Brett Kavanaugh’s Opponents Aren’t Really Against Him. They’re Against the Constitution.

/in , , , , /by

One of the best statements of how the Framers saw the role of the federal government is found in Federalist Paper 45, written by James Madison, who is known as the “Father of the Constitution”:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people.

Today’s reality is the polar opposite of that vision. The powers of the federal government are numerous and indefinite, and those of state governments are few and defined.

If confirmed, Brett Kavanaugh will bring to the Supreme Court a vision closer to that of the Framers than the vision of those who believe that the Constitution is a “living document.”

Those Americans rallying against Kavanaugh’s confirmation are really against the Constitution rather than the man—Kavanaugh—whom I believe would take seriously his oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Was Madison misinformed or just plain ignorant about the powers delegated to Congress? Before we answer, let’s examine statements of other possibly “misinformed” Americans.

In 1796, on the floor of the House of Representatives, William Giles of Virginia condemned a relief measure for fire victims, saying the purpose and the right of Congress is to attend to not what generosity and humanity require but instead what their duty requires.

In 1854, President Franklin Pierce vetoed a bill intended to help the mentally ill, writing to the Senate, “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the federal government the great almoner of public charity.” He added that to approve such spending would “be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive of the whole theory upon which the Union of these states is founded.”

President Grover Cleveland out-vetoed his predecessors by vetoing 584 acts of Congress, including many congressional spending bills, during his two terms as president in the late 1800s. His often-given veto message was, “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution.” By the way, Cleveland was a Democrat.

Were the Founding Fathers, previous congressmen, and previous presidents who could not find constitutional authority for today’s massive federal government intervention just plain stupid, ignorant, callous, and uncaring?

Article 1 of the Constitution defines the role of Congress. Its Section 8 lists powers delegated to Congress. I examined our Constitution, looking to see whether an Article 5 amendment had been enacted authorizing Congress to spend money for business bailouts, prescription drugs, education, Social Security, and thousands of other spending measures in today’s federal budget. I found no such amendment.

Contrary to what our Constitution permits, Congress taxes and spends for anything upon which it can muster a majority vote.

But I found a constitutional loophole that many congressmen use as a blank check, as well as justification to control most aspects of our lives—namely, the general welfare clause.

The Constitution’s preamble contains the phrase “promote the general Welfare,” and Article 1, Section 8 contains the phrase “provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.” What did the Framers mean by “general Welfare”?

In 1817, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated.”

Madison wrote: “With respect to the words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

Case closed: It’s our Constitution that’s the problem for leftist interventionists—not Brett Kavanaugh.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams is a columnist for The Daily Signal and a professor of economics at George Mason University. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: Democrats’ Mindless Opposition to Brett Kavanaugh

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is by Ron Sachs/Sipa/Newscom. This column originally appeared in The Daily Signal. 

Vatican Gay Lobby Exposed

/in , , , , /by

Italian Media have unearthed details of the much sought-after secret dossier compiled during the last months of Pope Benedict’s pontificate, which names various names, uncovering the homosexual network operating within the Vatican and around the globe.

These revelations now threaten to shake the Francis papacy to its very foundations.

At a time when Francis and his inner circle have already been rocked by a non-stop flow of charges that senior Church officials — including Francis himself — have covered up sexual abuse of minors and young adults abuse mostly homosexual in nature, this latest revelation drops on Rome like a nuclear explosion.

Church Militant, along with multiple media outlets, reported back in late 2012 that a 300-page dossier revealing the existence of the gay lobby had been delivered to Pope Benedict in response to what had been called the Vatileaks affair.

Three cardinals had been appointed by Benedict to get to the bottom of the leaks and during that investigation, the three cardinals came across credible information about the homosexual lobby in the Vatican and changed the direction of their report accordingly. They presented their final dossier to Pope Benedict in two red leather-bound volumes, and a few months later he resigned.

Now, almost six years later, the Italian media outfit Il Fatto Quotidiano, a respected media outlet has published a story saying they have seen the dossier and it is extensively damaging to the Pope and especially Cdl. Kevin Farrell.

Here are three quotes — translated from the original Italian by Church Militant — from the article detailing very important information about the dossier:

[A case] on the auxiliary bishop of Washington, Kevin Joseph Farrell is said to have been filed at the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith in the Vatican, at the dicastery that is responsible for investigating sexual and other crimes against good morals, which, if not rebutted, would fall squarely on the Pope like a boulder. Farrell [was] appointed directly by Bergoglio to head the Dicastery of the Family.

That, of course, would directly implicate Pope Francis in promoting yet another man into a position of power when even though he had advance knowledge of moral crimes — the first being Theodore McCarrick, who was the housemate of Cdl. Farrell when they were together in Washington, D.C.

A second quote from the Italian article:

The report contains a detailed and disturbing picture of the moral and material corruption of the clergy, with names, surnames and circumstances. We were exceptionally able to examine a document on papal letterhead contained in the investigative report, whence we here publish an excerpt: it is a list of prelates and laymen who belong to the so-called gay lobby, which, by means of blackmail and secrets, could condition, or have conditioned, positions and careers.

The article explicitly states for the first time it has been revealed on papal letterhead that the Vatican itself admits of a powerful gay lobby within its own walls.

And a third quote from the article:

If the public were to become cognizant of the content of the final report, it would be a disaster for the image of the Church, already devastated by sexual scandals throughout the whole world.  … [And now] Francis cannot even count on some of his most powerful friends and supporters, overwhelmed by sex scandals themselves or for having covered up such behavior: from McCarrick to Farrell, from Cardinal Roger Mahony to Cardinal Godfried Danneels.

When the newspaper questioned the Vatican for comment, they were told in yet another stonewalling effort from churchmen, “There will be no communication.”

To show the great fear that has gripped the Vatican as a result, consider the title of the article: “Shock in the Vatican: All the Names on the List of the Gay Lobby.”

