A fair and trustworthy vote accepted by all citizens is necessary for functioning democratic processes. The actions of the Democratic National Committee, Marc Elias, and George Soros have jeopardized that. What Elias has done in recounts is proof that we need strong election integrity laws, ones that partisans can’t overpower.
Watch our video on partisan election litigation here.
Support Capital Research Center’s award-winning journalism
EDITORS NOTE: This CRC column with video and images is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/man-852766_640.jpg360640Capital Research Centerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCapital Research Center2019-02-14 16:31:462019-02-14 16:31:48VIDEO: How Democratic Party Lawyers Win Contested Elections
I have read many books about the Middle East but none have been as profound as that written by a 26-year old Kurdish woman named Joanna Palani titled “Freedom Fighter. My War Against ISIS on the Frontlines of Syria.” Joanna Palani’s perspective on peace in the Middle East is unique and based upon her personal experiences as a child, as a young girl and as a woman.
We must listen to what she has to say.
A Woman At War With Everyone
Joanna was (and in her heart still is) a soldier who served with the Women’s Protection Units (YPJ) in Iraq and Syria fighting against Daesh (ISIS). Joanna writes, “We [the YPJ] believe that women and men are equal, so we fight together for the freedom of the Kurdish people and the destruction of ISIS.”
Joanna was born in 1993 in a UN refugee camp outside of Ramadi, Iraq. At the age of 3-years old she and her Sunni Muslim family were relocated to Denmark. Joanna writes, “In Kurdish culture we celebrate the group – the family, the community, and the clan – instead of the individual, and the rules of the clan are the rules by which we live.” From 1996 to 2010 Joanna was raised and schooled in Denmark. It was in Denmark that she began her quest to become the equal of men.
Losing One’s Virginity
Joanna, as a Sunni Muslim girl, was raised to believe that the most important thing was her virginity. During her powerful story we learn how she lost her virginity in countless ways.
She lost her virginity because she rebelled against the strict Sunni Muslim beliefs of her father and her family. For this she was verbally abused, beaten, starved and eventually left her family to escape the oppressive culture in her home. Joanna writes, “Everything we do right, our father takes credit for. Everything we do wrong, our mother takes the blame.”
Joanna lost her virginity as a girl when she became a fighter (Peshmerga) in 2011. At the age of 18 Joanna went to Syria to join the Kurdish battalions that supported the Free Syrian Army volunteers fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad.
Joanna writes, “In the Middle East, most people consider a girl able to have sex as an adult after her first period. A ‘woman’ is normally a married person who has had sex, whereas a ‘girl’ has not had sex.” Joanna lost her virginity to become a woman when she had an out-of-wedlock relationship with one of her commanders referred to as “R” in her book. “R” later abused her. She left “R.” For this she was later called a whore, prostitute and even shunned by some of the women in the YPJ. Women, and men, whom she had fought shoulder-to-shoulder with to free Syria from Daesh either rejected her or took sexual advantage of her.
Joanna lost her virginity when she was betrayed by her clan, friends, lawyer, the Danish police and Danish secret service (PET), and by thousands on her social media sites.
Finally, Joanna lost her virginity to Denmark, her beloved adopted country, which took her passport, tried her, found her guilty and put her in prison twice for going to Syria to fight for women’s rights and freedom. Something she knew was right to do but the current Danish laws find to be illegal.
Fate whispered to the warrior, “You cannot withstand the coming storm.” And the warrior whispered back, “I am the storm.”
Joanna ends her book with this:
I do think women should be armed, as part of a wider democratic and equality movement. I do believe women are entitled to defend and protect themselves with weapons from ideologies that seek their absolute destruction, because what other choice do we have?
It was not death that haunted me on the battlefield, it was my life. I don’t regret anything I’ve done: there is no longer an Islamic State, and there is no longer a caliphate, so we achieved our aims – we won. My prize is to be alive still: to see what age I will actually make it to, and to find out how else I can spend my life.
