illegal aliens immigration status despite a pending lawsuit and an injunction. That is the argument that attorneys representing Texas and more than two dozen other states made.

During the heated court hearing Andrew Hanen, a U.S. District Court Judge, said that the apparent violation had made him look like an idiot since he initially believed the U.S. Government.

In a heated court hearing Angela Colmonero from the Texas Attorney General’s office stated that Texas had acted promptly in November 2014 upon learning of President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty and had followed all the timelines set forth with a sense of urgency.

“This was done to preserve the status quo and to prevent irreparable damage to the state,” Colmonero said referring to the cost that the individuals would bring and to the incentive for further illegal immigration. “You can’t put toothpaste back in the tube.”

During the hearings leading to an injunction handed down by Judge Hanen, attorney’s with the Department of Justice claimed that if an injunction was filed nothing would be done. That wasn’t the case, the Texas attorney said.

“The defendant did the exact opposite and gave 100,000 renewals for a term of three years under the expanded DACA,” Colmonero said. “The defendant didn’t inform the court until March 3 – 15 days after the injunction was filed.”

According to Colmonero’s statements, the program known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival) was implemented in 2012; however in November 2014 it was expanded, changing the time of the permits from two years to three years. Therefore the permits issued by the U.S. Government are a violation.

The coalition of states asked the court to give them early access as to the defendant’s documents and files since they couldn’t be taken at their word, Colmonero said.

DOJ attorney Kathleen Hardeck appeared nervous as she stuttered her response saying it was the terminology used that led to confusion, but once they saw that things could be misinterpreted they had tried to notify the court.

“When I asked you what would happen and you said nothing I took it to heart,” Hanen said. “I was made to look like an idiot. I believed your word that nothing would happen.”

During the hearing Hanen talked about possible penalties if, in fact, the evidence proved that the government had lied. He said it would probably not be financial since the taxpayer would be footing the bill over damages already made to them.

After hearing the arguments from both sides Hanen said he would issue a ruling in the near future.

.

.

Too bad Chief Justice John Roberts does not have the integrity this judge has

You go Judge Andrew Hanan

Hat/tip to Doug Ross @ Journal.

As previously reported here, Texas Federal Judge Andrew Hanen had ordered an investigation into President Obama’s illegal activities concerning his amnesty via Executive Fiat.

Well now the judge has just called a “raise.”

The judge who put a halt to Obama’s amnesty plans was being pressured to put aside his ruling by Obama’s administration. But instead of bowing to pressure the judge demanded that Obama send his representatives to his courtroom to explain why they think they have the powers to even issue the amnesty and why they lied about what they’ve already done.

Obama’s team already admitted that they lied to federal Judge Andrew Hanen about what actions have been taken to push Obama’s amnesty and the judge is furious about it.

“The hearing is in response to a filing last week in which the government acknowledged three-year deportation reprieves were granted before Hanen’s Feb. 16 injunction, which temporarily halted Obama’s action, sparing from deportation as many as 5 million people in the U.S. illegally.”

The coalition of 26 states which had convinced Judge Hanen to temporarily block Obama’s executive amnesty charges that the government misled the judge about not implementing part of the plan before the judge halted it, giving the states more time to argue against the president’s unilateral action on immigration.

Judge Hanen is demanding that the administration explain why they issued amnesty papers to up to 100,000 illegals despite telling the judge they hadn’t made any such moves.

This brave judge is not buckling under Obama’s pressure and is instead bringing pressure of his own to bear.

Federal Judge Slams The Brakes On President Asshat’s Executive Amnesty Scheme

Federal Judge Halts Obama’s Amnesty Orders – WorldNetDaily

.

.
A federal judge in Texas on Monday granted a temporary injunction halting President Obama’s executive-order driven amnesty program.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ordered the government not to proceed with any portion of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, DAPA.

In his order the federal judge said the court found “that at least one plaintiff has satisfied all the necessary elements to maintain a lawsuit and to obtain a temporary injunction.”

“The United States of America, its departments, agencies, officers, agents and employees and Jeh Johnson, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; R. Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of United States customs and Border Protection; Ronald D. Vitiello, deputy chief of United States Border Patrol, United States Customs and Border Protection; Thomas S. Winkowski, acting director of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Leon Rodriguez, director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services are hereby enjoined from implementing any and all aspects or phases of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents…”

The outline of plans was “set out in the Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson’s memorandum dated November 20, 2014.”

The injunction is until “a final resolution of the merits of this case or until a further order of this court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit or the United States Supreme Court,” the judge ordered.