“Pope Francis and his homosexualist cabal in Rome may begin to feel like the walls of the Vatican are starting to close in on them.” Tweet

Consider that in the space of less than three weeks, the Pope has had his former U.S. ambassador Abp. Viganò publicly testify that the Pope knew about McCarrick’s evil and lifted sanctions against him anyway; has worked quietly behind the scenes to formulate as graceful an exit plan as possible for the now disgraced Cdl. Donald Wuerl; had to, just today, announce the retirement of an American bishop credibly accused of sexual immorality; had to meet with a delegation of American cardinals and bishops today who are wanting a full-blown investigation into Viganò’s claims about the Pope and other senior churchmen.

And then, of course, this, Pope Francis and his homosexualist cabal in Rome may begin to feel like the walls of the Vatican are starting to close in on them.

It’s just after midnight in Rome right now as of this Church Militant live report, and Church Militant will have much more for you tomorrow and in the coming days on this news, which can only be classified as devastating for the Francis pontificate.

RELATED ARTICLE: Leaked German study documents thousands of sexual abuse cases – Catholic News Agency

2018 Amendments to the Florida Constitution

/in , , /by

As part of the 2018 midterm elections, Floridians will be asked to vote on thirteen amendments to the state’s constitution. Thirteen seems a lot, but it is understandable as many of them are proposed by the Constitution Revision Commission, a state commission that meets every 20 years to recommend changes, and, Yes, this is the year when they met, hence the substantial number of changes.

A copy of the amendments can be obtained from the state (click HERE), and I encourage voters to become familiar with them prior to November 6th.

The purpose of a constitution is to define the basic mechanisms of the government. For example, the U.S. Constitution defines the duties and responsibilities of the three branches of government, including voting and how to enact changes. The Bill of Rights is a separate document related to the Constitution detailing our rights. In Florida though, the state constitution is a bloated document where everything is thrown into, thereby requiring it to be updated frequently. Many of the Amendments here should be placed in a separate document or simply handled by the state assembly.

I endeavored to find out how the Democrats and Republicans feel about each issue. This was difficult as I could find no party specific recommendations. Along the way though, I discovered how many of the party officials felt and deduced their answer. Naturally, the two parties were black and white on every issue (no surprise there). The one group who was unafraid to state their position was the Florida Chamber of Commerce. Consequently, I have included their response herein.

With this said, here are the thirteen amendments, along with their sponsors and pertinent comments:

NO. 1 – BALLOT TITLE: Increased Homestead Property Tax Exemption
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, ARTICLE VII, SECTION 6, ARTICLE XII, SECTION 37
Sponsor: The Florida Legislature/House (HJR7105)

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to increase the homestead exemption by exempting the assessed valuation of homestead property greater than $100,000 and up to $125,000 for all levies other than school district levies. The amendment shall take effect January 1, 2019.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is Neutral. Conceptually, the legislation gives homeowners a tax reduction, and by doing so will result in less money for municipalities, counties and special districts.

NO. 2 – BALLOT TITLE: Limitations on Property Tax Assessments
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, ARTICLE XII, SECTION 27
Sponsor: The Florida Legislature/House (CS/HJR 21)

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to permanently retain provisions currently in effect, which limit property tax assessment increases on specified nonhomestead real property, except for school district taxes, to 10 percent each year. If approved, the amendment removes the scheduled repeal of such provisions in 2019 and shall take effect January 1, 2019.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a YES.

NO. 3 – BALLOT TITLE: Voter Control of Gambling in Florida
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, ARTICLE X, SECTION 29
Sponsor: Voters In Charge

BALLOT SUMMARY:
This amendment ensures that Florida voters shall have the exclusive right to decide whether to authorize casino gambling by requiring that in order for casino gambling to be authorized under Florida law, it must be approved by Florida voters pursuant to Article XI, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution. Affects articles X and XI. Defines casino gambling and clarifies that this amendment does not conflict with federal law regarding state/tribal compacts.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote YES, Republicans NO, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a YES. If passed, 60% of Florida voters will be needed to regulate it in the future. Is this something that really belongs in our constitution?

NO. 4 – BALLOT TITLE: Voting Restoration Amendment
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 4
Sponsor: Floridians for a Fair Democracy, Inc.

BALLOT SUMMARY:
This amendment restores the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation. The amendment would not apply to those convicted of murder or sexual offenses, who would continue to be permanently barred from voting unless the Governor and Cabinet vote to restore their voting rights on a case by case basis.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote YES, Republicans NO, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is Neutral.

NO. 5 – BALLOT TITLE: Supermajority Vote Required to Impose, Authorize, or Raise State Taxes or Fees
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, ARTICLE VII, SECTION 19
Sponsor: The Florida Legislature/House (HJR7001)

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Prohibits the legislature from imposing, authorizing, or raising a state tax or fee except through legislation approved by a twothirds vote of each house of the legislature in a bill containing no other subject. This proposal does not authorize a state tax or fee otherwise prohibited by the Constitution and does not apply to fees or taxes imposed or authorized to be imposed by a county, municipality, school board, or special district.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a YES. A YES vote means tax increases require a 2/3 approval in both the state senate and house; a NO vote means a simple majority is needed for passage.

NO. 6 – BALLOT TITLE: Rights of Crime Victims; Judges
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE I, SECTION 16, ARTICLE V, SECTIONS 8 AND 21, ARTICLE XII, NEW SECTION
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Creates constitutional rights for victims of crime; requires courts to facilitate victims’ rights; authorizes victims to enforce their rights throughout criminal and juvenile justice processes. Requires judges and hearing officers to independently interpret statutes and rules rather than deferring to government agency’s interpretation. Raises mandatory retirement age of state justices and judges from seventy to seventy-five years; deletes authorization to complete judicial term if one-half of term has been served by retirement age.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is Neutral.

NO. 7 – BALLOT TITLE: First Responder and Military Member Survivor Benefits; Public Colleges and Universities
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE IX, SECTIONS 7 AND 8, ARTICLE X, NEW SECTION
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Grants mandatory payment of death benefits and waiver of certain educational expenses to qualifying survivors of certain first responders and military members who die performing official duties. Requires supermajority votes by university trustees and state university system board of governors to raise or impose all legislatively authorized fees if law requires approval by those bodies. Establishes existing state college system as constitutional entity; provides governance structure.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is Neutral.