You have probably seen this news about another illegal alien killer, however I’m mentioning it because the sensational aspects of the case have made it news around the world.
The victim was beautiful and her body was stuffed in a suitcase and dumped in the woods making the news apparently more interesting to the mainstream media than the Reno, Nevada caseI reported recently where four older Americans were killed in their homes by another illegal alien creep—a story that didn’t get nearly the coverage this one is getting.
The man alleged to have murdered the young and beautiful Valerie Reyes is in the country illegally as a visa overstay.
Suspect in suitcase death in U.S. illegally, authorities say
A man accused of killing his ex-girlfriend and dumping her body in a suitcase in Connecticut is a citizen of Portugal who has been in the U.S. illegally for more than a year, federal authorities said Wednesday as the victim’s loved ones gathered for her funeral.
Javier Da Silva Rojas, who had been living in New York City, was taken into custody Monday and charged with kidnapping resulting in death in the killing of 24-year-old Valerie Reyes, of New Rochelle, New York. The charge carries the possibility of the death penalty.
Da Silva, also 24, entered the U.S. on May 8, 2017, through the Visa Waiver Program and was required to leave by Aug. 5, 2017, Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in a statement.
If you are interested in reading more about the alleged killer, simply search his name and you will see stories about the murder everywhere.
We spend a lot of time talking about “the Wall,” but the feds need to do more to round-up visa overstays and get them the heck out of the country! Why not let the President know how you feel about the need for greater enforcement!
Several civil rights and voting advocacy groups sued Texas officials and five county elections administrators on Monday over an advisory urging counties to review the citizenship status of thousands of voters flagged as possible non-citizens.
The ACLU of Texas, along with the Texas Civil Rights Project, Demos and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, filed the lawsuit against Texas Secretary of State David Whitley and Director of Elections Keith Ingram, alleging that their recommendations discriminate against naturalized citizens. Also named in the suit are the election administrators in Galveston, Blanco, Fayette, Caldwell, and Washington counties, who sent out notices threatening to cancel voter registrations based on the list. [This is the type of intimidation the ACLU relishes—going after local officials.—-ed]
In a Jan. 25 advisory, Whitley asked local elections offices to look into the citizenship of 95,000 people on the voter rolls. Since then, the list has been cut by nearly 20,000 names — registered voters who were identified as citizens.
This sounds very reasonable to me, but it sent the ACLU around the bend!
The secretary of state can’t remove voters from the rolls, but county elections officials can. Whitley has instead recommended that counties send notices to the people they flagged as possible non-citizens, giving them 30 days to prove they’re eligible to vote by presenting a birth certificate, passport or certificate of naturalization. If they don’t respond, their registrations will be canceled by the county voter registrar.
Whitley’s list drew from documents people submitted to the Department of Public Safety when they were applying for drivers licenses. Non-citizens, such as temporary residents, asylum seekers and refugees, can get a Texas drivers license but can’t register to vote unless they become U.S. citizens.
Whitley said the list includes 58,000 people who have cast ballots in Texas elections.
As I have said on several previous occasions, if you are looking for something to do, get involved with your local board of elections and see how they are handling this issue of determining who is a citizen eligible to vote. See if they are working to at least purge the dead people!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/element5-digital-1126261-unsplash-1-e1550104953350.jpg427640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2019-02-13 19:42:442019-02-13 19:42:46Texas: ACLU Using Legal Intimidation Tactics to Stop Voter Roll Purge
Yet another study has found that voter ID laws do not suppress voter turnout, but the study also asserted such laws have no clear effect on stopping voter fraud.
The study was compiled by two professors, Vincent Pons of Harvard University Business School and Enrico Cantoni of the economics department at the University of Bologna in Italy. It was issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
“For all the heated debates around strict voter ID laws, our analysis of their effects obtains mostly null results,” the study says, adding:
First, the fears that strict ID requirements would disenfranchise disadvantaged populations have not materialized. Second, contrary to the argument used by the Supreme Court in the 2008 case Crawford v. Marion County to uphold the constitutionality of one of the early strict ID laws, we find no significant impact on fraud or public confidence in election integrity. This result weakens the case for adopting such laws in the first place.
