Category Archives: Immigration

The Amazing Presidential Power-Grab (And Disregard for Rule of Law – He Makes Up His Own)

Posted on by
2

By Kyle Stone via The American Thinker

With  little consternation or lasting opposition, the Obama administration has  dramatically usurped congressional power at the expense of popular will and the rule of law.  Numerous dastardly bureaucratic coups — motivated by the  president’s progressive and political agenda — have amazingly failed to  engender a serious response.

What  began as a trickle of presidential power-grabs has turned into a cascade of  executive roguery.  A list of them is worth some review and  reflection:

  •   In June 2012, President Obama circumvented Congress’s refusal to pass the DREAM  Act by instituting a portion of it on his own. Through executive order, the  administration has directed federal officers to no longer deport large swathes  of younger illegal immigrants, with an inclusive  net that could impact over a million. Conservative sage Charles Krauthammer summed  it up pithily: “This is out-and-out lawlessness. You had a clip of the president  himself say[ing] months ago, ‘I cannot do this on my own because there are laws  on the books.’ Well, I have news for the president — the  laws remain on the books. They haven’t changed.”
  •   Earlier this month, the Obama administration quietly stripped away a central  component of the 1996 bipartisan welfare reform act — the lynchpin work  requirements — passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by President  Clinton. The regulations allow states to  substitute education programs as “work” for their residents to enjoy welfare  benefits. Self-described “neo-liberal” pundit Mickey Kaus reacted  to the “surprising (and possibly illegal) attempt to grant waivers of the work  requirements” as follows:

A  great deal of effort was put into defining what qualified as work, and making  sure that work actually meant work and not the various BS activities (including  BS training activities) the welfare bureaucracies often preferred to substitute  for work[.] … To the extent the administration’s action erodes the actual and  perceived toughness of the work requirements, which it does, it sends the  opposite and wrong signal.

In  effect, the administration is taking the teeth out of the reform.  So long  as states believe that new methods might achieve employment goals in the long run, the feds can approve the  changes, and those not working can enjoy sustained welfare benefits.  All  this without consulting those charged with actually making  law.

  •   The so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA) is one mammoth legislative concession to  executive-branch lawmaking. The Act is hardly a law at all, but rather a series  of directives and mandates, providing the secretary of HHS (i.e., the Obama  administration) immeasurable power in implementing the Act’s policy aims. One  example from earlier this year is the HHS religious mandate, requiring employers  to include abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception in their  employee health insurance. The regulation  applies to religious institutions like Catholic hospitals, schools, and  charities — regardless of whether these institutions object to such services on  moral grounds. Want to find the portion of the 2,700-page bill that deals with  this issue? Good luck. It’s not there.
  •   Less publicized examples are numerous. The Wall Street Journal‘s  Kimberly Strassel, in a recent superb  column, outlined a laundry list a few weeks ago:

o   The president opposes a federal law  criminalizing medical marijuana.  No problem — he merely instructed his  Justice Department not to prosecute violators.

o   He disapproves of the federal Defense  of Marriage Act.  No need to work with Congress on repealing it — he  merely stopped defending it in court.

o   With no love for the federal No Child  Left Behind Act, he ordered his Education Department to issue waivers “that are  patently inconsistent with the statute.”

o   Congress falls  short of passing cap-and-trade?  The administration had the Environmental  Protection Agency enforce something similar though unilateral  regulations.

o   Congress demurred in taking up “net  neutrality” internet regulations, so the president’s Federal Communications  Commission did it instead.

This  list could go on.

When  presidents past overstepped constitutional or statutory boundaries, the Fourth  Estate would lecture on “imperial” presidencies.  For President Obama,  however, the media’s progressive core prompts compliments of bravery and  perseverance, while journalistic duty turns a blind eye to procedural  lawlessness.  One wonders what their reaction would have been had President  George W. Bush and his administration acted similarly.

Politically  combatting this lawlessness is difficult, as a public debate about procedural  malfeasance invariably morphs into disputes of the substantive policy itself.   Attempts to highlight procedural strong-arming are blurred by political  attacks — “wars” on women, immigrants, the poor, and the like.  It may  also be said by political strategists that when one argues about procedure, he  has already lost the policy debate.