NO. 8 – BALLOT TITLE: School Board Term Limits and Duties; Public Schools
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE IX, SECTION 4, NEW SECTION, ARTICLE XII, NEW SECTION
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

COMMENT:
THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN STRUCK DOWN BY THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT. As such, it will not be included on the November 6th ballot.

NO. 9 – BALLOT TITLE: Prohibits Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling; Prohibits Vaping in Enclosed Indoor Workplaces
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE II, SECTION 7, ARTICLE X, SECTION 20
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Prohibits drilling for the exploration or extraction of oil and natural gas beneath all state-owned waters between the mean high water line and the state’s outermost territorial boundaries. Adds use of vapor-generating electronic devices to current prohibition of tobacco smoking in enclosed indoor workplaces with exceptions; permits more restrictive local vapor ordinances.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote YES, Republicans NO, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a NO. It is a mystery why a bill concerned with offshore drilling includes a section on e-smoking devices.

NO. 10 – BALLOT TITLE: State and Local Government Structure and Operation
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE III, SECTION 3, ARTICLE IV, SECTIONS 4 AND 11, ARTICLE VIII, SECTIONS 1 AND 6
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Requires legislature to retain department of veterans’ affairs. Ensures election of sheriffs, property appraisers, supervisors of elections, tax collectors, and clerks of court in all counties; removes county charters’ ability to abolish, change term, transfer duties, or eliminate election of these offices. Changes annual legislative session commencement date in even- numbered years from March to January; removes legislature’s authorization to fix another date. Creates office of domestic security and counterterrorism within department of law enforcement.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is Neutral.

NO. 11 – BALLOT TITLE: Property Rights; Removal of Obsolete Provision; Criminal Statutes
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, ARTICLE X, SECTIONS 9 AND 19
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Removes discriminatory language related to real property rights. Removes obsolete language repealed by voters. Deletes provision that amendment of a criminal statute will not affect prosecution or penalties for a crime committed before the amendment; retains current provision allowing prosecution of a crime committed before the repeal of a criminal statute.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a YES.

NO. 12 – BALLOT TITLE: Lobbying and Abuse of Office by Public Officers
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE II, SECTION 8, ARTICLE V, SECTION 13, ARTICLE XII, NEW SECTION
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Expands current restrictions on lobbying for compensation by former public officers; creates restrictions on lobbying for compensation by serving public officers and former justices and judges; provides exceptions; prohibits abuse of a public position by public officers and employees to obtain a personal benefit.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote NO, Republicans YES, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a NO.

NO. 13 – BALLOT TITLE: Ends Dog Racing
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION, ARTICLE X, NEW SECTION, ARTICLE XII, NEW SECTION
Sponsor: Constitution Revision Commission

BALLOT SUMMARY:
Phases out commercial dog racing in connection with wagering by 2020. Other gaming activities are not affected.

COMMENT:
Democrats will likely vote YES, Republicans NO, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a NO. Again, is this something that really belongs in our constitution? And what is next, elimination of horse racing?

As you can see, there isn’t anything here to change the basic mechanisms of our government, yet people find it necessary to put everything but the kitchen sink in there.

Keep the Faith!

What Bruce Ohr Told Congress

/in , , , /by

In case you hadn’t heard what the #4 person in Department of Justice, Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, told Congresspersons behind closed doors. The article below from Kimberley A. Strassel, one of few reliable journalists and investigative reporters while enlighten you.  Kimberley Strassel is a member of the editorial board for The Wall Street Journal. She writes editorials, as well as the weekly Potomac Watch political column, from her base in Washington, D.C.

Now what will Attorney General Jeff Sessions do with this information?

What Bruce Ohr Told Congress

He warned the FBI that Steele had credibility problems. The bureau forged ahead anyhow.

By Kimberley A. Strassel

To believe most media descriptions of Justice Department lawyer Bruce Ohr, he is a nonentity, unworthy of the attention President Trump has given him. This is remarkable, given that Mr. Ohr spent Tuesday confirming for Congress its worst suspicions about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s abuse of its surveillance and sourcing rules.

If Mr. Ohr is only now under the spotlight, it’s because it has taken so much effort to unpack his role in the FBI’s 2016 investigation of the Trump campaign. Over the past year, congressional investigators found out that Mr. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, worked for Fusion GPS, the opposition-research firm that gave its infamous dossier, funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, to the FBI. They then discovered that Mr. Ohr had numerous interactions of his own with Fusion chief Glenn Simpson and dossier author Christopher Steele, and that he passed on information from these talks to the bureau. So the G-men were being fed the dossier allegations from both the outside and the inside.

This week’s news is that Mr. Ohr’s deliveries to the FBI came with a caveat. Congress already knew that Mr. Ohr had been aware of Mr. Steele’s political biases. In notes Mr. Ohr took of a September 2016 conversation with Mr. Steele, he wrote that the dossier author “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” Congressional sources tell me that Mr. Ohr revealed Tuesday that he verbally warned the FBI that its source had a credibility problem, alerting the bureau to Mr. Steele’s leanings and motives. He also informed the bureau that Mrs. Ohr was working for Fusion and contributing to the dossier project.

Mr. Ohr said, moreover, that he delivered this information before the FBI’s first application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a warrant against Trump aide Carter Page, in October 2016. Yet the FBI made no mention of this warning in the application, instead characterizing Mr. Steele as a “reliable” source. Nor does the application note that a senior Justice Department official’s spouse was contributing to the dossier and benefiting financially from a document the FBI was using in an investigation. That matters both because the FBI failed to flag the enormous conflict and because Mr. Steele’s work product potentially wasn’t entirely his own.

Read more.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Fox News.

The Disturbing Allegiances of the Democratic Party

/in , , , , , /by

For me, writing about the terror attacks of 9/11 has become something of an annual ritual.

