Last year a retired Border Patrol Officer by the name of Zach Taylor went on camera to explain the driving force behind the unprecedented surge in illegal immigration happening on our southern border. Taylor went on to note that what was happening at our border was not due to a spur of the moment event, or “a humanitarian crisis”, but asymmetrical warfare. The surge we saw at the border was apart of a larger more chilling event that served one purpose and one purpose only, to show our enemies that our southern border had been compromised and the government wouldn’t do a damn thing about it.
The border was destroyed because of the actions taken by President Barack Obama under the guise of his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) plan. Simply put, DACA rewrote our immigration laws and created the incentive for illegal aliens to break our laws as Obama deliberately undermined our nation’s sovereignty by simply creating his own. The culmination of Obama’s DACA has resulted in over 790,000 illegal aliens entering the country from the middle of 2013 to May of 2015, for a total of 2.5 million new illegal immigrants since Obama took office in January of 2009.
While the threat comes from without, in this case millions of illegal immigrants, it could not have been possible without the enemy already being inside of the United States. As Mr. Taylor states, “If asymmetrical warfare is going to be successful, the first thing that has to be done is to compromise America’s defense against invasion because they have to have their personnel inside the United States to affect the infrastructure – our hospitals, our schools, our electric grid, our power supplies, our water supply – basically what we call infrastructure [which] effects the degeneration from inside the United States.” By drawing away the resources that are intended to protect the United States border in order to care for the illegal immigrants, the border is now wide open and our infrastructure is overloaded. Yet, the “crisis on the border” is only a small part of the larger warfare that’s being waged against our country at the hands of our own president.
“Today the Obama juggernaut is systematically bankrupting our country, and undoing the constitutional arrangements our Founders left to us”, writes David Horowitz in his book Fight Fire With Fire. The contempt of the Obama party for consultative and representative government is relentlessly on display. Horowitz goes on to give the example of what our enemy represents with the following statement uttered by then Senate Majority leader Harry Reid as he defended his refusal to negotiate with Republicans over Obamacare and the debt crisis. Reid stated in these words: “We are here to support the federal government. That’s our job.” End quote. You’ll notice that representing the people for whom our Constitution makes sovereign is not included in Reid’s statement.
Horowitz then writes the following:
“My years as a radical prepared me to see much of this coming. But even I never thought we would be looking so soon at the prospect of a one-party system and a fascist state. Those words may sound hyperbolic, but take a moment to think about it. If you have transformed the taxing agency of the state into a political weapon – and Obama has; if you are setting up a massive government program to collect and file the financial and health information of every citizen, and also to control their access to care; and if you have a spy agency that can read the mail and listen to the communications of every individual in the country, you don’t really need a secret police to destroy political opponents. You already have the means to do it.”
This is all the more troubling when you look at the sheer amount of data the Obama administration, or shall I say the Obama government, is collecting on each and every individual living in the United States. To effect the degeneration of the country from within the Obama administration has weaponized the IRS, DOJ, and FBI to target Americans who oppose their agenda. Now, the White House has added a key tool in their arsenal by prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.” On Saturday, Paul Sperry of the New York Post, uncovered the latest Obama plan that is aimed at collecting personal data for a secret race database. Sperry writes, “Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.” It may sound conspiratorial but under this government the only conspiracy is that being committed against Americans who are too distracted by today’s latest ginned up political crisis.
Sperry continues by noting that, “this Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make ‘disparate impact‘ cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds. Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.” This means that so called civil-rights attorneys like those working for the ACLU and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.
“Such databases have never before existed. Obama is presiding over the largest consolidation of personal data in US history. He is creating a diversity police state where government race cops and civil-rights lawyers will micromanage demographic outcomes in virtually every aspect of society”, concludes Sperry. If you were to add all the databases created under this administration, including the Obamacare database, known as MIDAS, which retains tens of millions of Obamacare enrollees information, you could quiet literally make the claim that the federal government has data on every single American citizen. In the hands of someone like Obama this becomes of grave concern given his willingness to use such information against his opponents. Now that this information will be made public in order to extort communities deemed “too segregated”. Whether it be through the withholding of federal funds for a local community showing a pattern of “racial disparity” or lawsuits against a school that disciplines minorities more than whites, it doesn’t much matter. The government will be able to force you to act in a way that it deems socially acceptable as Obama drastically changes the racial makeup of America by enshrining an infrastructure that will continue long after he’s gone.
All the while this is happening below the surface and under the radar from most Americans, we remain and for good reason, distracted by the latest crisis of the day. A Christian owned Oregon bakery is forced by the state to pay a fine for not baking a cake for a lesbian couple, a woman is killed by an illegal immigrant and 7-time convicted felon in San Francisco, four Marines and one Navy Officer are executed by an Islamic jihadist; none of this would be happening but for Obama’s actions. He knew that ISIS had put out a hit list specifically targeting our military, and he did nothing. He cheered on the Supreme Court ruling that legalized gay marriage knowing that it would be used in a way to exploit and destroy businesses specifically owned by Christians. He created the “sanctuary city” policy that has served to protect illegal immigrants while they rape, murder, and assault American citizens like Kate Steinle in San Francisco.