Political  challenges, however, are no excuse for allowing this administration to peel away  constitutional checks and balances.  A coordinated effort by conservative  and Republican (big “R” and small) causes must be brought to bear to inform the  voting public on these knavish executive end-runs.  John Adam famously  warned that our Constitution sought “a government of laws and not of men.”   Process matters.  Our constitutional framework depends on  it.

Kyle  Stone is a practicing attorney in Chicago, co-chair of Maverick  PAC Chicago, and board member for the Chicago Young  Republicans.  He can be reached at  kyle.evan.stone@gmail.com.

Read more at The American Thinker

Related articles

King Calls on Secretary Napolitano for Explanation about Granting of Visa to Member of Designated Terrorist Organization

Posted on by
Reply

Via Committee on Homeland Security

Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY), Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, has called on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to explain why a visa to visit the United States was granted to Hani Nour Eldin, a member of a designated foreign terrorist organization, Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group).

In a letter to Napolitano, King wrote: “Mr. Eldin’s membership in the Islamic Group is a matter of public record, and reportedly even disclosed on his Facebook page.  Nonetheless, Eldin met with senior Department of State and National Security Staff officials during the past week, and as reflected in media reports requested the transfer of the jailed leader of his terrorist group, Omar Abdel Rahman, to Egyptian custody.”

The signed letter to Napolitano is available HERE.

The text of the letter follows:

June 24, 2012

The Honorable Janet Napolitano Secretary Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC  20528

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

I write as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security to inquire as to the circumstances under which a visa to visit the United States was granted to Hani Nour Eldin, a member of a designated foreign terrorist organization, Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group).

Mr. Eldin’s membership in the Islamic Group is a matter of public record, and reportedly even disclosed on his Facebook page.  Nonetheless, Eldin met with senior Department of State and National Security Staff officials during the past week, and as reflected in media reports requested the transfer of the jailed leader of his terrorist group, Omar Abdel Rahman, to Egyptian custody.

I am aware that there may be legitimate diplomatic reasons to grant a member of a designated foreign terrorist organization a visa to visit the United States, such as for example in furtherance of peace negotiations.  However, the nature of Eldin’s visit suggests an absence of full vetting rather than a policy choice, or perhaps a break-down in the screening missions of and coordination among our Federal agencies.

Accordingly, pursuant to Rule X, Clauses 2(a) and 3(g)(1), and Rule XI, Clause 1(b)(1) of the House of Representatives, I request answers to the following questions.

1.      What U.S. Government department or agency sponsored Eldin’s visa application, and for what reason?

2.      What steps did that department or agency take to trace Eldin’s background?  Was it aware of his membership in the Islamic Group, or not?

3.      What information, if any, did the department or agency sponsoring Eldin’s visit share with the Department of Homeland Security regarding Eldin’s membership in a designated terrorist organization and his pending visit to the United States?

4.      What rationale did Customs and Border Protection apply to allow Eldin’s admittance into the United States?  And, when entering the country, did Eldin undergo secondary inspection?

5.      What information, if any, was relayed to the United States Secret Service (USSS) in advance of this Islamic Group member’s appointment at the White House?  Did the USSS express any security concerns about the location of this meeting?

6.      During his visit to the United States, did Eldin engage in any activities which might constitute material support for terrorism under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B?

7.      What policies and procedures are in place regarding interagency notifications of visits of members of designated terrorist organizations to the United States?

8.      What is the position of the Department of Homeland Security regarding any potential custodial transfer, or release, of Omar Abdel Rahman?

In light of the serious national security questions raised by Eldin’s visit and meetings, I request your written response to this inquiry by no later than Tuesday, July 3, 2012.  If you have any questions regarding this inquiry, please contact me directly, or have your staff contact Kevin Carroll of my Committee staff at (202) 226-8417.

Thank you for your time and personal attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

PETER T. KING Chairman

 Related articles

Another Holder Cover-up? Eric Holder Covers Up for Radical Islamists

Posted on by
Reply

By Ryan Mauro via Radical Islam

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is in the spotlight after the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted to hold him in contempt because he is refusing to provide documents related to the Fast and the Furious scandal. But there’s another scandal you should know about. For over one year, he has refused to hand over documents about the Muslim Brotherhood network in the U.S.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), vice chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, confronted Holder about the matter on Thursday, June 21. Rep. Gohmert wants Congress to have access to documents from the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history. Five Foundation officials were found guilty of funding Hamas and evidence introduced by the federal government shows it was set up by the Muslim Brotherhood’s secret “Palestine Committee” in the U.S.