I don’t do this to rehash old news and old concerns but out of my burning desire to prevent future terror attacks by pointing out the vulnerabilities that undermine national security and public safety.  Those threats are as real today as they were on that sunny late summer morning 17 years ago.

Since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 I have testified before numerous Congressional hearings and provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission and have testified before state legislative hearings across the United States.

Wherever I participate in panel discussions and other public speaking engagements I am frequently asked essentially the same question by concerned members of the audience, “Are we safer today than we were on September 10, 2001?”

From the immigration perspective, my area of expertise, it is clear that we are not only not safer, but increasingly at risk.  In point of fact, today because of the Radical Leftist ideology that the Democratic Party has adopted, America’s threat level has risen precipitously.  I addressed this extreme danger in my recent article, Democrats’ Attack On ICE Agents Is Working, making more terrorism inevitable.

Let me be as clear about this as I can.  I am not being partisan, I am being pro-American!

I have been a registered Democrat for more than five decades.  The problem is that Democrats are no longer Democrats but have morphed into a political party of anarchists and seditionists.

The Democratic Party has been hijacked as certainly as were those four airliners on September 11, 2001 turning crowded passenger airliners into de facto cruise missiles.

Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States have spread across the United States like a wildfire, obstructing the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.

The official report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel noted:

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities claim to be motivated by compassion but in reality, Sanctuary Cities Protect Crooked Employers and Human Traffickers.

Leaders of the Democratic Party have only shown utter contempt and disdain for immigration law enforcement personnel, thereby endangering the agents’ safety and the safety of their families.  New York’s Governor Cuomo, has referred to ICE agents as “thugs” and has threatened to prosecute these dedicated law enforcement professionals for carrying out their lawful duties.

This also has a chilling effect, dissuading folks who have actionable intelligence from reaching out to ICE.

The second largest continence of federal agent who are assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) are the agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  This is not by chance.  Alien terrorists all violate multiple provisions of our nations immigration laws.

Now the unthinkable has happened as the “leadership” of the Democratic Party has demanded that ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) be disbanded altogether and immigration law enforcement be terminated.

I addressed this suicidal seditionist call to arms of Americans by the now radicalized Democratic Party in my recent article, Immigration Anarchists vs National Security in which I noted that Dismantling ICE would lower America’s shields in a dangerous era.

In the days, weeks and months after the attacks of 9/11 our leaders warned us that for the terrorists to succeed in carrying out deadly terror attacks in the United States they need to “Get it right” only once while our officials needed to “get it right” 100% of the time.

Beyond that slogan, that became a virtual mantra, we must understand what that really means.

There was an old humorous riddle that asked “How many fools does it take to screw in a lightbulb?”  Where terrorists are concerned the equivalent question is “How many terrorists does it take to wreck havoc on America?”  Terrorism has been defined as “asymmetric warfare.”

Terror organizations certainly do not have access to the military firepower that the United States can bring to bear.  However, as we saw on 9/11, just nineteen terrorists inflicted a greater number of casualties on the United States’ mainland than was inflicted by the Japanese fleet on the U.S. at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

Furthermore, the casualty count continues to climb and it is now estimated that more than 10,000 people continue to suffer grave consequences of the toxins that they ingested when the World Trade Center was reduced to rubble in lower Manhattan.

The horrifying reality is that every single alien who manages to enter the United States, either legally or illegally provides terrorists with that single opportunity that they need to carry out a deadly attack.

Every year tens of millions of aliens enter the United States legally and illegally.  This means that if only a fraction of 1% of the millions of aliens who enter our country annually came with the intentions of launching a massive terror attack, we are in deep trouble.

It was recently reported that last year some 700,000 nonimmigrant aliens who had been lawfully admitted through ports of entry failed to depart from the United States as required.

Annually more than 6 million applications for various immigration benefits are adjudicated by the overwhelmed and beleaguered adjurations officers of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services).  Those benefits include political asylum, the conferring of lawful immigrant status and conferring U.S. citizenship upon resident aliens via the naturalization process.

The 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, warned that immigration fraud was the key method of entry and embedding for terrorists.  These cases are investigated by ICE and are a component of what is known as “interior enforcement” of our immigration laws.

9/11 and  Terrorist Travel reported:

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

Therefore, each time an alien is granted any immigration benefit or even is able to file for such a benefit, terrorists among them may acquire that opportunity essential for them to be able to launch a deadly attack.

If only a fraction of one percent of the six million applicants for immigration benefits are terrorists, we are indeed in deep trouble.

Yet the leadership of the Democratic Party not only refuses to fund the construction of a wall to secure the southern border to the United States but has demanding that the agency charged with enforcing our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) be totally disbanded and enforcement of our immigration laws be terminated.

Let’s briefly consider more recent developments.

On November 20, 2013 ABC News reported, “Exclusive: US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.”  This is not a new problem, on July 13, 2011 the Washington Times published a truly disturbing article, “Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”

On September 2, 2014 ABC News reported, “Lost in America: Visa Program Struggles to “Track Missing Foreign Students.”

Here is how this report began:

The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished — exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

“My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything,” said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. “Some of them could be here to do us harm.”

My recent articles highlighted several cases involving alien terrorists who were fortunately arrested before they could do harm.

Here are a few of those articles that provide unequivocal evidence of the severity of the threats of terrorism that America and Americans face:

Iranian Agents charged With Targeting U.S. Locations: Sleeper agents/assassins in our midst?

Somali Refugees Busted In Tucson:  Immigration fraud is at the heart of a terror case . . . again.

Jihadis And Drug Cartels At Our Border: A nightmare on the horizon.

Saudi Graduate Of Al Qaeda Terror Training Camp Arrested In Oklahoma: Alleged classmate of 9/11 hijackers attended US flight school in 2016.

The Democratic Party leadership has chosen sides.  They stand with transnational gangs and international terrorist organizations.  They stand with human traffickers and crooked employers.