He cited the Obama administration’s failure to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.

Hanen also ordered that federal officials and agencies are further enjoined from implementing “any and all aspects or phases of the expansions (including any and all changes) to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.”

That was the program begun several years ago by Obama.

The judge also explained the defendants will be allowed to “reapproach this court for relief from this order, in the time period between the date of this order and the trial on the merits, for good cause, including if Congress passes legislation that authorizes DAPA or at such a time as the defendants have complied with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”

He scheduled a conference call for counsel following a Feb. 27, 2015, deadline for a schedule for the case to be processed.

In Austin, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “President Obama abdicated his responsibility to uphold the United States Constitution when he attempted to circumvent the laws passed by Congress via executive fiat, and Judge Hanen’s decision rightly stops the president’s overreach in its tracks. We live in a nation governed by a system of checks and balances, and the president’s attempt to by-pass the will of the American people was successfully checked today. The district court’s ruling is very clear – it prevents the president from implementing the policies in ‘any and all aspects.’”

It’s one of two pending cases challenging Obama’s amnesty.

The other actually was developed first, and was thrown out at the district court level.

But it now is on a fast track before an appellate court in Washington, D.C.

It was filed by attorney Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, on behalf of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Klayman told WND he’s waiting now for the government to respond to the appellate court.

“We want the D.C. court to enter a preliminary injunction, stopping everything in its tracks,” he said. “We’re confident that they will agree with us.”

Obama’s amnesty plans are forecast to allow at least another five million illegal aliens in the U.S. to be given a legal status, where they could hold jobs, driver’s licenses – and critics say they would even be allowed to vote.

WND had reported earlier on the significance of the case, which was brought by 26 states against the federal government. It was predicted to go far beyond amnesty and immigration.

The fight will determine whether the United States can be run by a president and his decrees, or by a chief elected official who enforces the laws Congress writes, according to Mark Krikorian, chief of the Center for Immigration Studies, which watches the immigration situation.

“If I were a Republican politician, I wouldn’t even be arguing this on the basis of immigration,” he told WND in an interview. “I would be talking about this as just the latest and most egregious example of a president’s rule by decree.”

He said the coming dispute, which very well may extend into the 2016 presidential election or beyond, is going to decide “the balance of powers, whether Congress actually makes law or is an advisory body like the U.N. General Assembly, which is how Obama sees it.”

Obama already has challenged America’s laws a multitude of times, simply issuing orders to make changes to the Obamacare law, and on a variety of other issues, all without the benefit of a decision by Congress, which originally wrote the laws.

The fight over amnesty is one of two focal points – the other is Obamacare – of a letter-writing campaign to encourage GOP members of the U.S. House to replace Speaker John Boehner.

The “Dump Boehner Now” campaign allows voters to reach every single Republican House member with hard-copy letters asking them to reconsider their choice as speaker. The letter says House members had the chance to stop Obamacare and amnesty, but Boehner failed to take advantage.

Joseph Farah, WND founder and campaign organizer, set up the letters campaign. He said the opposition to Boehner is based on the Obamacare and amnesty program that voters rejected in the 2014 midterm elections.

The letter explains to members of the U.S. House that two issues have “prompted Americans to turn in droves to the Republican Party in November 2014 – Barack Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive action to provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, and the deliberately deceptive restructuring of America’s health-care system through Obamacare, which threatens to unravel the greatest health delivery system in the world.”

Pointing out that Republicans before the election “solemnly vowed to STOP this lame-duck president,” the letter states: “Now you have the power, right and duty to stop him.

“But it won’t happen with John Boehner leading you. You know this to be true. The trillion-dollar budget deal is just the latest proof that Boehner is not capable of leading the House to victory during this critical period.”

It’s because during the lame-duck Congress, Boehner agreed to Obama’s plan to continue funding for Obamacare and amnesty into 2015.

MSNBC did a report only days ago speculating on whether Hanen would halt the federal plan. MSNBC called Hanen “a critic of the Obama administration’s immigration policies.”

Worried MSNBC, “If Hanen decides against the Obama administration, he could block the implementation of the executive measures, which are scheduled to kick in Feb. 18. If that were to happen, the Department of Justice would almost certainly appeal the decision, which would then go to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals – yet another conservative-leaning court.”

The fact that more than half the states are participating in the case has alarmed amnesty supporters, but they still hope more and more illegals come out of the shadows and claim a place at the head of the line of those awaiting official recognition in the U.S., or at least it appears that way.

