Category Archives: Federal Law

OBAMA LIED! White House Knew of IRS Targeting Conservatives Back in June 2012 (Stole Election)

Barack Obama condemned the IRS scandal earlier this week saying,

“I have got not patience for it… I first learned about this from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this.”

But now we know… The Obama administration knew about the IRS targeting scandal in June 2012 – before the November elections.
The New York Times reported:

The Treasury Department’s inspector general told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 he was auditing the Internal Revenue Service’s screening of politically active organizations seeking tax exemptions, disclosing for the first time on Friday that Obama administration officials were aware of the matter during the presidential campaign year.

At the first Congressional hearing into the I.R.S. scandal, J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, told members of the House Ways and Means Committee that he informed the Treasury’s general counsel of his audit on June 4, and Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin “shortly thereafter.”

It remained unclear how much the disclosure would affect the broader debate over the I.R.S.’s problems. Complaints from Tea Party groups that the I.R.S. was singling them out became public in 2012, through media accounts.

Mr. George told Treasury officials about the allegation as part of a routine briefing about ongoing audits he would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

Comcast Cable Bans All Firearm, Ammunition Advertisers

Comcast Cable, “the nation’s largest cable provider,” has decided it will not accept firearm and ammunition advertisers in the future.

This decision comes after Comcast has been running ads for some gun and hunting groups for decades. Comcast chose this new position after purchasing NBCUniversal, which has a long-standing ban against firearm, ammunition and firework advertisements.

This move brings Comcast in line with its competitors, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications.

Cox already had a ban similar to the one Comcast has now instituted and Time Warner Cable announced in January that it was banning “ads showing semi-automatic weapons and guns pointed at people.”

Gun control advocates praise Comcast’s “brave move,” while gun store owners say their profession has been unjustly singled out by Comcast.

Is A Civil War Coming To America?

For anyone who has done even a cursory study of Barack Obama’s life, they know that his radical Marxist views are not a recent phenomenon.

During his New York years, he was a frequent participant in the annual Socialist Scholars Conference held in Manhattan.

In the 1990s, he was affiliated with the Marxist New Party.

He called for an outright ban on guns in 1996.

Through the 1990s and 2000s, he funneled millions of dollars to socialist front groups like ACORN, via the Woods Fund and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. His buddy, domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, helped stuff the money in the pockets of these “public welfare” groups, often taking money from wealthy donors who believed the funds were being used to further education or stamp out poverty. This was Barack Obama’s first foray into “spreading the wealth around.”

The dirty little secret about Marxists is that the moral outrage they have about the poor, about gun violence, about war, and even about the environment (so-called “global warming,” now rebranded as “climate change”) is that these are all simply tools to set up a totalitarian government. A so-called utopia where “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is not determined by the individual, but according to an elite bureaucracy.

Read more here.

Arizona Regains Footing in Legal Battle Over Immigration Law

After suffering a major legal setback in the summer, Arizona regained its footing in court Friday when a federal judge dismissed parts of the U.S. Justice Department’s challenge to the state’s new immigration law and rejected several claims made by Hispanic activists and Phoenix police officers.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton’s ruling on Friday struck down the federal government’s challenge to the portion of the law that prohibits the transport of illegal immigrants.

It also rejected a challenge from Phoenix police officers and an advocacy group called Chicanos Por La Causa who argued that the cops could be sued for racial profiling if they enforced the law or lose their jobs if they didn’t.

Bolton agreed with Arizona that they had no valid claim of immediate harm.

Bolton also dismissed a lawsuit from the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders who were seeking an injunction preventing authorities from enforcing the law because the group argued federal law pre-empts state regulation of national borders.

“I am pleased with today’s decision,” Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said in a statement Friday. “I strongly believe that the citizens of Arizona will ultimately prevail in all of these legal challenges. My defense of the rule of law will continue as vigorously as ever.”

Arizona’s law has been at the center of an impassioned national debate on illegal immigration ever since it was passed in April. The federal government filed a lawsuit soon after to block the measure — a battle that is ongoing and is likely to wind up in the Supreme Court.

Read more here.

