Gutiérrez just spilled the Democratic beans; accidentally exposed real reason for amnesty

Tom Tillison

Obama-GutierrezU.S. Rep. Luis Gutiérrez, D-Ill., inadvertently tipped the Democratic Party’s hand Friday on why they so doggedly pursue amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants in the United States.

While appearing on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Gutiérrez crowed about going to the White House later in the day to “negotiate” how the president, with a stroke of the pen, can legalize up to 5 million illegal immigrants.

President Obama‘s expected executive action will, in effect, not only nullify the immigration laws of the United States, but serve to create a legion of brand new Democrat voters.

A fact that didn’t escape Gutiérrez.

“Let me just say in about an hour, I’m going over to the White House,” he said. “I’ll be meeting with Jeh Johnson and the Chief Legal Counsel to the President of the United States.”

The joy he derived from making such a statement could hardly be missed.

“We are going to sit down and we’re going to negotiate additional terms and avenues the president can use and prosecutorial discretion, and I think we can get three or four or maybe even five million people.”

Democratic Rep Who Co-Sponsored Bush Impeachment Bill: We Didn’t Try To Impeach Bush

By Mike Miller 7 hours ago

Texas Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who often has an arm’s length relationship with the truth, told a “whopper” Wednesday, as she excoriated House Republicans for voting to sue Barack Obama for executive overreach.

As reported by Buzzfeed’s Katherine Miller, Lee not only claimed that the effort was little more than a precursor to impeaching Obama, but that she and her Democrat colleagues never considered impeaching George W. Bush:

” I ask my colleagues to oppose this resolution for it is in fact a veiled attempt at impeachment and it undermines the law that allows a president to do his job.

A historical fact: President Bush pushed this nation into a war that had little to do with apprehending terrorists.

We did not seek an impeachment of President Bush, because as an executive, he had his authority. President Obama has the authority.”

Whoops. Not only did House Democrats indeed introduce a resolution to impeach President Bush in 2008 – Sheila Jackson Lee co-sponsored it.

Hey, maybe she just “forgot,” right?


According to Yahoo!, Rep. Sheila Jackson’s office says she ‘misspoke’:

“She misspoke,” Jackson Lee’s spokesman Mike McQuerry told Yahoo News on Thursday morning. He declined to elaborate on what she meant to say.

BREAKING: Judge Orders DOJ to Release Fast and Furious Documents Withheld From Congress Under Obama Executive Privilege Claim


Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit pursued against the Department of Justice by government watchdog Judicial Watch, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has ruled documents being withheld from Congress under President Obama’s claim of executive privilege must be turned over. Obama made the claim on the same day Attorney General Eric Holder was voted in criminal and civil contempt of Congress in June 2012.

“This order forces the Obama DOJ, for the first time, to provide a detailed listing of all documents that it has withheld from Congress and the American people for years about the deadly Fast and Furious gun running scandal,” Judicial Watch released in a statement.

The FOIA lawsuit has been ongoing for 16-months and is now proceeding after a lengthy delay. The Justice Department originally asked the court for an indefinite hold on a FOIA request from Judicial Watch, citing executive privilege and an ongoing investigation. That indefinite hold request was shot down more than a year ago.

The documentation DOJ is required to now turn over is a “Vaughn index” of “all requested Fast and Furious materials from a June 2012 Judicial Watch FOIA request.”

A Vaughn index must: (1) identify each document withheld; (2) state the statutory exemption claimed; and (3) explain how disclosure would damage the interests protected by the claimed exemption.” In ordering the DOJ to provide Judicial Watch the Vaughn index, the Court ruled, “In this circuit, when an agency is withholding documents under exemption claims, courts require that the agency provide a Vaughn index so that the FOIA requester – at a distinct informational disadvantage – may test the agency’s claims.”

“Once again, Judicial Watch has beat Congress to the punch in getting key information about another Obama scandal – this time, the Fast and Furious outrage,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “A federal court has ordered the Obama administration to produce information that could, for the first time, provide specific details who in the administration is responsible for Fast and Furious lies to Congress and the American people. This is a battle that put Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, saw Nixonian assertions of executive privilege by Barack Obama, and a hapless Congress in face of all this lawlessness. Finally, we may get some accountability for Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and the countless others murdered as a result of the insanely reckless Obama administration program.”

This is a huge step forward.