Three prominent Muslim-American organizations were labeled by the federal government as “unindicted co-conspirators” in the trial-the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). The documents requested by Rep. Gohmert for the past year were provided to the Holy Land Foundation’s defense team, yet are being denied to Congress.

“They are terrorists, and we wanted the documents you gave to the terrorists. We are a year later, and we still don’t have them,” complained Rep. Gohmert. Holder replied that he’d only provide what is already available publicly.

Watch Rep. Gohmert grill holder at a Congressional hearing on the subject:

Rep. Gohmert is one of five members of Congress requesting investigations into the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-tied organizations and individuals in the U.S. government. As I reviewed here, this influence is far-reaching. It is very possible that the documents from the Holy Land trial would be embarrassing to many government officials, not to mention businesses and interfaith groups that have embraced Brotherhood entities. At the very least, they could provide further justification for the labeling of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT as “unindicted co-conspirators.”

The documents were originally requested on April 27, 2011 after reporter Patrick Poole broke the blockbuster story at Pajamas Media that Justice Department political appointees blocked the prosecution of one CAIR co-founder and, according to his high-level Justice Department source, other groups and individuals listed as “unindicted co-conspirators.”

Poole learned that Assistant Attorney General David Kris wrote a memo dated March 31, 2010 titled, “Declination of Prosecution of Omar Ahmad,” an individual who was present at a Muslim Brotherhood meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 to discuss how to support Hamas. The idea to create a new group was put forward at this meeting and Ahmad co-founded CAIR the next year. Ahmad was also personally listed as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land trial. The given reason to drop the prosecution was potential jury nullification but the source is certain that it was a political decision.

According to Poole’s source, “It was always the plan to initially go after the [HLF] leaders first and then go after the rest of the accomplices in a second round of prosecutions.” The original trial resulted in a mistrial, pushing back the planned prosecutions. The Obama Administration then came into office and they were stopped.

After the report broke, the Administration claimed that its predecessor had decided not to indict CAIR in 2004. Poole explains that this is true but it was because “They decided to get the bigger fish after they convicted the smaller fish.” Rep. Peter King confirmed that FBI officials and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Texas, which prosecuted the Holy Land Foundation, were ready to begin the second round of prosecutions and were outraged at how the political appointees stopped them.

Congressional sources later told Poole that Assistant Attorney General David Kris also dropped the prosecution of several officials involved with the International Institute of Islamic Thought, a Muslim Brotherhood front, and the SAAR Foundation/SAFA Group, which has disbanded since the federal government raided their offices. They were to be prosecuted on charges related to tax evasion and money laundering because Sami al-Arian, a Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader in the U.S., refused to testify and reveal their terrorist connections.

Poole reported that one of these protected officials is Jamal Barzinji. In October 2011, former Virginia Governor and current Democratic Senate candidate Tim Kaine spoke at an event honoring Barzinji. His ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas are very well-documented. FBI documents all the way back from 1987-1988 identify him as a Brotherhood operative. He is also a founder of the radical Dar al-Hijrah mosque, which Treasury Department records say “is a mosque operating as a front for Hamas operatives in the U.S.”

Rep. Gohmert slammed Holder for not prosecuting these groups and individuals when there is a “mountain of evidence” against them. He further revealed that “at least one of which now says it is working inside your [Holder's] agency to help advise on the purge of counter-terrorism training materials.”

The role of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) has already been discovered. MPAC was founded by Brotherhood ideologues and works in tandem with the aforementioned groups, but was not labeled as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land trial. Rep. Gohmert was apparently referring to  CAIR, ISNA or NAIT.

On February 8, ISNA was part of an interfaith group that met with the FBI Director about the training materials. A FBI spokesperson said the agency would consider a proposal from the group to create a committee to review the materials. More recently, the White House’s new Director for Community Partnerships, George Selim, said that “There is [sic] hundreds of examples of departments and agencies that meet with CAIR on a range of issues.”

Fast and the Furious isn’t the only controversy Holder is refusing to show documents about, but it’s probably the only one you’re hearing about.

Ryan Mauro is RadicalIslam.org’s National Security Analyst and a fellow with the Clarion Fund. He is the founder of WorldThreats.com and is frequently interviewed on Fox News.