Elections most certainly have consequences, arguably more so this year than any year since the founding of our great nation.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Illegal immigrant families exploit ‘catch-and-release’ loopholes, surge over border at record levels

Illegal immigrants cited in theft of 39 million Social Security numbers

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Department of Homeland Security officers watching members of Occupy ICE, a group set on disrupting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, outside the ICE offices in New York City, June 25, 2018. Photo by REUTERS/Brendan McDermid.

VIDEO: Do you know what they did to me in prison?

/in , , , , /by

Citizen of Great Briton Tommy Robinson sent out the below exclusive interview with TheRebel.media’s Ezra Levant in a email:

Robinson wrote:

In May, I was thrown in prison for 13 months for contempt of court, because I reported the news from outside a Muslim rape gang trial in Leeds.

In August, after I served two and a half months in solitary confinement, the Court of Appeal threw out that conviction and set me free, because of outrageous errors made by the judge in Leeds.

But I’ve never told anyone the full story of what happened that day in Leeds, after I was thrown in the back of a police van, and driven away.  

But now I want to tell you everything — from the kangaroo court hearing, to being sent to prison in Hull, to being transferred to HMP Onley, the prison with the highest Muslim population of any C-category prison in the UK. 

It’s the most candid interview of my life. And you can watch it here:

I describe things I haven’t told anyone before:

  • how a Muslim terrorist named Sayful Islam sent a threat to my prison door
  • how I was transferred to a dangerous prison run by Muslim gangs, and I was called “racist” when I complained
  • how I was “arrested” in prison for criticizing Islam
  • how I was put in a wire cage, and not allowed to exercise, visit the prison church or meet other prisoners
  • how prison starved me, and refused to let me buy more than one can of tuna a day (from my own money)
  • what I wrote in a letter to my wife and children — a letter prison guards seized, and wouldn’t deliver
  • and so much more.

The facts in this interview — and the documents I show on screen — will outrage you. The only consolation I take from this whole situation is that seeing it unfold has made many more people speak up. Our support grows, and we are succeeding in winning peoples’ hearts and minds.

Please watch my interview here, and share it with your friends and family. Post it on social media. Tell your friends about it.

It’s not just my story — it’s your story, too.

Yours truly,

Tommy Robinson

P.S. As I explain in the interview, the Attorney General insists on sending me back to trial again for contempt of court. Unfortunately, that means I have to hire my lawyers again, and I’ve just received a new invoice from them for tens of thousands of pounds.

That’s part of the government’s plan to break me — physically, psychologically and financially.

Your continued support is what drives me on. Please click here to help if you can — thank you.

P.P.S. Thank you for your support. Over the past month, I’ve been working on my plans for the future. I’ll let you know about my next steps soon!

RELATED ARTICLE: Tommy Robinson’s wife threatened with acid attack, police warn her ‘not to break the law’ if attacked.

Sheriff Makes Secret Deal with ACLU to Stop Detaining Illegal Immigrants

/in , , , , , , /by

A federal appellate court just heard oral arguments involving an outrageous backdoor deal in which a county sheriff promises a leftwing civil rights group to stop detaining illegal immigrants. The case comes out of Marion County Indiana where an illegal alien, Antonio Lopez-Aguilar, was arrested by local law enforcement after a traffic court hearing in Indianapolis.

At the time the Marion County Sheriff’s Office had an agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to hold suspects in the U.S. illegally like Lopez-Aguilar until federal officers pick them up for processing.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Marion County Sheriff to end the local-federal detainer policy that is practiced by law enforcement agencies nationwide and has led to the removal of countless violent criminals living in the country illegally. The ACLU asserts that ICE uses the detainers to “bully local authorities into imprisoning immigrants, many of whom have done nothing wrong, and funneling them into deportation proceedings.”

Lopez-Aguilar was held in jail and funneled into deportation proceedings solely on the basis of a “detainer request” from ICE, according to the ACLU. “In addition to violating immigrants’ basic constitutional rights, this kind of cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities also undermines public safety,” the group claims. “If immigrants are reluctant to show up in court or report a crime out of fear they may be deported, everyone will be less safe.”

The Marion County Sheriff’s Office caved into the ACLU’s demands by agreeing to stop detaining illegal immigrants for the federal government. Under the deal’s terms, the agency won’t seize or detain suspects based on requests from ICE or deportation orders from an immigration court.

The feds must provide a warrant signed by a judge or demonstrate probable cause the immigrant committed a crime. This sort of intimate arrangement between a local law enforcement agency and a private group to skirt federal law seems incredulous. To be fair, a local newspaper reported that the sheriff’s office made the deal to avoid the costly legal expenses of fighting it.

“Court documents filed by city attorneys cited the cost of litigation as motivation to end a lawsuit the ACLU filed in September after an Indianapolis man living in the country illegally was detained after a hearing in traffic court,” the article states.

Fortunately, the state got involved and filed an appeal to reverse the scandalous agreement which was approved by a federal judge in the southern district of Indiana last year. Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill says the decree runs counter to Indiana law and public safety. “Our nation’s immigration laws are put in place to protect the public,” Hill said in a statement last year when his office filed the appeal.

“Establishing a policy that requires law enforcement personnel to not cooperate with each other not only violates Indiana law but jeopardizes public safety.” Last week the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments from the state and the ACLU, which is trying to keep the state from intervening by arguing that it is barred from doing so on procedural grounds. A three-judge panel heard oral arguments in Chicago on Friday.

The attorney representing Indiana taxpayers, Solicitor General Thomas Fisher, told the court that “when there is a specific request from ICE to detain a person,” state law “requires that kind of cooperation.” In 2011 Indiana passed a measure prohibiting the implementation of any policies that restrict local law enforcement agencies from cooperating with federal immigration authorities. The ACLU-Marion County Sheriff agreement violates that state law, Fisher argued before the appellate court.

The ACLU also sued Indiana years ago over the immigration control law, claiming that it’s discriminatory, unconstitutional and unlawfully interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters. The group claims that the law marginalizes entire communities and undermines our most cherished constitutional safeguards by putting Indiana residents at risk of unlawful warrantless arrests without any suspicion of wrongdoing.