In 2008, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law in a 6-3 ruling in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board.
Typically, Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed voter ID laws as a measure to prevent voter fraud, while Democratic lawmakers have alleged that such laws are voter suppression.
Past studies have drawn the same conclusion that voter ID laws do not deter voter turnout, but the new study is “totally wrong” to conclude ID laws don’t prevent voter fraud, said Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation.
“How would you show it deters fraud if that’s something that didn’t happen because of voter ID laws?” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal. “You have to look at convictions in absentee ballot fraud cases. In just four states, the voter ID laws apply the same to both in-person and absentee voting. So, it’s difficult to say.”
Various studies in recent years done by professors at the University of Missouri, the University of Delaware, the University of Nebraska surveying elections from 2000 through 2016 found similar results that voter ID laws do not suppress voter turnout.
Of those states, the National Conference of State Legislatures classifies 10 states as “strict,” meaning if a voter is without acceptable voter ID under that state’s law, most vote on a provisional ballot. Three of those “strict” states do not require photo ID.
The National Bureau of Economic Research study’s researchers used data from Catalist, a company that provides data for progressive-leaning groups that target voter turnout.
It looks at elections from 2008 through 2016 with a sampling across 30 states.
The study stated: “Measuring voter fraud represents a challenge, as federal and state agencies vary in the extent they collect and share information on it.”
The research cited The Heritage Foundation voter fraud database that includes 1,177 proven cases of voter fraud. Of those, 1,019 cases ended in criminal conviction.
The study also used data from News21, an investigative project funded by the Carnegie Corp. and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Through research of government documents, the project found 2,068 cases of suspected voter fraud reported from 2000 through 2012.
The study does not claim to be the last word on the matter.
“Because states adopted strict ID laws only two to 12 years ago, our results should be interpreted with caution: we find negative participation effects neither in the first election after the adoption of the laws nor in following ones, but cannot rule out that such effects will arise in the future,” the study says.
Americans should resist the trend of assumed guilt and demand elected officials end this assault on our constitutional rights.
Red flag laws have spurred quite a bit of controversy. This legislative movement seeks to create a process to remove firearms from the homes of people who are rumored to be dangerous to themselves or others. The proponents of such laws cite this as a possible way to help combat mass shootings and suicides. However, the truth is far more damning.
The 5th & 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution mandate that no one shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” Although this should be clear to anyone with a basic comprehension of English, it’s often ignored by judges and politicians. Depriving people of a constitutional right before a trial and without charges tramples on the notion of innocent until proven guilty and severely erodes the core values of justice.
Proponents of red flag laws argue due process is respected by allowing the deprived to appeal to the courts to reinstate their rights. However, this backward process would imply that the Second Amendment is a privilege, not a right. Furthermore, state agents finding cause for a warrant and subsequently seizing private property while denying access to a constitutional right seem to be a perfect setup for a kangaroo court system. There is a serious risk that citizens found guilty of nothing and charged with no crime will be paying expensive fees to petition the courts to restore what should be their constitutionally guaranteed rights. Such concerns aren’t just wild superstitions. Our nation’s history of the corrupt process of civil asset forfeiture gives ample reason to believe the aforementioned outcome is more likely than not.
If the open assault on our rights and criminal justice system wasn’t reason enough to reject red flag laws, one should note the paternalistic tone of the advocates. Proponents are selling these bills as a way to reduce suicides. But let’s take a step back and think about the core of this argument. We have authority figures claiming they need the means to deny you of your constitutional rights in order to protect you from yourself. This disturbingly authoritarian doublespeak implies that some of our elected officials believe that people can’t be trusted with their rights. This clear attempt to coax ordinary citizens into surrendering their rights should be rejected as the degradation of free society that it is.