This article was sponsored by the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

Read more here.

Related articles

Obama is a domestic enemy of the U.S. Constitution

Posted on by
Reply

By Joseph Curl via The Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

“Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation — I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.*

“* Unless, you know, 224 years from now, whoever happens to president simply decides he really doesn’t want to do that.”

— Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 of Barack Obama’s U.S. Constitution

The Founders set the course in a simple, concise, 35-word affirmation — the president’s top job is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution. The chief executive does, of course, have other responsibilities, but his guardianship of the document they had just written was deemed by the Founders to be of such great import that they made him swear it — aloud, in front of witnesses.

In 1884, Congress, having no set oath of office, wrote its own: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same …”

Little did they know then that 128 years later, America would face just that: a domestic threat to the U.S. Constitution.

From the very beginning, the president and his administration made clear they had no intention of enforcing laws they didn’t like. Mr. Obama and his minions decided that they would simply stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act, no longer prosecute growers of “medical” marijuana, and let some states walk away from provisions in the No Child Left Behind law (which, by the way, was co-authored by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and passed the Senate by a 91-8 vote).

Mr. Obama’s Justice Department has even more flagrantly flouted the laws of the land. Out of the blue, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, reinterpreted America’s gambling laws (and dumped the decision on Christmas Eve so as to avoid scrutiny). More recently, Mr. Holder has decided to thwart congressional oversight by refusing to release documents on the disastrous “Fast and Furious” gun-running scheme, and he is actively fighting Florida for trying to expunge dead people from its voter rolls.

Now comes Mr. Obama’s decision to stop enforcing America’s immigration laws. The new policy states that illegal immigrants who were younger than 16 when they entered the country are eligible for a two-year exemption from deportation. Of course, the “deferred action process,” as Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano called it, will apply to illegals up to age 30. (Think when they legally get their driver’s licenses they will also be handed a voter registration card?)

The increasingly desperate Mr. Obama, once a constitutional professor, knows full well he is circumventing Congress. In March 2011 he told a group of young Hispanics: “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job.

“Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws,” he said. “There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

So why now? Politics. The Hispanic population in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado may well decide the November election, and with working-class whites, religious blacks, disenchanted young people and Jews fleeing in droves, Mr. Obama is looking to shore up his support, even if that means violating his oath to protect the Constitution.

Continuing his nonstop campaign of division — black against white, rich against poor, straight against gay, religious against secular, race against race — the president is seeking to build whatever loose coalition of support he can. Forget bipartisanship; a coalition of the middle, Mr. Obama’s sole path to victory, he thinks, is to stir up so much discontent within different strata that he can win re-election.

Of course, the liberals who whined about President George W. Bush’s signing statements haven’t made a peep about Mr. Obama’s Napoleonic power grab.

“What’s ironic,” columnist Charles Krauthammer noted, “is for eight years, the Democrats have been screaming about the imperial presidency with the Bush administration — the nonsense about the unitary executive. This is out-and-out lawlessness.”

But that doesn’t matter when you are King Barack. The Founders were determined to make sure no American leader ever had the power King George III enjoyed. Which is why they also wrote this in the Constitution: “The president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

For more click here.

 

Related articles:

Allen West on Obama: ‘The Resurrection of an Imperial Presidency’

Posted on by
1

By DANIEL HALPER via The Weekly Standard

Speaking this morning to talk radio host Laura Ingraham, Florida congressman Allen West, a Republican, blasted President Obama’s immigration plan to use prosecutorial discretion not to go after young immigrants who came to the United States illegally. Obama announced his new immigration plan on Friday.

“What country did we wake up in on Friday?,” West asked. “It just causes people to ask, where are we? You know, the last time we had this was with King George III, and we didn’t like it too much. And I think that you’re seeing the resurrection of an imperial presidency, and the arrogance thereof. To think that you can come out and basically tell the American people that this is what we’re going to do … and don’t question me.”

The big hold up for West seems to be Obama’s decision to bypass Congress and the law of the land. “America is not about ruling by verbal edict or just whims; the president has been elected to enforce the laws of this country. And he doesn’t get to pick which laws he likes or dislikes. And I find it very perplexing and ironic that when he had control of the House and Senate, this did not seem like a very important issue.”