RELATED ARTICLE: Flashback: 9/11 ‘Mastermind’ Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Given U.S. Visa Weeks Before Terrorist Attacks.

Tom Fitton: ‘FBI has Contempt for the Rule of Law’ (VIDEO)

/in , , , /by

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton appeared on “Outnumbered Overtime” on the Fox News Channel to discuss newly revealed text messages between fired FBI official Peter Strzok and former FBI attorney Lisa Page.

RELATED ARTICLE: Judicial Watch: Justice Department Discloses No FISA Court Hearings Held on Carter Page Warrants

How Louisiana Stood Up to the Anti-Gun Corporate Elite

/in , , , /by

The state of Louisiana recently held some members of the corporate social police accountable for discriminating against law-abiding Americans.

By a vote of 7-6, the State Bond Commission excluded Citigroup and Bank of America from the running for a lucrative state contract. Our reason for doing so: these corporations had introduced bank policies that restrict legal access to firearms and bank misrepresentations on those policies.

While our governor and his allies sided with these anti-gun corporations, conservatives stood together to protect the Second Amendment rights of Louisiana citizens.

Citigroup and Bank of America’s policies were grotesque attempts to capitalize on the tragedy in Parkland, Florida. In the wake of the tragedy, they proudly and publicly announced plans to restrict the distribution, manufacture, and purchase of firearms.

When called to task by our commission this past spring, these “too big to fail” companies asserted that they had no policies restricting the availability of firearms to law-abiding citizens.

When asked to defend these positions a second time, Citigroup and Bank of America then attempted to convince us their policies would have minimal effects on Louisianans, stressing that they were specifically tailored to either a particular age group or class of firearm.

This type of double-speak is not uncommon in today’s liberal corporate culture. Banks, airlines, tech firms, and many other corporations have tried to cash in on easy public relations wins by appeasing outraged activists so that “news” outlets like CNN and MSNBC will applaud their actions.

Fortunately, our commission did not fall for the trap. Instead, we fought back—something other government entities would be wise to do.

The clear disconnect between the banks’ policies and their likely effects shows exactly how little these companies care for our Second Amendment rights. Such casual dismissal of our cherished rights and values should not be minimized or dismissed.

Recently, the people of my state directly and overwhelmingly approved the strongest possible constitutional protection of our gun rights. The constitutional amendment states that “the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right and any restriction of that right requires the highest standard of review by a court.”

I intend to continue upholding that duty and fighting boardroom elitists who seek to use their power to undermine our constitutional rights.

I have not and will not allow their public virtue signaling to even nominally affect the ability of Louisiana citizens to enjoy their Second Amendment rights. I am proud of our majority on the Louisiana Bond Commission who saw these policies for what they are.

I hope others will follow our example and hold these companies accountable for the full extent of their actions, especially those that restrict Americans’ exercise of their right to defend themselves and their families.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Jeff Landry

Jeff Landry

Jeff Landry is the attorney general for Louisiana. Twitter: .

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Shreveport, Louisiana is by Sean Pavone/Getty Images.

VIDEO: Dianne Feinstein’s Failed Logic on ‘Assault Weapons’ During Kavanaugh Hearing

/in , , , , , /by

“Dianne Feinstein was trying to claim that Kavanaugh was somehow wrong to suggest that these weapons aren’t unusual since there are millions and millions of people who own them… It was horrible logic from a woman who once held a press conference with Michael Bloomberg wherein they pointed all of the barrels at the press.” — Dana Loesch

Levi’s Teams with Billionaire Michael Bloomberg to Attack Gun Rights

/in , , , /by

Levi Strauss & Co. established its brand in the mid-19th century by selling durable clothing to working-class Americans. As Levi’s signature jeans gained popularity amongst a wider set in the middle of the last century, the pants came to symbolize American freedom. As Stanford Historian Niall Ferguson points out in his book, Civilization: The West and the Rest, during the Cold War, the American pants were so desirable behind the Iron Curtain that citizens would break any number of laws to obtain them. At one point the company even celebrated America’s armed heritage in a circa 1950 advertising brochure, “Levi’s Gallery of Western Guns & Gunfighters.” It’s with some irony then that Levi’s has abandoned this rugged image to team up with a billionaire oligarch in an effort to empower the government to trample upon the fundamental rights of the American people.

On September 4th, Levi’s CEO Chip Bergh announced that the San Francisco-based clothing manufacturer (which also owns Dockers) would openly advocate for gun control. As part of this campaign, the company will donate more than $1 million to radical anti-gun groups, including Michael Bloomberg front-group Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords, formerly Americans for Responsible Solutions and the Legal Community Against Violence. The company will also match employee donations to these groups and is encouraging its staff to devote their time to anti-gun activism.

Further, Bergh stated that the company has joined the Everytown Business Leaders for Gun Safety. The business wing of Bloomberg’s outfit is dedicated to leveraging member companies’ “market footprint… employee networks, [and] public communications platforms” to diminish Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

In a repulsive insult to the nation’s 100 million gun owners, Bergh likened Levi’s campaign to restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans to previous company efforts aimed at combatting pre-Civil Rights Era racial bigotry.

Among gun owners, Levi’s intemperate foray into the world of gun control politics has been met with the disgust it deserves. However, it shouldn’t be met with surprise.

Since the late 1990s, Levi’s has used its name and resources to attack gun rights. In 1999, the company gave $100,000 to gun control group PAX, followed by a $250,000 donation in 2000 and another $100,000 in 2001.

PAX was founded in 1998 by Dan Gross, who went on to become president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. PAX would go on to change its name to the Center to Prevent Youth Violence and later merge with the Brady Campaign.

Much like Bloomberg’s Everytown, PAX placed an emphasis on attracting corporate partners to their gun control efforts. As part of Levi’s relationship with PAX, in 1999 the apparel company teamed up with the band Goo Goo Dolls to attract support for the anti-gun group during the Levi’s Fuse ’99 summer concert tour. Concert goers, and visitors to Levi’s website, were encouraged to sign the PAX Youth Petition. Moreover, the denim company donated a percentage of all Levi’s Fuse ’99 t-shirt proceeds to the gun control group.

