ONLY Refugees that Support U.S. Constitution


want-muslim-refugees-next-door

John R. Houk

© January 30, 2017

 

Leo Hohmann has typed an article warning that Homeland chaos is on the way to confront Trump’s campaign promises on illegal immigrants and Muslim refugees. To be honest the article is also a WND promo for Hohmann’s book “STEALTH INVASION: MUSLIM CONQUEST THROUGH IMMIGRATION AND RESETTLEMENT JIHAD”. If the stealth-invasion-bk-jkbook is as informative as the Hohmann article, it is a must to get a hold of.

 

I pray political correctness does not pressure President Trump to cave in on his campaign promises on vetting Muslim Refugees. I have noticed the MSM has gone out of its way to highlight so-called peaceful Muslims out of the USA doing business yet now are not allowed back in to see their families residing on American soil.

 

Off the top of my head (no pun intended), a Muslim Ethiopian who is a British citizen has resided in Oregon for ten years. He communicated to his family in Oregon he may not be back to see them in Oregon for some time because he is a Muslim.

 

This is an example of crap news coming from the American Left.

 

ONE: The Trump EO refers to refugees from seven particular nations. NOT Muslims!

TWO: If the Ethiopian is a British citizen residing in Oregon already for ten years, he is not subject to the 7-nation refugee moratorium – HE’S A BRIT.

 

These kinds of stories are pure poppycock.

 

On the other hand, I do realize there are already unvetted Muslim refugees on American soil largely due to Obama’s Multiculturalist agenda. These refugees may have expected some family members from the 7-nation refugee moratorium and now there is a freeze for at least 90 days. That doesn’t mean those family members have a radical Muslim agenda against the USA. IT DOES MEAN those family members must be vetted to insure they have no hatred of America or any nefarious designs based on potential hatred. So, protest all you want. The USA has no need for foreign American-hating Muslims that feel they are on a divine Quranic mission.

 

Yesterday I blogged on some AWESOME vetting technology that President Trump could employ to make the vetting process move faster. The technology is called “COGITO”.

 

Now back to the Hohmann article.

 

Hohmann believes there are what he calls three flashpoints that will inspire the “global Islamic movement and its allies on the political left” to “confront” Trump’s policies:

 

  • Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem

 

  • Declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

 

  • Restricting Islamic immigration into the U.S.

 

Trump confront back and I believe he will. BUT – If for some reason the American Left hamstrings President Trump, there is a Second Amendment option for private citizens to organize and confront back on American soil. Begin with confrontational peaceful protest. Then if the American Left and/or Muslims supporting Islamic Salafist ideology ups the ante with violence, be prepared to ante up ourselves.

 

JRH 1/30/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

3 ‘TRIGGERS’ FOR ISLAMIC UPRISING UNDER TRUMP PRESIDENCY

Airport protests just the start of ‘chaos’ planned by Muslim Brotherhood

 

By LEO HOHMANN

Updated: 01/29/2017 at 10:52 PM

WND

 

airport-protests-led-by-cair-per-trump-immigration-eo

Major airports saw protests led by CAIR and other groups in defense of continued, unrestricted immigration from seven countries President Donald Trump says are harboring terrorists.

 

A former Homeland Security officer who spent years screening Muslim immigrants points to three “triggers” of confrontation between the new administration of Donald Trump and the global Islamic movement.

 

These three issues will spawn a violent backlash in response to Trump as he attempts to implement what many believe are long-overdue reforms.

 

And Trump has already bumped head-on into one of the hot-button issues – Muslim immigration.

 

Philip B. Haneyphilip-haney

 

According to Phillip Haney, a founding member of the Homeland Security Department and author of the book “See Something Say Nothing,” the stars are lining up for a major confrontation with the global Islamic movement and its allies on the political left.

 

The “flashpoints” to watch going forward are these:

 

  • Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem

 

  • Declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

 

  • Restricting Islamic immigration into the U.S.