Americans should also pay very close attention to states that have implemented these laws. In places like Maryland and Florida, success isn’t measured in lives saved. Intuitively, it’s impossible to determine how many lives were saved or if lives were ever truly at risk; thus the only practical measure of success for such a law is the number of guns seized and people denied their rights. Americans should resist the trend of assumed guilt and demand elected officials end this assault on our constitutional rights.
Raheem Williams is an active economist who has worked for numerous liberty-based academic research centers and think-tanks. He received his B.A. in economics at Florida International University and his M.A. in financial economics from the University of Detroit Mercy. He is the founder of “The Policy,” a forum that promotes public policy dialogue across socio-economic levels.
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column with images is republished with permission. Image credit: U.S. Air Force Photo/Tech. Sgt. Thomas Dow
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/gunsafe-e1550054691167.jpg425640Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2019-02-13 05:45:002019-02-13 06:14:21Red Flag Gun Laws Turn Due Process on Its Head
Rep. Roger Marshall (R-Kans.) isn’t the only one asking himself, “What’s happened to our nation when the president of the United States has to ask legislators to save babies from being murdered?” Overwhelming majorities of pro-choicers are just as startled as he is.
Too often over the past 46 years, the issue of abortion has been reduced to a political issue. Very little thought has gone into the coarsening of America’s collective conscience, which has brought us to this point today — where leaders not only look away, but advocate and defend infanticide. Fortunately, what we’ve seen in the last few weeks is that the hardening of our country’s heart hasn’t extended much beyond the party’s leaders and militant abortion activists.
When AUL and YouGov put the Democrats’ infanticide agenda before the public, Americans were universally horrified. Large majorities in the country already objected to third-trimester abortions (79 percent) and birth day abortions (80 percent) — but it was tough to find anyone who thought leaving newborns on a metal table to die was just another “personal decision” between a woman and her doctor. On the question of legal infanticide, 82 percent said absolutely not.
If those numbers don’t make Democrats cringe, maybe these will. Of “pro-choicers,” 77 percent agree with the Republicans’ push to protect abortion survivors. Another 66 percent percent aren’t on board with abortions in the third trimester, and 68 percent disagree with any law that destroy a baby on its due date. Throw in the taxpayer-funded part of these procedures — another piece of the Democratic platform — and the Left’s abortion agenda is a one-way ticket back to the political minority.
If you think I’m exaggerating, look at Governor Andrew Cuomo’s (D-N.Y.) most recent approval ratings. After eight years of high marks, the bottom is falling out for the man who made the disastrous decision to put New Yorkers at the tip of the pink spear. In the weeks since he led the charge to kill babies at the moment of birth, Cuomo’s favorability rating has taken a beating, dropping to 43 percent from 50 — the lowest ever recorded since he took office in 2011. He also had an almost double-digit decline in his performance ratings, with only 35 percent now agreeing that he’s doing an “excellent” or “good job.”
Contrast that with President Trump, who, after doubling down on the culture of life, is enjoying the highest approval rating (52 percent) since 2017. One man embraced the outer limits of abortion extremism. The other used his most important speech of the year to passionately reject it. You do the math.
Making matters worse for the Left, every day that a Republican walks to the floor of the House and demands a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is a reminder of just how fanatical Democrats are. On Monday, they got another glimpse when Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) took his turn asking for unanimous consent on the bill. He, like three Republicans before him, was denied. And while most liberals aren’t exactly knocking down the doors of the press to talk about their wildly controversial stance, some Democrats are saying enough for everyone.
“There is zero place for politicians to be involved in these very complicated medical decisions, and they should only be made between a woman and her doctor — period, full stop,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) insisted. So that’s what killing is now? A “medical decision?” Listen, if Democrats want to get the government out of the health care business, conservatives are all for it. If there’s “zero place” for Congress in medicine, then by all means — let’s do away with Obamacare, insurance regulation, health care mandates, Medicare, and Medicaid. Personal decisions shouldn’t need public funding. But that’s the hypocrisy of the Left. Democrats don’t want taxpayers to have any input in health care — they just want them to foot the bill.