All of this is happening because of the enemy we have in the White House. The country is being brought to its knees by overt acts such as the jihadist attack that was met with no response, to covert acts such as the Obama race database. Yet, no resistance is met to counter the agenda of the Obama adminstration. Even the capacity of the American people to determine their own national interests are being torn asunder without any fight, without even so much as a whimper from Congress. Without a pushback, the adminstration goes about acting without repercussion held to no degree of accountability. With impeachment and the power of the purse both taken off the table by Congress, America is literally at the whim of Obama as the only checks that exist today on what the president can do is what he personally thinks he can get away with and what his political incentives are.
So the adminstration pushes full steam ahead without any concern for the American people themselves. Nowhere is this more apparent, on a foreign policy scale, than with the adminstration’s nuclear deal with Iran. As Andrew McCarthy of National Review writes, “At the U.N. today, the Obama administration is colluding with our enemies and other foreign sovereigns to deprive the American people – through their elected representatives – of the power to determine what obligations they will accept under international law. The Obama administration has taken the position that Russia, China, and, yes, Iran, have a vote on our national security, but we do not. And in this betrayal, Congress has, at best, been a witless aider and abettor.” At worst, they’ve gone along with the adminstration in committing treason against the United States of America.
I believe in the latter.
Sierra Marlee reports that shockingly, or not, it turns out there were 26 Democrats among the anti-Second Amendment sit-in on the House floor who actually OWN firearms themselves.
The 25-hour sit-in was a pathetic attempt at a protest for stricter gun control laws that infringe on the 5th Amendment rights of Americans everywhere.
During the time, there were 26 Democrats who own firearms trying to make it difficult for others to own firearms.
Here is the full list of Democrats who are known to own guns below:
- Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick
- Rep. Bennie Thompson
- Rep. Dina Titus
- Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger
- Rep. Jared Huffman
- Rep. Jim Cooper
- Rep. Jim Costa
- Rep. John Carney
- Rep. John Garamendi
- Rep. Keith Ellison
- Rep. Mike Thompson
- Rep. Peter DeFazio
- Rep. Peter Welch
- Rep. Rick Nolan
- Rep. Ron Kind
- Rep. Steve Cohen
- Rep. Tim Ryan
- Sen. Gary Peters
- Sen. Harry Reid
- Sen. Mark Warner
- Sen. Martin Heinrich
- Sen. Patrick Leahy
- Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
- Sen. Tammy Baldwin
- Sen. Tim Kaine
- Sen. Tom Carper
While Democrats are beside themselves trying to accuse conservatives and the NRA of helping terrorists buy guns, the opposite is actually true; we are supporting the freedom of law abiding Americans to be able to exercise their rights.
We don’t support having our rights denied to us simply because a corrupted government added our name to an arbitrary list without due process.
The American government was never supposed to have this amount of power over the people and our God-given rights.
As Benjamin Franklin said: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Nobody has the right to ask us to give up our liberties for an idea as vague as “safety,” certainly not men and women who are so out of touch with Main Street, America that they think they can make a valid argument for gun control while surrounded by armed security.
If any of the above Congressmen represent you, please give them a call and let them know that you will NEVER support them unless and until they change their stance on gun control.
BY DUSTIN STOCKTON
Senator Cotton complained about listening to Reid’s “bitter, vulgar, incoherent ramblings,” and found a silver lining in a reduction in Senate work days because at least the Senate would be “cursed less with his [Reid’s] cancerous leadership.”
“I am forced to listen to the bitter, vulgar, incoherent ramblings of the Minority Leader,” Senator Cotton started. “Normally, like every other American, I ignore them. I can’t ignore them today, however.”
Senator Cotton unloaded on Minority Leader Reid during discussion of a defense bill that passed unanimously Wednesday. The Arkansas Senator invoked some of Harry Reid’s greatest hits including the Nevada Senator’s comments in 2007 that the Iraq war was lost and Reid’s infamous passing of Obamacare on Christmas Eve.
Cotton mocked Reid and railed against him:
When was the last time the Minority Leader read a bill? It was probably an electricity bill. What about the claims that it was written in the dark of night? It’s been public for weeks. And this coming from a man who drafted Obamacare in his office and rammed it through this Senate at midnight on Christmas Eve on a straight party line vote?
To say that he’s delaying this because he cares for the troops, a man who never served himself, a man who in April 2007 came to this very floor before the surge had even reached its peak and said the war is lost, when over 100 Americans were being killed in Iraq every month, when I was carrying their dead bodies off an airplane at Dover Air Force Base. It is an outrage to say that we had to delay this because he cares for the troops. We are delaying it for one reason and one reason only: to protect his own sad, sorry legacy.
Senator Cotton finished by insulting Senator Reid’s “cancerous leadership.”