West continued:

He could have brought [immigration] up back in 2009, and got it through. And also it was just not even a year ago — September 2011 — when his own admission, this is something he said he could not do, that he did not have the power and authority to do. So what has changed from September 2011 to where we are today? Political expediency.

West said he hoped politicians would stop “pandering to the special interests” and instead find immigration solutions for the American people.

West also tweaked Mitt Romney for not giving a “forceful” response to Obama’s immigration announcement, when the Republican presidential candidate was asked about the new plan over the weekend. “I guess I feel a little bit dejected because I think that it goes back to what my mother taught me, ‘a man must stand for something, or else he’ll fall for anything,’” West said.

Read more here.

Related articles

If We Took the Constitution Seriously, Obama Would Be Impeached

Posted on by
Reply

By Michael Filozof via The American Thinker

If  the citizens of this Republic still took the Constitution seriously, Obama would  be impeached for his decision to unilaterally grant amnesty to certain illegal  aliens.

Article  1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, which enumerates the power of Congress, states  that “Congress shall have the Power To… establish an [sic] uniform Rule of  Naturalization.” Congress has passed numerous laws pertaining to immigration and  naturalization, including laws requiring the deportation of  illegals.

The  role of the President, according to Article II, Sec. 3, is to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Obama’s  refusal to execute Congress’s immigration  laws (or, for that matter, Congress’s Defense of Marriage Act) is an  impeachable offense. Article II, Sec. 4 states that the President “shall be  removed from Office on Impeachment for… Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes  and Misdemeanors.” The deliberate failure to enforce valid immigration law and  allow hordes of foreigners to live and work in the U.S. is, arguably, “treason,”  and doing so in an election year to appease Hispanic voters could certainly be  considered “bribery.”

In  theory, Obama could exercise his power in Article II, Sec 2. to “grant Reprieves  and Pardons for Offenses against the United States” and offer a blanket pardon  for all violators of immigration law. He’s not doing that, because he’d  certainly lose in November if he did. (However we should be concerned that if he  does lose in November, he’ll do it anyway on his last day in  office).

The  upshot of Obama’s policy not only to allow hundreds of thousands of illegals to  live and work in the U.S. during a time of 8 to 10% unemployment, but even  worse, since the vast number of illegals we’re talking about are Hispanics  eligible for affirmative-action preferences, to actually get preferential treatment over native-born  Americans.

Remember  Obama’s speech in Berlin in 2008? Well, now you know what “citizen of the world”  means: instituting an illegal and unconstitutional policy that favors Third  Worlders, and disadvantages people actually born as U.S.  citizens.

Of  course, he’ll get away with it… if you think the gutless Republicans in the  House actually represent the interests of their native born constituents  and will introduce articles of impeachment, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell  you….

For more click here.

H/T News You May Have Missed

Related articles

Obama By-Passes Congress (again) and Ignores Questions Regarding His ‘Non-Dream, Non-Amnesty Act’

Posted on by
2

By Kasey Jachim

Yet again our President by-passes Congress and enacts his version of the ‘Dream Act’ – then runs for  cover!   Although the Dream Act failed in Congress, Obama has decided to ignore the Legislative Branch and use the Executive Branch to pursue his agenda.  Will he also ignore and challenge the Judicial Branch when Obamacare is overturned?

Even though he had two years of a Democrat White House, Senate and House of Representatives, he failed in his promise to pass immigration reform.  But now, just five months before the election, he decides to upstage Senator Marco Rubio and his plans for ‘legitimate’ immigration  reform and pander to the Latino vote.  Have you no shame Mr. Obama?

When questioned by reporters over his decision, the President retreated to the Oval Office.  According to Neil Munro of the Daily Caller:

“President Barack Obama declined to take any questions from reporters about  his controversial and significant decision to offer a de-facto amnesty to at  least 800,000 foreigners aged 15 to 30.

The president turned and walked away from reporters at the end of an early  afternoon address in the White House’s Rose Garden, even though two reporters  called out questions about his decision.

The announcement of the decision comes at a time of record unemployment among  low-skilled workers, Hispanics and African-Americans.”

Neil  Munro explains his exchange with President Obama in Rose Garden [VIDEO]

We need a leader who will enforce our laws instead of arrogantly ignoring them and suing states for doing the job he refuses to do.  Several states are being sued by the Obama Justice Department for trying to enforce immigration laws, voter ID laws, and even Right to Work laws.  Tell me again why this man is still the legal occupant of the White House?