To her credit, at least Gillibrand will cop to her radicalism. Others in the increasingly crowded 2020 field refuse to even talk about abortion. But they don’t have to. The Democratic platform says it all.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
EDITORS NOTE: This FRC column with images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/021219_abortion_770x400-e1550052815774.jpg370640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2019-02-13 05:13:452019-02-13 06:13:19Is the Party over for Dem Extremists?
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/rainbow-flag-1183343_1280-e1550051902730.jpg422638Bill Finlayhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBill Finlay2019-02-13 04:58:412019-02-13 06:51:33VIDEO: In The UK Misgendering Gets You Thrown in Jail -- Coming to America?
Watch the reveal of the 2019 Dirty Dozen List – which names 12 mainstream contributors to sexual exploitation in America.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/dirty-dozen.jpg419640National Center on Sexual Exploitationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngNational Center on Sexual Exploitation2019-02-12 20:01:502019-02-12 20:01:52Fight Corporate Sexploitation Now! Watch Video of 12 American Sex Exploiters
Judicial Watch presents “The Sun City Cell” – a stunning investigative documentary detailing the Narco-Terrorist Cell operating out of El Paso, Texas!
Featuring Judicial Watch’s Director of Investigations, Chris Farrell, “The Sun City Cell” exposes a chilling narco-terror plot that government officials deny.
In this 40-minute expose, you follow the trail of corruption. You see the actual court documentation. You listen up close and personal to the confidential informants. And with Chris Farrell as your guide, you follow the four-year investigation and meet the sources inside the law enforcement and government who risk their lives to get the truth to the American people.
EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch documentary with images and video is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/sun-city-center.jpg361640Judicial Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJudicial Watch2019-02-11 16:38:472019-02-11 16:38:48VIDEO: The Sun City Cell – Investigative Documentary by Judicial Watch
A verse in the Bible says, “They meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.” Who could have imagined that God would transform the following three attacks on the unborn into a blessing for the pro-life movement.
Fake news media faces a lawsuit for false reporting which caused the high-tech lynching of the Covington high school students who attended the 2019 March for Life. New York legislators gave a standing ovation to killing babies on the date of birth. The governor of Virginia sought to legalize killing babies after birth. These 3 attacks have made Americans more aware of Democrats’ culture of death and war on the unborn. Abortion is front and center on the international political stage.
Since the Roe v Wade abortion on demand decision in 1973, 60 million babies have been killed. Pro-lifers are passionately energized to challenge Roe v Wade. Praise God!
I was blown away that the majority of the estimated 300,000 who attended the 46th Annual March for Life were teens, pre-teens and millennials. It was heartwarming and encouraging to see so many young people overflowing with compassion for the unborn. They were extremely excited, upbeat and joyful about celebrating and defending babies. Many carried signs, “I am the pro-life generation.”
Every time I lament that my fellow blacks insanely support Planned Parenthood which targets black babies to kill, I’m flooded with emails from whites. “Lloyd, let blacks know Planned Parenthood was founded by rabid racist Margaret Sanger to exterminate blacks.” Frustrated, I yell at my computer. “I’ve been telling blacks the truth about Sanger and Planned Parenthood for years to no avail!”
To stop the black on black genocide via abortion, Godly black ministers put up a billboard. “The most dangerous place for an African-American is in the womb.” Guess who had a cow and demanded that the billboard be removed? The answer is Rev Al Sharpton, black civil rights organizations and Democrats. https://dailym.ai/2UJBfZS
Black civil rights leaders have betrayed their people and the legacy of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Liberalism continues to devastate the lives of black Americans. And yet, black leaders keep preaching the destructive evil religion of Liberalism to their people.
Planned Parenthood demands that women rights include mothers killing their babies for whatever reason they deem necessary before or after birth. Here is a link to a brief video of an abortion doctor explaining to congress, in graphic detail, the procedure he used to perform second trimester D&E abortions. Anyone not extremely disturbed by this video is spiritually ill.
