Moscow: US will feel ‘tangible losses’ from ‘destructive, myopic’ sanctions

Capture

The new round of American economic sanctions imposed against Russia over the Ukrainian crisis will only further worsen relations between Washington and Moscow, the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

EU and US impose new round of sanctions on Russia over Ukraine

“Washington will gain nothing from such decisions except for further complication of Russian-American relations and the creation of an unfavorable atmosphere in international affairs, where the cooperation between our countries often plays a key role,” the statement by the ministry reads.

“We have repeatedly spoken about the illegitimacy and groundlessness of the US sanctions against Russia,” it said, commenting on a new package of sanctions announced by Washington on Tuesday.

In addition to steps taken earlier, the US has now added four new names to the list of Russia-affiliated entities sanctioned by Washington, including the Bank of Moscow, the Russian Agricultural Bank and VTB Bank OAO, as well as the state-owned United Shipbuilding Corporation.

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks about new sanctions imposed on Russia as he departs the White House in Washington July 29, 2014 (Reuters / Joshua Roberts)U.S. President Barack Obama speaks about new sanctions imposed on Russia as he departs the White House in Washington July 29, 2014 (Reuters / Joshua Roberts)

Also, the US will be “blocking the exports of specific goods and technologies to the Russian energy sector”, “expanding sanctions to more banks” and “suspending credit that encourages exports to Russia,” President Barack Obama said on Tuesday.

European Union agrees on Russian sectoral sanctions – top EU officials

The move came just hours after the EU announced its own economic measures targeting the Russian economy. Both the US and the EU accuse Moscow of supporting anti-Kiev militias in eastern Ukraine.

Moscow, in response, said that the US is only pretending to be consistent in its current behavior. In fact, “it is only trying to escape responsibility for the tragic development of the events in Ukraine,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said Wednesday.

“It is not Russia but the Kiev regime and its foreign patrons that can be blamed for the increasing number of casualties among civilians in eastern [Ukrainian] regions,” the ministry said in a statement.

The White House – in its “pretentious, prosecutor-like manner” – continues to put forward groundless charges against Russia, the ministry said. At the same time, the US is covering up “the bloody operation by the Kiev military who, in violation of international laws, have launched missile strikes against peaceful cities.”

In Moscow’s view, “the only goal” that the US is pursuing by imposing sanctions is to “settle accounts” with Russia for its policies that are “independent and unfavorable for Washington.”

“The losses that Washington will sustain from such a destructive and myopic policy will be very tangible,” the Foreign Ministry added.

VTB, Russia’s second-largest bank and one of the institutions targeted by US sanctions, has called them “politically motivated, unfair, legally dubious and economic damaging for all parties.”

The bank said in a statement that the “move appears particularly misguided, given that VTB strictly adheres to all applicable international laws and regulations, including those set out by the US authorities, which they are well aware of.”

It assured the clients that despite the US’s “discriminatory decision” it will continue to meet all of its obligations, adding that the move will not affect the bank’s “operational performance and creditworthiness.”

Another leading Russian bank targeted in the sanctions, Bank of Moscow, also said that its customers would not be harmed by them as the bank is focused on the internal Russian market.

The United Shipbuilding Corporation, in response to the sanctions, said it is considering switching from US dollars to other currencies in its payments with foreign customers, the corporation’s head Aleksey Rakhmanov told Kommersant FM radio station. He added that the sanctions may cause more harm to the company’s civilian customers rather than the military sector.

Krauthammer: Impending White House Amnesty Order ‘Would Be An Impeachable Offense’

Capture

http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=90046&siteSection=dailycaller&videoId=26465770

Brendan Bordelon

Like many on the right, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer is politically opposed to impeaching President Barack Obama. But on Tuesday, he declared that legally, the rumored White House order granting amnesty to as many as 6 million illegal immigrants “would be an impeachable offense” — and Obama’s talk of impeachment may be a way to preempt that pushback.

Krauthammer spoke with Fox News’s Bret Baier on a panel with The Hill’s A.B. Stoddard and Fox News contributor Juan Williams. The group discussed the impeachment buzz swirling around Washington, which most observers agree is being ginned up by Democrats eager for the campaign donations such talk brings.