 

Trump’s executive orders slapping a 120-day moratorium on refugee resettlement and a 30-day ban on those entering on visas from seven terror-sponsoring countries has been met with protests Sunday at airports in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit and Minneapolis.

 

In Hamtramck, Michigan, the nation’s first city to elect a Muslim-majority city council, protesters descended on City Hall Sunday with signs that included “Ban Bannon” and “We are all Immigrants.”

 

There were no such protests when former President Obama restricted Christian refugees from entering the U.S. from Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and other Muslim countries.

 

As Trump tries to rein in concessions given to the Muslim Brotherhood by the previous administrations of Clinton, Bush and Obama, he should expect the Brotherhood and its allies on the left to push back with hell’s fury, Haney said.

 

There will be lawsuits, ugly protests, and an all-out effort to create chaos in the streets of U.S. cities, he predicts.

 

What do YOU think? Are you concerned about an Islamic backlash to Trump? Sound off in the WND Poll!

 

The reason is simple. This isn’t 1968 or even 1978, when Islam in America consisted primarily of a few thousand Nation of Islam and Black Panther activists.

 

Islam, particularly the Salafist brand of Sunni Islam promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose stated goal is to spread Shariah throughout the world, has been allowed to establish a major foothold in America.

 

More than 300 U.S. cities and towns have been stacked with Sharia-compliant Muslims through refugee resettlement and myriad other visa programs that have been expanding for four decades.

 

Meanwhile, groups that agitate for Muslim “civil rights,” which tend to manifest as special privileges not afforded to Christians, have been empowered. Thanks to the expanded immigration, the U.S. Muslim population has exploded to 3.3 million, the number of mosques has grown exponentially and the Council on American Islamic Relations or CAIR is now a force to be reckoned with despite its ties to extremist organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, Haney said.

 

“There’s this concept of the observant Muslim base, it’s a global observant base, and that’s what the Muslim Brotherhood has done here in America since the 1960s is build up that observant Muslim base,” Haney said.

 

America is on the same suicidal path as Europe but is it too late for Donald Trump to fix the problem? Get all the facts in Leo Hohmann’s brand-new investigative book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.”

 

In a document seized by the FBI and presented at a terror-financing trial in Texas in 2007, the Brotherhood referred to this process as building “settlements” in the U.S. that would eventually subjugate all other religions.  Doubters can read the Brotherhood’s strategy in the Brotherhood’s own words in a document titled the “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.”

 

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Russia have all banned the Muslim Brotherhood for its terrorist connections and seditious strategies.

 

A bill on Congress, the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act, would do the same thing, declaring CAIR and other Brotherhood-affiliated group as terrorists.

 

“Now the U.S. has a new president who is considering doing the same thing and CAIR is crying about Islamophobia,” Haney said. “And that’s why they need to be designated as terrorists.”

 

Trump is already showing a pattern, a trend of behaviors, which indicates he plans to follow through with campaign promises related to Israel, terrorism and immigration, Haney said.

 

The main school of Islamic jurisprudence in North America, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America or AMJA, issued a fatwa which it called a “roadmap” for Muslim reaction in the wake of Trump’s election victory.

 

“They are expecting him to actually do what he said, so the AMJA steps in and provides a Shariah-compliant roadmap on the way that they should respond,” Haney said. “They have set the parameters of the acceptable response based on Shariah law. They included not only 32 Quranic verses woven into the roadmap but several other references to the hadith.

 

“The AMJA put this statement out and mobilized the observant Muslim base calling on them to be prepared to respond.”

 

And it’s not just Muslims who will join in this monumental push back against Trump.

 

As seen at protests in major U.S. airports Sunday, the radical left is eager to take up the crusade of Muslim activism. Haney says it’s not just American Muslims who will join this fight, either, but global Islamic extremists who are invested in destroying Israel, propping up the Muslim Brotherhood, and continuing the flow of Shariah-compliant Muslims from the Middle East into Western democracies.