President Trump, the most pro-life president in American history, signed legislation to empower states to defund Planned Parenthood. From day one of his presidency, Trump took action to defend the sanctity of life. He reinstated the Mexico City policy, stopping American foreign aid from going to organizations that promote or support abortion around the world.
In his speech to March for Life 2019, president Trump said, “Together we will work to save the lives of unborn children so that they have a chance to live and to love.” “Every child is a sacred gift from God.”
Trump signed a letter to congress that if they send any legislation to his desk which weakens the protection of human life, he will veto it.
Carrie Fischer was aborted in 1968. Born 6 months later, the failed abortion caused Carrie to be partially paralyzed and facially disfigured. As a little girl, 5-6-7 years old, Carrie had reoccurring dreams of a baby in a womb fighting for her life; trying to get away. Carrie said she felt the baby’s pain and heard her screams.
At age 13, Carrie learned that the baby was her. A relative told Carrie her mother tried to abort her. When Carrie confronted her mom who raised her, she confessed and wept deeply. When the abortion failed, Carrie’s mother said she was filled with regret and shame. Carrie and her mom are best friends.
Remarkably, Carrie did not suffer brain damage as doctors predicted. Due to her facial disfigurement, Carrie endured horrific bullying by students and teachers. Carrie attempted suicide. Today, Carrie is happily married. She speaks around the country. Carrie said God saved her life to be a voice for the voiceless unborn.
My friend, radio show host (Radio Patriot) Andrea Shea King shared her story with me. Pregnant and unwed at age 15, Andrea chose giving her son up for adoption rather than abortion. Forty-two years later, Andrea received a phone call from her son which led to a heartwarming reunion. Andrea met her daughter-in-law and her grand-kids. Her son is also a conservative like Andrea, his mom.
Andrea’s story inspired me to write, perform and record this song titled, “Hello Mom, It’s Me”. Please enjoy the music video.
Download the song, adding it to your play-list. Share it and encourage others to do the same, in defense of the sanctity of life. With abortion zealots outrageously seeking to legalize killing babies even after they are born, a compassionate pro-life song is needed more than ever.
EDITORS NOTE: The edited featured image is by Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/roe-v-wade.jpg361640Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2019-02-10 19:21:072019-02-10 19:22:02Are the Days of Roe v Wade Numbered?
It is not clear whether President Trump plans to declare a national emergency in order to build a physical barrier along our border with Mexico, in order to protect Americans from illegal aliens, drug traffickers, gun runners, human smugglers and other assorted criminal border jumpers.
The mainstream media has repeatedly asserted that the president does not have the authority to declare a border emergency and take the action necessary to defend the American public.
However, the media pundits would appear to be mistaken. Below, FAIR sets out the facts on the National Emergencies Act and related statutory provisions that would enable the president to accomplish what congress refuses to – place the interests of law-abiding Americans above those of law-breaking foreign nationals.
1976 National Emergencies Act (NEA) 50 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1651: This legislation specifies the manner in which the president may declare a national emergency. It also gives congress the authority to terminate a national emergency by joint resolution of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
58 national emergencies have been declared since the act was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.
31 of those national emergencies remain in effect.
An emergency declaration pursuant to the NEA does not provide any specific emergency authority on its own. Rather, it allows the president to exercise emergency authorities set forth in other statutes.
There are currently 123 distinct statutes granting the president emergency authority to respond to a wide variety of situations.
None of those statutes explicitly reference immigration. However, many of them would allow the present to implement an emergency response to migration crises involving threats to national security, public safety or public health.
As part of the emergency declaration process the president must specify which emergency authority he is invoking.
The statutes the president is most likely to invoke, upon declaring an immigration-related national emergency, are:
10 U.S. Code § 2808 – Construction Authority in the Event of A Declaration of War or National Emergency: This statute provides that, upon the President’s declaration of a national emergency, “that requires use of the armed forces,” the Secretary of Defense may “without regard to any other provision of law . . .undertake military construction projects . . . not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.”