Zombie GOP Bill Tried To Sneak Immigration Boost [UPDATED]


Neil Munro
White House Correspondent

The border bill that was apparently defeated by conservative GOP legislators would have greatly expanded the “unaccompanied alien child” loophole that is now being used by at least 80,000 Central American youths to win legal residency in the United States.

“This takes a problem that is bad, and makes it worse,” a Hill staffer that wished to remain anonymous told The Daily Caller.

In a dramatic confrontation, the bill was pulled from consideration once the GOP leadership could not find enough votes. However, GOP leaders are preparing to bring a revised version to the floor for a vote late this afternoon.

The GOP bill would have allowed youths from Mexico to use the same “unaccompanied alien child” loophole in a 2008 law that is currently offered only to minors traveling from non-contiguous countries, such as Honduras and Guatemala, say conservatives and legal analysts.

The defeated bill expanded the loophole, even though numerous GOP and conservative legislators, plus many conservative activists and a majority of voters, urged it be closed by an amendment to the 2008 law.

The GOP’s leadership, led by House Speaker John Boehner, temporarily abandoned their effort to pass the bill when many conservative legislators balked during intense negotiations on July 30 and July 31.

House Democrats could have allied with Boehner to pass the bill, but they instead choose to let it fail.

The defeat will help Democrats blame the border crisis on the GOP, even though the influx of the 100,000-plus Central Americans began in 2012, amid lax enforcement of the border by President Barack Obama’s border agencies.

Under the flawed 2008 law, so-called UACs from Mexico can be repatriated in a day via a “voluntary return” legal procedure, according to an explanation of the bill shared by conservative legislators and activists.

The new “bill appears to put the majority – if not all – [Mexican UACs] in the new court proceedings,” where they will be exempt from “voluntary return,” and will have five ways to win residency, said the document.

Those major policy changes are hidden by obscure language in the “Secure the Southwest Border Act of 2014,” according to an analysis released by the Center for Immigration Studies.

The bill includes “a cornucopia of options by which UACs can ensure that they are never returned to their country of nationality,” the CIS report says.

For example, the bill amends the 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act by “altering the bright-line distinction between UACs from countries that are contiguous, versus noncontiguous, to the United States,” says the CIS report.

“It does this specifically by inserting instead the phrase, ‘Canada, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and any other foreign country that the Secretary determines appropriate’ where the word ‘contiguous’ was previously used,” said the CIS report.

The bill also created a new legal process that pressures judges to grant residency to youths.

Section 103 created a new court procedure that allows each UAC to win a green card unless the immigration judge can show it would be “manifestly unjust.”

That was just one of five opportunities that any and all UACs would be allowed to seek green cards.

“The House bill allows five bites at the apple for those claiming asylum,” according to the explanation of the bill.

“UACs are screened for credible fear by the Border Patrol; UACs go before an immigration judge in the new court proceeding to determine if they have a claim for relief; UACs are screened by an asylum officer for a credible fear of persecution; UACs then have their asylum case adjudicated by any asylum officer who can only grant relief or refer the case to immigration court; and If a UAC’s case is referred, the immigration judge will hear their case on the merits de novo,” read the explanation.

Also, the bill ensured that the number of youths who can claim to be UACs will rise because of a new definition hidden in a section about the use of the National Guard on the border.

Current law says youths who have parents or guardians in the United States don’t get the legal advantage of being called UACs. For example, “when children who arrived unaccompanied are released to their parents [living in the United States], they cease to be UACs,” said CIS.

But the new bill defined UACs as illegals younger than 18 for whom “no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.”

The bill also requires that more youths be detained pending completion of their case.

That new definition meant that detained youths would be classified as UACs — even if they arrive with their parents — because they could not be transferred to the custody of their parents while they’re being detained.

The bill’s sponsors said the bill was intended to speed up court proceedings needed to deport migrant youths from Central America.

It required judges “to issue decisions within 72 hours of conclusion of the hearing… [but] there is no indicator of exactly how long such a hearing may be prolonged,” said the CIS report.

Read more:

Democrats’ Impeachment Obsession, Explained



BY: Andrew Stiles // July 31, 2014 3:23 pm

As world-renowned data scientist Nate Silver explains: “Democrats Are Way More Obsessed With Impeachment Than Republicans.” For example, nearly every time the word “impeachment” has been entered into the Congressional record this month, a Democrat said it.

Surely the wingnuts at Fox News have been using the I-word more often than the intellectual pundits at MSNBC, right?



Meanwhile, Democratic campaign committees have raised millions by sending dozens of panicked emails about nonexistent Republican efforts to impeach the president.