By: Doug Ross
Doug Ross @ Journal
For those who are wondering how Barack Obama — a man seemingly engaged in full-time campaigning, fundraising and rabble-rousing — could also have the bandwidth to weaken America both at home and abroad, the answer is really quite simple.
The leader of the free world is actually a woman named Valerie Jarrett, a longtime crony of Barack and Michelle Obama, who appears to call all of the shots in the Oval Office.
In the White House, Jarrett has been linked to a wide variety of scandals and other policy debacles.
There are credible reports that Jarrett blocked the attack on Osama Bin Laden’s compound on three separate occasions.
Similar reports indicate that she gave the “stand down” order to would-be rescuers in Benghazi on 9/11/2012.
Thanksgiving is over; now it’s time for Christmas. Here’s the spirit:
On a tip from Merchant of Venom.
Conservatives are not split as to whether or not Obama and his ministers have committed high crimes.
We are split over what to do about it. There is no question Obama has gathered arbitrary powers within the executive branch to make, ignore, modify congressional statutes at his whim. His administrative agencies, a shadow army of lawgivers whose identities (sans Gruber) are kept quiet and out of public view, issue dozens of unconstitutional and imperial diktats every year.
OTOH, what is certain is that impeachment of American presidents is unfortunately an historic rarity.
Taken all together, impeachment is largely viewed as a losing proposition, because despite his clear guilt, it is assumed no rat senators will cross over to convict. Modern party discipline, especially among rats, combined with the Obama news cycle is enough to instill outright terror in the hearts of those who fear doing the right thing. By this theory, impeachment will only strengthen the rats at the expense of the GOP.
So what? To be concerned with the health of either party is to lose sight of the objective, turning back tyranny and restoring freedom. The real issue that conservatives should ponder is which alternative, impeachment or no, best serves republican freedom, our freedom.
What are the downwind ramifications of letting Obama and his ministers get away once again? Amnesty is merely the last in a long list of Obama high crimes which began right away in 2009.
Is he to have two more unchallenged years?
It isn’t enough to jab the American worker in the eye with a sharp stick. Obama has to give the stick an extra twist:
Under the president’s new amnesty, businesses will have a $3,000-per-employee incentive to hire illegal immigrants over native-born workers because of a quirk of Obamacare.
President Obama’s temporary amnesty, which lasts three years, declares up to 5 million illegal immigrants to be lawfully in the country and eligible for work permits, but it still deems them ineligible for public benefits such as buying insurance on Obamacare’s health exchanges.
Under the Affordable Care Act, that means businesses who hire them won’t have to pay a penalty for not providing them health coverage — making them $3,000 more attractive than a similar native-born worker, whom the business by law would have to cover. …
A Department of Homeland Security official confirmed that the newly legalized immigrants won’t have access to Obamacare, which opens up the loophole for employers looking to avoid the penalty.
That will teach American voters for soundly rejecting Obama’s party in this month’s elections. As Obama’s fellow left-wing Democrat once said,
Lawbreakers always go straight to the front of the line under a kakistocracy run by the moral dregs of society.
This will matter more than ever as Obama’s global warming decrees make job openings ever more scarce.
Now that President Barack Obama has granted legal relief to as many as 5 million unauthorized immigrants, Republicans are thrashing about for an effective response. Only a few hard-liners are talking about impeachment now, but more could join them out of frustration with their other options.
Many people in both parties have tried to quell such talk by saying the president is within his powers to issue the order. The problem is the pro-impeachment Republicans are right: There is a plausible case for taking that step.
By constitutional design, impeachment for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” is a political accusation and initiates a political remedy, not a legal one. It is pretty much up to Congress to define and apply “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and no court would second-guess it. The next Congress could find that the president had violated his oath to “faithfully execute” the laws by refusing to enforce important provisions of the Affordable Care Act, No Child Left Behind and, now, the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The president surely has some power to withhold prosecution, but granting legal status and work permits to millions of people most likely exceeds his discretion. No judge can decide the precise scope of his discretion because no one, including Congress, has legal standing to challenge his order in court.
Of course, many lawyers at the Justice Department and elsewhere disagree, noting that prosecutorial discretion is pervasive, that there isn’t enough money to prosecute all violators, that the president will continue to prosecute criminals and illegal border crossers, and that earlier presidents have done the same thing. These are serious arguments. But as an immigration and administrative law teacher who strongly favors more legal immigration and even broader legislative relief than Obama’s order grants….
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com …
Accuracy in Media
Editor’s Note: By Roger Aronoff
The report released last Friday on the September 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has once again brought to the surface this story that will not go away. Not, certainly, until those responsible are held accountable, and a truthful and accurate version of events and motivations in the months and days leading up to this tragic chapter in American history has been established.
The media embraced the report as bipartisan vindication of what the Obama administration has argued: Namely that yes, mistakes were made, we did everything we could to protect our people, and have put into place remedies, and changes in policies, so that nothing like this happens again. But the evidence and the testimony say otherwise.