The PAX Youth Petition endorsed a variety of severe gun control measures that have repeatedly been rejected by the American public through their elected representatives. The document called for the “licensing and registration of guns, like automobiles.” The petition also demanded the “elimination of assault weapons and other weapons of war.” As the 1994 Clinton “Assault Weapons” ban was in place at the time of the petition, this imprecise demand appeared to call for prohibiting the sale of the remaining lawful semi-automatic firearms, confiscation of the firearms grandfathered under the ban, or both.

Given the majority of Levi’s 165-year history, Bergh’s decision to use a formerly-quintessential American company to attack a quintessential American right is a particularly sad episode in the current surge in corporate virtue-signaling. We can only assume that Levi’s accountants have determined that resulting skinny jeans sales will be enough to offset the permanent damage to their once-cherished brand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pro-2A Student Shuts Down Anti-Gun Syllabus

Oregon Teen Shoots Down Discriminatory Walmart Gun Policy

Anti-gun Senator Distorts the Law and the Facts in Unsuccessful Attack on Supreme Court Nominee

Giffords’ Gun Control Activists Plot Rollout of Next Generation Firearm Restrictions

VIDEO: Cory Booker is No Martyr. He’s a Self-Serving Narcissist.

/in , , , , /by

“Cory Booker tries to be a martyr by releasing an email chain that he believes implicates Judge Kavanaugh in racial profiling. The email chain—Booker says is classified. He says, ‘I’m willing to take the punishment for releasing this classified information.’ What Booker’s not telling you is that the email chain was declassified the night before. And he knew it!” —Dan Bongino

VIDEO: Corrupt, Top to Bottom

/in , , , , /by

RELATED ARTICLE: Four States Seek Sexual Abuse Records from ALL Catholic Dioceses

TRANSCRIPT

What’s coming to light in view of all this non-stop scandal is just how corrupt the institutional Church has become. From top to bottom, a culture of secrecy, non-transparency, non-accountability, vengeance, careerism, egoism, have all contributed to a massive massive crisis of faith in the Church.

Too many leaders simply do not care about the Faith as they do about non-faith matters.

As we have highlighted for years in The Vortex, much of that corruption has been placed at the service of advancing the notion that sodomy is a good thing. A cone of silence simply drops over practically everything going on that is evil, and almost no leaders feel the slightest sense of accountability for their actions.

For good faithful Catholics, this is frustrating and even maddening. But faithful Catholics are about as numerous as snowflakes in Hell. Most Catholics are not faithful. Most Catholics don’t know the first thing about the Faith.

Likewise most people looking at the Church from the outside and considering converting would do so why? Sure, you will encounter every now and then the man of good will who can look past the horrors of the headlines and still see the Bride of Christ. But many people, because of where they are in their lives, cannot. These horrors are truly stumbling blocks for them.

So fighting this evil — out in the open — is a matter of charity.

But it is also a matter of justice. So many have been abused — physically, spiritually or emotionally — that justice must be satisfied to whatever degree possible in this life. The entire world operates like this. Why should corrupt churchmen think the rules of charity and justice should apply differently when applied to them?

They should apply more stringently in fact when it comes to successors of the Apostles.

In fact, most of these men should be behind bars, but they get to hide behind privacy and secrecy because the culture of corruption is so institutionalized that there is no way to breach the wall.

Look for example at Bp. Cistone in Saginaw hiding and promoting predatory priests like Robert DeLand, who by way of an update, will be sentenced next month for going after young males — did you hear that Cupich? — young males who were not minors — homosexual stuff.

Or Bp. Richard Malone, who admits he “fell short” — his words — but refuses to resign in the face of reassigning predator priests like Dennis Riter, another homosexual predator — again, Cupich, are you listening — you who claim this isn’t a gay thing?

Whether these men should be gone should in no way be left to them. The Pope should sack them immediately. But see, all credibility is destroyed when the Pope himself refuses to answer charges against him and just steps beneath that cone of silence.

All the bad bishops — and they are legion — simply take their cues from him in this regard.

Robert McElroy in San Diego has offered zero comment on the charge that he was told about McCarrick raping seminarians years in advance. Donald Wuerl has still offered zero comment on his role in moving around and protecting predator priests while he was in Pittsburgh — that in addition to lying about not knowing anything about McCarrick.

Bishop after bishop is simply shredding the Church to pieces and it is only when they are shamed or criminally accused that they say anything, and then it’s written by lawyers.

Look at Cdl. Sean O’Malley and his lawyer-crafted statement that he “never personally received” the letter about McCarrick’s homosexual predation, carefully avoiding whether he knew the content.

Even now, after having been sent a complete dossier on the South American gay pipeline into U.S. seminaries, not a peep. Same with the current nuncio, Christophe Pierre, who received the same dossier — nothing, no admittance whatsoever.

What about Bp. Henry Mansell who, as bishop of Hartford, actually went on to knowingly ordain a number of men kicked out of Holy Apostles Seminary for homosexual activity — zero accountability.

These men and dozens and dozens of others of them do whatever the Hell they want with complete disregard for the faithful, and they live under that cone of silence promoting their gay agenda — yes gay agenda, Cupich — not clericalism.

Even the attitude so many of them adopt that they are princes entitled to use the money of the faithful for their own personal gain.

Atlanta Abp. Wilton Gregory was having a multi-million dollar palace built for himself until the press exposed it, and then he admits he wasn’t plugged in enough to the appearance this would create. Well, if you’re that out of touch, then you shouldn’t be a bishop.

Or the bishop of San Jose, Patrick McGrath, who just this week had to cancel plans for his $2.3 million retirement house when again the press exposed it.

Or the palatial penthouse Donald Wuerl lives in in the swankiest neighborhood in Washington, D.C. And for the record, who’s paying the $50–75 thousand bill each month for his PR legal team at Jones Day, or his first class seats back and forth to Rome at the drop of a hat?