Karen Tumlin of the National Immigration Law Center told MSNBC, “People have been waiting so long for a chance to come forward and be able to work with authorization and not be looking over their shoulder all day long. We’re really trying to send the message that this should be business as usual.”

House Republicans, under Boehner, also have said they are going to take court action, but haven’t yet.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the decision was a victory.

“And a crucial first step in reining in President Obama’s lawlessness,” he added.

Klayman has explained it’s not a case mainly about immigration.

“This is fundamentally about the rule of law and our constitutional system,” he said.

“I know we would prefer, like all conservatives and patriots, to have a clear ruling that executive overreach by any president is a dangerous injury to our Constitution. Lawyers do recognize, however, that courts try to find the easiest way to reach a result. We hope to reach a ruling that the executive branch cannot rewrite the nation’s laws whether they go through the Administrative Procedures Act process or not,” Klayman said.

In an accompanying 123-page memorandum, Hanen wrote about the states’ interest in not allowing “their own resources” to be drained by the “constant influx of illegal immigrants.”

He found “States ultimately bear the brunt of illegal immigration.”

The opinion noted specifically that Washington “maintains that none of the plaintiffs have standing to bring this injunctive action. The states disagree, claiming that the government cannot implement a substantive program and then insulate itself from legal challenges by those who suffer from its negative effects.”

The judge noted the reality of the immigration situation.

“When apprehending illegal aliens, the government often processes and releases them with only the promise that they will return for a hearing if and when the government decides to hold one. In the meantime, the states – with little or no help from the government – are required by law to provide various services to this population.”

He continued, “It is indisputable that the states are harmed to some extent by the government’s action and inaction in the area of immigration.”

The judge said Obama’s program isn’t only a situation where there aren’t enough resources, so program managers pick and choose which cases to handle. Washington’s current program “is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

“The DHS does have discretion in the manner in which it chooses to fulfill the expressed will of Congress. It cannot, however, enact a program whereby it not only ignores the dictates of Congress, but actively acts to thwart them,” the judge said.

.

.

*VIDEO* Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Sets CNN’s Chris Cuomo Straight On Where Our Rights Come From


.

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

Related audio:

.

.

.

Unfreakingbelievable!

There are no words, except I hope this scumbag gets hit by a bus

Oregon judge has ruled that a 61-year-old man did nothing illegal when he crouched in the aisle of a Target store and snapped photos up a 13-year-old’s skirt.

It was lewd and appalling, but not outlawed, Washington County JudgeEric Butterfield said.

“From a legal point of view, which unfortunately today is my job to enforce, he didn’t do anything wrong,” the judge said Thursday.

Patrick Buono of Portland didn’t dispute using his cellphone to take upskirt photos on Jan. 3 at the store in suburban Beaverton, The Oregonian(http://bit.ly/1zXl9hx) reported.

Too bad the girls father was not present when this pervert “did nothing wrong”. 

Strike One: Federal Court Rules Obama’s Executive Amnesty Unconstitutional

District Court Declares Obama Immigration Action Unconstitutional – Washington Post

.

.
Earlier Tuesday, a federal court in Pennsylvania declared aspects of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration policy unconstitutional.

According to the opinion by Judge Arthur Schwab, the president’s policy goes “beyond prosecutorial discretion” in that it provides a relatively rigid framework for considering applications for deferred action, thus obviating any meaningful case-by-case determination as prosecutorial discretion requires, and provides substantive rights to applicable individuals. As a consequence, Schwab concluded, the action exceeds the scope of executive authority.

This is the first judicial opinion to address Obama’s decision to expand deferred action for some individuals unlawfully present in the United States. [I’ve now posted the opinion here.]

The procedural background of the case is somewhat unusual. The case involves an individual who was deported and then reentered the country unlawfully. In considering how to sentence the defendant, the court sought supplemental briefing on the applicability of the new policies to the defendant, and whether these policies would provide the defendant with additional avenues for seeking the deferral of his deportation. In this case, however, it’s not entirely clear it was necessary to reach the constitutional question to resolve the issues before the court with regard to the defendant’s sentence.

This isn’t the only case challenging the lawfulness of the Obama’s immigration actions. Some two-dozen states have filed suit challenging Obama’s recent immigration policy reforms. Led by Texas, these states claim that the president as exceeded the scope of executive authority in this area. As I’ve noted before, I’m skeptical of these arguments on the merits (as is Ilya), and wonder whether the states will be able to satisfy the requirements of Article III standing to bring their claims. Yet as this case shows, even if the states don’t have standing, the legality of the president’s actions could nonetheless be decided in federal court.

.

.