Hispanic GOP Group to Announce Support for Arizona Immigration Law

The Arizona Latino Republican Association will become the first Hispanic organization in the country to actively oppose the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona’s new immigration law.

Larry Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch, Inc., said he will be joined by ALRA Chairman Jesse Hernandez and members of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association at an announcement Thursday morning in Phoenix.

ALRA will become the first group of Latino Americans to “put a foot forward legally” in support of S.B. 1070 by filing a motion to intervene against the Justice Department’s lawsuit challenging Arizona’s immigration policy, Klayman said.

“This is a way to tell the country that, ‘Hey, we’re Americans too and we believe in the rule of law,” Klayman told Foxnews.com. “It’s a way to say, ‘We got here legally and we contributed a great deal. We want the rest of the country to recognize that we’re with you’ [in the national immigration debate].”

By filing the motion, Klayman said ALRA will be “in effect, a defendant” in the DOJ lawsuit, which names the state of Arizona as well as Gov. Jan Brewer as defendants. The Justice Department claims the federal government has “preeminent authority” on immigration enforcement and that the Arizona law “disrupts” that balance.

The motion was being finalized as of Tuesday.

Read more here.

Border police bait & switch

By PAUL SPERRY

President Obama is suing Arizona for hav ing its cops identify and round up illegal aliens — even though he’s also deputizing them to do the same thing.

That’s right: Under a little-known federal program called ICE 287(g), the administration has continued to enlist at least eight Arizona state law-enforcement agencies to carry out the procedures at issue in the new Arizona law, which goes into effect July 29.

The program dates to a 1995 law signed by President Bill Clinton, which allows US immigration officials to train local law-enforcement officers and authorize them to ID and detain illegals. After 9/11, the Homeland Security Department entered into official partnership agreements with various police departments, allowing them to search federal databases for illegals.
Napolitano: As governor, OK’d police work on illegals. –
AP
Napolitano: As governor, OK’d police work on illegals.

The program spread across the country, including to Arizona. It now involves 71 state and local police agencies. Indeed, Homeland Security has even conscripted Arizona state troopers to help it enforce federal immigration rules. Obama’s Homeland Security chief, Janet Napolitano, OK’d that agreement and another deal with a second state law-enforcement agency when she was Arizona’s governor.

All told, the feds have deputized 1,100-plus cops in 26 states to round up illegals — including officers in the liberal bastions of New Jersey, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Maryland and Massachusetts.

And the program has continued virtually unabated in the Obama years — despite calls by the ACLU and Hispanic groups to shut it down. The ACLU complains the program promotes an “anti-immigrant agenda” and encourages “racial profiling and civil-rights abuses” — the very same complaints Obama’s been making about the Arizona law.

Which, presumably, is why the president didn’t mention federal 287(g) program in his immigration “reform” speech, in which he scolded Arizona for its “divisive” and “ill-conceived” crackdown on increasingly violent illegal immigrants pouring across the border. “Laws like Arizona’s put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that ultimately are unenforceable,” Obama complained.

“Unenforceable”? Hardly. Just since 2006, more than 110,000 illegal immigrants have been ID’d and rounded up for deportation under the extremely successful federal-state partnership, which is finally putting a dent in the backlog of criminal aliens in the United States.

Last year, one out of every five immigration-related arrests in the country was made by local police.

In its lawsuit against Arizona, the administration argues the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over immigration and border security. Yet it’s farming out that role to state and local police under 287(g).

And Gov. Jan Brewer says she signed the Arizona statute to help enforce federal law, not to supplant it. In fact, the state’s new training video prepping cops for the new crackdown advises them to turn over any illegals they nab to either ICE agents or “the local 287(g)-certified officer.”

Local cops across the country are already directly involved in federal border security — the Obama administration just prefers not to acknowledge it. Its rhetoric and legal filings utterly ignore what it’s doing with its other hand, raising even greater suspicion that its opposition to Arizona’s new law is pure politics designed to energize the Democratic base ahead of November’s elections.

If Arizona’s law usurps federal authority, what about those 71 agreements the feds have made with state and local police under 287(g)? Are they unconstitutional, too?

Perhaps this hypocritical administration should look into suing itself.