33 U.S.C. § 2293 – Reprogramming During National Emergencies: This legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Army to terminate or defer Army civil works projects that are “not essential to the national defense” upon the declaration of a national emergency. The Secretary of the Army can then use the funds otherwise allocated to those projects for “authorized civil works, military construction, and civil defense projects that are essential to the national defense.”
According to the Congressional Research Service there are also two statutes which may allow the president to begin construction on a border wall without declaring a national emergency or obtaining congressional authorization:
10 U.S.C. § 2803 – Emergency Construction: This legislation provides that the Secretary of Defense “may carry out a military construction project not otherwise authorized by law” after determining the following: (1) “the project is vital to the national security or to the protection of health, safety, or the quality of the environment,” and (2) “the requirement for the project is so urgent that” deferring the project “would be inconsistent with national security or the protection of health, safety, or environmental quality.”
10 U.S.C. § 284 – Support for Counterdrug Activities and Activities to Counter Transnational Organized Crime: This legislation provides that the Secretary of Defense “may provide support for the counter drug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime” of any law enforcement agency, including through the “[c]onstruction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.”Should the president choose to declare an immigration-related national emergency and invoke his powers under one of the aforementioned statutes, he is sure to be challenged in court – most likely in the radical Ninth Federal Circuit – by organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union and its network of open-borders, pro-illegal-alien agitators.However, outside the Ninth Circuit, he is likely to prevail. Many prior presidents have declared national emergencies and invoked extraordinary powers in response to “crises” that were significantly less threatening than the near failure of our southern border.For now, those of us who are concerned about the integrity of America’s borders can only wait, watch and hope that our elected leaders will do the right thing and put the interests of everyday Americans above those of un-vetted border-jumpers who may present a significant threat to our country.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/border-security-petition-e1549835253744.jpg377640Federation for American Immigration Reformhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFederation for American Immigration Reform2019-02-10 16:51:372019-02-11 18:28:16Fact Sheet: National Emergencies, Military Construction Authority and the Border Barrier
EXCLUSIVE: Sign At Virginia Election Office Says, ‘Responsibility Has No Borders. Vote’
A sign at the Arlington County Department of Voter Registration and Elections office in Virginia gives immigrants a clear message: “Responsibility has no Borders. Vote.”
The sign is in a public area of the office, visible to people at the counter as they are registering to vote or voting absentee. The photo is from 2016, but it was still up in the office during the 2018 midterm election. Our tipster inquired about it and was told that it’s part of a “historical display,” whereas other authorities just ignored it and said there’s nothing that can be done about Arlington County, which describes itself as a “welcoming” but not a “sanctuary” jurisdiction for illegal immigrants.
“I’m an Arlington county election officer. Arlington County VA is essentially a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants/noncitizens. These signs are posted at the Arlington County election office. Voter fraud is more likely to take place at the time of registration rather than at the polls, in my opinion,” our tipster told Big League Politics.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/vote-1190034_640.jpg360640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2019-02-10 07:12:272019-02-10 07:13:11Is a Virginia County Inviting Non-Citizens to Vote?
At least two illegal workers formerly employed by Trump businesses will be in the House gallery for the president’s State of the Union address Tuesday night. That’s two more good reasons for Mr. Trump and Congress to insist on a mandatory E-Verify employment screening law.
Courtesy of Democrats eager to make hay over illegal aliens on the payroll at Trump’s National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., Victorina Morales and Sandra Diaz got reserved seats for the president’s speech.
The Washington Times reported last month that just five of the 565 companies in the Trump Organization were signed up for the government’s E-Verify online vetting system.
Attempting to improve the optics, the Trump companies announced they will start using E-Verify to weed out workers who are in the country illegally.
“We are actively engaged in uniforming this process across our properties and will institute E-Verify at any property not currently utilizing this system,” said Eric Trump, executive vice president of the Trump Organization.