Krauthammer didn’t dispute that characterization, but offered a couple serious caveats. “There’s only one real thing here,” he claimed, “and that is that Obama is said to — or there are reports from the White House — that he’s going to do something by executive order about immigration.”

“If he were to do something like legalize five — let’s say half, which is what’s been talked about — huge numbers of illegal immigrants, to do it by executive order — which would be clearly lawless, and it would be the biggest overreach of a president in memory — it would be an impeachable offense,” Krauthammer declared.

“I would be 100 percent against impeachment,” the columnist clarified, “because it’s political suicide. But it really would be the basis for that.”

“That’s what I think the White House may actually be softening people up for,” Krauthammer mused. “An executive order that reaches impeachable offensive, but it’s a way to — it’s like a preemptive strike.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/29/krauthammer-impending-white-house-amnesty-order-would-be-an-impeachable-offense/#ixzz38uQ90DFC

COLLECT MORE THAN $7,000 PER MONTH FOR ‘FOSTERING’ ADULT ILLEGAL ALIENS

Capture

http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=90085&siteSection=breitbart_nws_us_sty_vmppap&videoId=26414815

HOUSTON, Texas–The federal government is in dire need of U.S. citizens willing to house the thousands of illegal immigrants who enter the country each week, and they are willing to pay them to do so.
The Texas-based nonprofit Catholic Charities is currently seeking out foster families for the migrants, most of whom come from Central America. Ruth Braiser, a spokeswoman for the organization, told Breitbart Texas that foster families can receive monthly payments for housing adult immigrants who are under 23-years-old.
“Most of our children are 15 to 17-years-old,” she said. “But some stay in our program until they are 22-years-old; if they’re still working on getting their high school diploma, they can stay until they’re that age.”
The revelation that some of the migrants receiving foster care are adults will likely come as a surprise to many; the mainstream media has largely portrayed the border crisis as involving only children and family units.
Braiser mentioned that foster families will be paid $40 per day for each migrant they take in from Catholic Charities. The payments are funded by the federal government, as Breitbart Texas previously reported.
Foster parents have the ability to collect more than $7,400 per month, considering that they can house six immigrants at any given time.
In addition to daily payments, Braiser said that the illegal immigrants are provided with taxpayer subsidized education, health care, transportation, and an “allowance.” She was not specific about the amount of such an allowance or how often it is administered.
Many have expressed outrage that instead of being turned away at the border, many illegal aliens are being brought to federal facilities where they receive a slew of taxpayer-subsidized benefits: housing, food, vocational training, English lessons, recreation, and legal counsel. Ultimately, most of the migrants are released onto U.S. soil after promising to show up at an immigration court hearing.

Jeff Sessions: House Border Bill Is a ‘Surrender To a Lawless President’

Sombrero

By Joel Gehrke
July 29, 2014 4:26 PM
Comments1395

Print Text

Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) denounced the House Republican border bill as a “surrender to a lawless president” because the legislation does not include any language to prevent President Obama from expanding his unilateral legalization of illegal immigrants.

Here’s the statement:

The Obama Administration has openly declared its plan to implement a unilateral executive amnesty for 5–6 million more illegal immigrants. This unlawful amnesty—urged on by congressional Democrats—would include work permits, taking jobs directly from millions of struggling American citizens.

Any action Congress might consider to address the current border crisis would be futile should the President go forward with these lawless actions. Congress must speak out and fight against them. It must use its spending power to stop the President’s executive amnesty.

That the House leaders’ border package includes no language on executive actions is surrender to a lawless President. And it is a submission to the subordination of congressional power.

After years of falling wages and rising joblessness, American workers are pleading for someone to hear them. How can it be that our President is brazenly advertising that he will nullify and strip away American workers’ immigration protections, and their own elected leaders will not rise to their defense? Or to the defense of our laws and our Constitutional order?

There are other grave concerns with the Granger package as well: because it does not fix our asylum rules and loopholes, the end result of the additional judges and hearings will be more illegal immigrants gaining asylum and access to U.S. welfare. It is a plan for expedited asylum, not expedited removal.

Nor will this package make our rogue President actively enforce anything, coming nowhere close to the kinds of reasonable enforcement activities needed to restore the interior application of our immigration laws.

And finally, a package that is silent on blocking amnesty creates an opportunity for Senate Democrats to add elements of their party’s open borders and mass immigration agenda.

This legislation is unworthy of support.