Related articles

The coming tsunami of voter fraud!!!

Posted on by
2

By Judson Phillips via Tea Party Nation

 

When the Democrats, aided and abetted by the RINO establishment, pushed the  Motor Voter law through, they had one thing in mind.  They wanted to get as many unlawful voters registered so they could steal elections.

With Florida probably being THE swing state this year, we should all be alarmed by this news.

From Reuters:

Florida election authorities are examining about 180,000 people who they say may not be U.S. citizens but are registered to vote in the state, an official said on Friday.

State officials are updating Florida’s voter rolls ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November. Florida is home to a large Latino population and is expected to be a critical swing state in the contest between Democratic President Barack Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

Florida’s Division of Elections said it is checking the citizenship of voters by comparing its databases with those of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which keeps track of whether a licensed driver is also a U.S. citizen.

Similar efforts have been carried out by state authorities in Colorado and New Mexico, which also have large Latino communities.

“We’re going to vet a list of 180,000 people to try to come up with a real number,” said Chris Cate, a spokesman for Florida’s Division of Elections. “We don’t want to jump to conclusions without a thorough investigation.”

Officials in Florida have so far identified more than 2,600 potential voters who may not be U.S. citizens and sent their information to local election authorities, Cate said.

Drivers in Florida are required to show proof of their legal status when they get a driver’s license or renew an old one.

Cate said cross-referencing voter rolls with the highway department information could help better determine whether voters are U.S. citizens, but he added the information was sometimes incomplete.

“Their last contact with the highway department may have been four or five years ago and they could have had the chance to become a citizen since then,” he said.

Potential non-citizen voters are notified by mail and given 30 days to respond.

You can bet your last dollar the Obama campaign and the Party of Treason are going to pull every trick out to try and steal this election this fall.    This is why we need voter ID laws.

Americans must have confidence our elections are fair.   If the Obama Regime tries to or even manages to steal this election this fall, all bets are off.

It is up to we the people to make sure they do not steal this election and make sure we get voter ID laws in all 50 states to make sure the Democrats never steal another election.

For more information click here.

Related articles

NBC: Obama IRS refunds ‘Illegals’ $4.2 billion for kids–in Mexico (Yes, Even NBC, National Barack Channel, is concerned!)

Posted on by
3

A follow-up on my previous post Illegal Immigrants Receive 4 BILLION Dollars Per Year in Taxpayer Money!!!

By  via The Examiner

Tax

This bombshell dropped on Monday in Washington, D.C., causing outrage throughout the halls of Congress, and now beyond, to the “genuine” taxpayers who have been robbed all across America.

Investigative television reporter Bob Segall of Indianapolis NBC affiliate WTHR TV Channel 13, was contacted by a long-time central Indiana tax preparer, who blew the whistle on a multi-billion dollar tax fraud about which the IRS has done nothing, according to the TV news show video segment that aired on Monday.

“There is not a doubt in my mind there’s huge fraud taking place here,” he said, slowly flipping through the pages of a [heavily redacted] tax return.

“We’re talking about a multi-billion dollar fraud scheme here that’s taking place and no one is talking about it,” he said.

The scheme involves illegal immigrants that are filing tax returns, claiming child credits for multiple dependents under their support in “their” U.S. household, and collecting enormous cash refunds–such as one persons tax return that showed income of over $14,000, who collected a cash refund of over $10,300.

In 1996 during the Clinton Administration, the Individual Tax Identification Number (ITIN) was created in order for both resident and non-resident aliens, regardless of immigration status, to fulfill their tax filing and payment obligations under IRS regulations–even though an ITIN does not confer the right to work and receive income in the United States.

This year tax preparation offices across the country were flooded by an estimated 2 million illegal immigrants, who in growing numbers have been taking advantage of a tax loophole called the Additional Child Tax Credit–a fully-refundable credit of up to $1000 per child–meant to ease the income tax burden on working families who have children living at home.

However, Segall’s investigation and reporting found many illegal immigrants who were claiming these tax credits, but for kids who live in Mexico–even listing nieces and nephews.

“We’ve seen sometimes 10 or 12 dependents, most times nieces and nephews, on these tax forms,” the whistleblower told Eyewitness News. “The more you put on there, the more you get back.”