Trump’s son blamed illegal aliens for submitting bogus paperwork that enabled them to be hired in the first place.
His concern is legitimate. Counterfeit and stolen documents are widely used by illegal aliens to secure employment under false pretenses. This makes the case for E-Verify even stronger, and Trump & Co. should have put this tool to use long before now.
“Much embarrassment for businesses and hardship for workers could be avoided if E-Verify were mandatory and only legal workers employed by all employers,” notes Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA.
Research points to E-Verify’s effectiveness, with one study finding steep declines in illegal alien populations where the program was mandated.
Indeed, E-Verify is key for any serious negotiations on immigration and border security. So it’s time for politicians on both side of the aisle to stop grandstanding and put E-Verify to work. Shut off the illegal jobs magnet, and illegal immigration will wane while American workers gain.
Bob Dane, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)’s Executive Director, has been with FAIR since 2006. His deep belief is that immigration is the most transformational determinant of where we are heading as a nation and that our policies must be reformed in the public interest. Over many years on thousands of radio, TV and print interviews, Bob has made the case that unless immigration is regulated and sensibly reduced, it will be difficult for America to reduce unemployment, increase wages, improve health care and education and heighten national security. Prior to joining FAIR, Bob spent twenty years in network radio, marketing and communications after an earlier career in policy and budgeting within the Reagan Administration. Bob has a degree from George Mason University in Public Administration and Management.
RELATED VIDEO: Ocasio-Cortez Claims The U.S. Is A “Native Land” For Latinos.
EDITORS NOTE: This column by FAIR with images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/E-verify-702x459-e1549712670554.png418640Federation for American Immigration Reformhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFederation for American Immigration Reform2019-02-09 06:44:422019-02-09 06:58:07A State Of The Union Stunt Makes The Case For E-Verify
The judge in the case said the Election Board officials who registered her “don’t know what they are doing.” Or do they?
I’ve had this story for a few days (thanks to reader Nancy), but am just getting to it because of the more pressing news from Nevada, Ohio and Virginia.
From Newsweek (I am actually surprised it is even being reported nationally!):
GREEN CARD HOLDER, 70, AVOIDS JAIL TIME AFTER VOTING ILLEGALLY THREE TIMES IN NORTH CAROLINA
A permanent resident of North Carolina will not face prison time after she was illegally allowed to vote in three separate elections.
Hyo Suk George, 70, was charged with illegal voting by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security after she reportedly voted in 2008, 2010 and 2016 in Columbus County. Instead of sentencing George to six months in prison, U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle fined George $100.
George arrived in the United States from South Korea in 1989. She got a green card in 1995 and has worked in housekeeping and the fast-food industry, her federal public defender Sherri Alspaugh said. She registered to vote “next to the senior center” after taking the advice of a town council member, according to the News & Observer. [They should be naming the town council member!]
Alspaugh said her client did not remember whether she registered at the county board or a library, but said there were likely volunteers working registration.
In his ruling, Boyle also expressed frustration toward the election board in Whiteville, North Carolina, because it allowed George to register to vote using her green card, Social Security number and driver’s license, the News & Observerreported.
“So they see a green card and say, ‘That’s OK’ because they don’t know what they’re doing,” the judge said. “They ought to be a little smarter than that.”
Boyle added that the same amount of attention that is placed on voters should be placed on educating election officials. Green cards give immigrants permanent residency in the United States but not citizenship. Only U.S. citizens are allowed to vote.
An investigation by the North Carolina Board of Elections found that 508 voters who cast ballots in the 2016 election were ineligible to vote.Of those, 441 voters were individuals serving active felony sentences. Only convicted felons who have completed their sentences are allowed to vote in North Carolina.
The election board also found that 41 noncitizens votedand 24 voters cast ballots twice. Two individuals reportedly voted using the names of family members who had recently died, the News & Observer reported at the time.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/choice-1250122_640.jpg466640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2019-02-02 06:37:262019-02-02 06:45:30A Non-citizen Who Voted in Three Elections Gets a Small Fine