“He now complains in the mornings that the Senate is not in session enough,” Cotton finished. “That our calendar is too short. Well, whatever you think about that, the happy byproduct of fewer days in session in the Senate is that this institution will be cursed less with his cancerous leadership. I yield the floor.”
As the bill’s fate hangs in the balance, Capitol Hill lawmakers across party lines are divided on whether to advance the legislation. If passed, it could jeopardize relations between Washington and Riyadh, one of the US’s closest allies in the Middle East.
Passed in the Senate Judiciary Committee in January, the bipartisan “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” would strip immunity from foreign governments in cases “arising from a terrorist attack that kills an American on American soil.”
Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Chuck Schumer (D-New York) are the original co-sponsors. Senators Al Franken (D-Minnesota) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have also signed on in support.
However, it’s unclear when – if ever – it will come to a vote in the Senate or the House. It is currently being blocked by an anonymous senator, a move that would require a minimum of 60 senate votes to overcome.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) has said that no vote has been scheduled yet.
Keeping the legislation in limbo works to President Obama’s advantage, as he opposes the bill, like many of his unlikely allies – Republicans in both the House and Senate.
The White House has been lobbying against the proposal despite widespread support among the president’s fellow Democrats in the Senate.
By contrast, the division appears to have created rare unity between Obama and some of his staunchest opponents, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin), both of whom have publicly expressed skepticism over the bill.
“We are obviously gratified that there are other Republicans that have taken a close look at this legislation and recognized the serious unintended consequences that could result from its passage,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said on Tuesday, admitting that alliances with GOP members are “rare.”
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) told reporters that he supports the bill like “almost everyone in the [Democratic] caucus,”but that the “pushback is coming from the Republicans.”
“I’ve spoken with the White House… they don’t particularly like it, but that’s okay,” Reid added.
The White House maintains that it would be “unwise” for the Senate to pass the legislation, which “does open up the United States to a unique degree of risk, and putting our country, our taxpayers, our service members and our diplomats in legal jeopardy in that way is contrary to our interests.”
On Tuesday, Senator Graham, who has put a hold on the bill, publicly expressed his doubts, saying that he wants to“make sure that anything we do doesn’t come to bite us.”
“Anything we do in this bill can be used against us later. So let’s say there’s a situation where you’ve got an American in a consulate or an embassy that’s got their own grudge against a government,” he said. “We want to make sure that we’re not liable for that.”
He specifically cited US support for Kurdish YPG fighters in Syria as an example.
“We’re helping the YPG Kurds, right?” Graham said. “They’re the cousins of the PKK, which is a terrorist organization in the eyes of the US government and the Turkish government. Well, if they collaborate on an attack inside Turkey, I don’t want to be held liable.”
His position has been shared by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), who also supports putting the legislation on ice to prevent it from coming to a vote.
“Everybody thinks this is the greatest bill since sliced bread,” Sessions said. “But you can have unintended consequences.”
Shortly before Earnest made his comments, Speaker Ryan also expressed uncertainty over the controversial law.
“I think we need to look at it,” Ryan said at a news conference, while declining to endorse the bill as of yet. “I think we need to review it to make sure we are not making mistakes with our allies and that we’re not catching people in this that shouldn’t be caught up in this.”
Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) has also expressed concern that passing the bill could strain relations with the Saudis, pointing out that they had pulled out of the fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) to go after Yemen.
“I’m concerned about the implications of taking this action on other activities, including the reaction of the Saudis,” he said. “This president has managed to poison relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia that is unprecedented because of his desire to have some kind of relationship with Iran.”
Many top Republicans have refused to either publically support or oppose the legislation, saying that they need more time to think on it.
Majority Leader McConnell has said he is “still looking at it.”
Originally announced by Schumer and Cornyn in September of 2015, the legislation has recently regained attention, especially in light of a New York Times report claiming that the Saudis have threatened to sell off American assets worth 12 figures if Congress passes the bill.
Possible links between the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack and Saudi Arabia may be hiding in 28 classified pages of a 2002 joint congressional inquiry into the matter. The completely blank 28 pages allegedly describe how Saudi Arabian nationals with links to the government financially assisted some or all of the 19 hijackers who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center’s twin towers and the Pentagon. Many people, including former Florida Senator Bob Graham, the co-author of the redacted pages, have been campaigning to have them declassified for years.
Speaking with Charlie Rose this week, President Obama hinted that the data could be declassified “very soon.”
When RT asked the State Department whether the Obama administration believes that current or former Saudi officials or members of Saudi Arabia’s royal family might have been in any way involved in the 9/11 attacks, spokesperson John Kirby refused to comment, readdressing the question to the internet and “the public record.”
“Look, I’m not going to re-litigate history here. The – you can go online and see the story of the attacks and how it happened and who was responsible, and I’m not going to re-litigate it here,” he said. “As it says in the report, there’s no indication that Saudi officials or the Saudi government was behind or supporting in any way those attacks,” he added.