After Segall reviewed many of the heavily redacted tax returns, it was still clear that the tax filers had received large tax refunds after claiming child tax credits for many dependents.

“Here’s a return right here: we’ve got a $10,3000 refund for nine nieces and nephews,” he said, pointing to the words “niece” and “nephew” listed on the tax forms nine separate times.

“We’re getting an $11,000 refund on this tax return. There’s seven nieces and nephews,” he said, pointing to another set of documents. “I can bring out stacks and stacks. It’s just so easy it’s ridiculous.”

Under agreement not to reveal their identity or filming them face on, Segall of WTHR was able to speak with several of the illegal immigrants who, using Segall’s translator–confirmed it is easy.

One of the workers, who was interviewed at his [appeared to be a 2 bedroom mobile home] in southern Indiana, admitted that four other illegal immigrants used his address to file tax returns–even though they don’t even live there.

These four workers claimed that not only they, but a total of 20 children between them–about 30 people–lived in the residence.

As a result, the IRS sent the illegal immigrants tax refunds totaling $29,608.

Upon Segall questioning the man regarding that incredible residency claim, he replied … “They don’t live here … the other kids are in their country of origin, which is Mexico,” later saying that none of the 20 children have ever visited the United States–let alone lived here.

Segall then asked why ‘undocumented workers’ should receive tax credits for children living in a foreign country, which is a violation of IRS tax rules?

“If the opportunity is there and they can give it to me, why not take advantage of it?”

Segall then met with Russell George, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Inspector General for Tax Administration, who stated … “The magnitude of the problem has grown exponentially,” but that the IRS has known about the problem for years.

Mr. George said his department has repeatedly warned the IRS that additional child tax credits are being abused by undocumented workers–in 2009 alone, their annual audit report showed that ITIN tax filers received about $1 billion in additional child tax credits.

The same audit report from 2010 showed it cost the American tax payers more than $4.2 billion.

“Keep in mind, we’re talking $4 billion per year.” George continued by saying “It’s very troubling” that the IRS has not taken any action on the matter–despite these multiple warnings from their own inspector general.

“Millions of people are seeking this tax credit who, we believe, are not entitled to it,” said the inspector general. “We have made recommendations to [IRS] as to how they could address this, and they have [still] not taken sufficient action in our view to solve the problem.”

Segall’s investigation revealed that claims for additional child tax credits by ITIN filers have skyrocketed during the past decade–from $161 million in 2001 to $4.2 billion in tax year 2010.

He also found that illegal immigrants filed 3.02 million tax returns in 2010, with 72% of those returns (2.18 million) claiming the additional child tax credit.

Segall’s attempts to speak with any of the 100,000 employees of the IRS were rebuffed; instead they emailed this statement…

“The law has been clear for over a decade that eligibility for these credits does not depend on work authorization status or the type of taxpayer identification number used.  Any suggestion that the IRS shouldn’t be paying out these credits under current law to ITIN holders is simply incorrect. The IRS administers the law impartially and applies it as it is written,” the statement said.

George disagrees with that position and believes the IRS should be doing more to prevent undocumented workers from getting billions in US tax dollars.

“The IRS is not doing something as simple as requesting sufficient documentation from people seeking this credit,” he said. “Once the money goes out the door, it’s nearly impossible for the IRS to get it back.”

Segall says that the IRS says it can’t change the system unless it gets permission from Congress; and closing this loophole requires lawmakers to pass a new law specifically excluding illegal immigrants from claiming additional child tax credits.

However, the IRS “Ten Facts About Child Tax Credit,” does not concur, as illegal immigrants, by definition, fail the citizenship qualification test.

Let’s remember, this is an election year, Barack Obama is CEO, Harry Reid can block any legislation in the Senate, and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who is George Russell’s boss, is still claiming that Obamacare will reduce healthcare costs.

Tomorrow in my follow on article, learn how Congressmen are reacting to this incredible tax fraud–and what they intend to do about it.

For more click here.

Related articles

Illegal Immigrants Receive 4 BILLION Dollars Per Year in Taxpayer Money!!!

Posted on by
1

This is absolutely unbelievable, but then again……An IRS loophole allows illegal immigrants to obtain over 4 billion dollars PER YEAR in tax payer money – an existing problem that the IRS is ignoring.   WTH?

VIDEO OF WHISTLEBLOWER!

H/T Black&White

Related articles