Too many of these men think they are something special and are entitled to do whatever they want — and you pay for it.

The laity is sick of paying for your negligence and corruption and evil. You all accept responsibility in statement after statement — again, only as the final, last, absolute resort after being exposed and having no more options, but then the natural results of accepting responsibility — which should be the end of your careers — never happens.

Anyone can accept responsibility for anything if there are no consequences for being responsible. This elevates the era of corruption in the Church to a whole new plane because after having been exposed, still nothing happens, starting with the Pope and all the way down.

Meanwhile, the advancement of the gay revolution in the Church, which is what this is all about — regardless of what lying Cupich says — moves along unabated.

And for the record, Cupich, those two priests having sex with each other down in Miami in the car who got arrested — those were your priests. Good thing it is not a gay thing?

If you are a Catholic and not boiling over with justified anger, then something’s wrong.

People — souls — have been ruined, destroyed by these men and are still being destroyed. No Catholic gets to sit on the sidelines for this one.

Say a prayer for the Church right now, before you do another thing, that these men be cast down from their offices so that the work of restoring the Church can begin.

Foreign Nationals Who Were Indicted for Illegally Voting Still on North Carolina’s Voter Rolls

/in , , , , , /by

Foreign nationals who were indicted on Aug. 24 for allegedly voting illegally in North Carolina are still on the voter rolls and officials are struggling to take them off.

Eighteen of the 19 individuals who allegedly voted illegally had registered at local Department of Motor Vehicle locations, according to The Washington Times Monday. Four were registered as Republicans, one unaffiliated, and 13 as Democrats.

dcnf-logo

One of the indicted, Elvis David Fullerton, voted in 16 elections over nearly two decades, according to the Times. Many voted on or before Nov. 8, 2016, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

Wake County election officials could not investigate the people who allegedly voted illegally until an “official or formal source” provided notification, according to Wake County Board of Elections Director Gary Sims, the Times reported. The elections board said it will be able to investigate if the Department of Justice provides information on individuals convicted of voter fraud or the indicted admit they are not citizens.

Logan Churchwell of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an organization that focuses on election laws, said election officials need to be more proactive in stopping illegal voting. However, he said officials were in a tough position.

“Federal law did not anticipate this kind of fraud,” Churchwell told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Officials in Wake County may not have the tools to fix the voter registration system or may be “hindered by outdated and increasingly bad laws,” he added.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation wrote in its study “Safe Spaces” that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act makes it easier for noncitizens to register to vote because there are no other verification systems required to be in place.

The National Voter Registration Act was an initiative to ease voter registration and maintenance, according to the DOJ. People could register to vote at the same time they applied or renewed driver’s licenses.

“If a noncitizen checks ‘Yes’ to the citizenship question in any setting, they are simply enrolled without any further verification, even if they presented a Green Card or foreign passport to identify themselves at the time of registration,” the Public Interest Legal Foundation study said.

The August 2018 study looked into noncitizen voting in 13 sanctuary cities and counties across the nation. Over 3,100 noncitizens were registered to vote or were taken off of voter rolls between 2006 and 2018.

Fairfax County in Virginia topped the list of noncitizens removed from voter rolls with 1,334 people.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation’s suggestions to decreasing noncitizenship voter registration included election officials having access to E-Verify and officials being able to enforce immigration and voting laws.

The study also proposed that states check the citizenship status for new voter registrants through other state databases like a driver’s license customers list. Arizona and Virginia currently employ this system.

“This reform places no upfront burden on new registrants,” the study said.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation uncovered some of the indicted voters in North Carolina, according to the Times.

The 19 who were indicted could face a maximum fine of $350,000 and six years in prison, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina reported.

“The State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement is printing signs to be placed at all polling places and early voting sites in the 2018 general election with the goal of notifying individuals who are not eligible to vote before they cast ballots,” Patrick Gannon, public information officer for the North Carolina State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement, said in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

A spokesperson from the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles told The Daily Caller News Foundation the DMV does not register voters and that people apply to register to vote.

EDITORS NOTE: Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org. Photo: fstop123/Getty Images.

A Banner Day for Texas Cheerleaders!

/in , , /by

At Friday’s football game, the people of Kountze, Texas will really have something to cheer about. Late last week, after a six-year struggle, the Texas Supreme Court finally put an end to the debate over Bible verses on high school rally banners. It had been a long haul for the families of Kountze, but the seven cheerleaders of 2012 who fought the suit were right: they can do all things through Christ who strengthens them.When the superintendent caved to the bullying tactics of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, the cheerleaders and their parents took a stand. Soon, this little town was at the center of a big debate over religious liberty. So big, it turns out, that even former Governor Rick Perry and then-Attorney General Greg Abbott weighed in. In an odd twist, the district fought to keep the challenge alive — even after local courts gave the cheerleaders the green light. That was probably the most infuriating part of the case, at least for local families — that the district is consciously funneling money away from education to fuel this gratuitous attack on faith.

First Liberty Institute represented the seven cheerleaders who made the signs, and the group’s Hiram Sasser celebrated that the journey had finally come to a successful end. “As the football season kicks off across Texas,” he told Fox News’s Todd Starnes, “it’s good to be reminded that these cheerleaders have a right to religious speech on their run-through banners — banners on which the cheerleaders painted messages they chose, with paint they paid for, on paper they purchased.”

The cheerleaders who fought back, including Rebekah Richardson who I profiled in my book No Fear, have long since left Kountze High. But the legacy of courage they left behind is something the whole town can be proud of. Because of them, generations of cheerleaders and students will be able to exercise their faith. Sometimes standing up for what you believe in takes time before it pays off. But the lesson here is as clear as it was when I talked to Rebekah in the beginning. If your conviction is rooted in your love for Jesus and obedience to His Word, then you’ve already won — no matter what the earthly outcome.

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Left Rushes to Judge Kavanaugh

Americans on Nike Deal: Just Boo It