 

“These three points will trigger conflict between the global Islamic community and the Trump administration,” he told WND. “There aren’t any other issues that have the volatility to precipitate actions up to and including violence.”

 

Haney said the three trigger points will affect three different areas: The Israel policy will affect the political arena, the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist declaration will affect law enforcement, and the immigration issue will affect the fabric of American society, halting the process of Islamization and civilization jihad that has been steadily occurring for the last 35 years and which was placed into overdrive under Barack Obama.

 

“It’s not about Trump. It’s about America,” Haney said. “America has had the audacity to pick someone different from what the world wanted, which was someone who would not be submissive to the global Islamic movement. So America is now going to become the focus of this backlash.”

 

In fact, the hardcore Islamic extremists affiliated with the Brotherhood and their allies among the hardcore left are already mobilizing a pushback for the cause of Shariah law. These troops have enjoyed complete cooperation from the U.S. government over the last eight years, Haney said, and to an extent for the last 20 years going back to the Bushes and Clintons. All of these administrations reached out to the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations for advice and counsel, inviting them to the White House, the State Department, and the departments of Homeland Security and Justice.

 

Trump has signaled a different approach by talking about moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, declaring the Brotherhood a terrorist organization and restricting Muslim immigration while shifting the government’s focus to rescuing Christian refugees. These were three untouchables under previous U.S. administrations and by even talking about these actions Trump must be prepared for a strong reaction, both foreign and domestic, Haney says.

 

The Brotherhood’s self-avowed goal is to spread Shariah around the globe. In the U.S., it works through a network of alphabet-soup organization that include CAIR, the Muslim Student Association or MSA, the Islamic Society of North America or ISNA, the Islamic Circle of North America or ICNA, and the Muslim American Society or MAS.

 

These Brotherhood-linked groups work to infiltrate and influence America’s critical institutions –government and law enforcement, the educational system and the nation’s churches and synagogues. The overall goal of this three-pronged attack is to wear down these institutions’ defenses to Shariah concepts, such as the idea that criticism of Islam or its prophet is off limits and makes one an “Islamophobe” worthy of second-class status. Criticism of Christianity continues to be popular sport in American society but criticism of Islam is socially unacceptable in the media, pop culture, business, academia or law enforcement. This is essentially a voluntary implementation of the Islamic blasphemy law – which is the beginning of Shariah – Haney says.

 

The most important Islamic voice to watch in America is the AMJA – the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America. This is the group of scholars that Muslim clerics look to for guidance on what to teach in America’s mosques, more than 75 percent of which have been funded by Saudi Arabia and 85 percent of which are led by foreign-born imams.

 

The AMJA issued a fatwa following Trump’s election, offering a “roadmap” forward on how U.S. Muslims should react to the changes Trump might try to implement. This roadmap informed the U.S. Muslim community that the rise of Trump held the potential to be a “calamity” for their future in this country.

 

While urging them not to panic, the AMJA then dropped the bombshell that the “worst of the worst” in America were those who try to destroy Muslim civil rights organizations, a direct reference to CAIR, ISNA, MSA and their overarching sponsor, the Muslim Brotherhood. The fatwa went on to warn Muslims that they may have to take drastic actions that they don’t want to take but which will please Allah, quoting almost word for word from the Quran.

 

America is on the same suicidal path as Europe but is it too late for Donald Trump to fix the problem? Get all the facts in Leo Hohmann’s brand-new investigative book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.”

 

“It’s all intertwined,” said Haney. “It’s all coming together as we predicted.”

 

Watch video trailer for “Stealth Invasion,” which former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is calling “the must-read book of 2017.”

 

VIDEO: Stealth Invasion – Official Trailer

 

Posted by WNDTV

Published on Dec 21, 2016

 

Use the PROMO CODE Stealth25 when you order Stealth Invasion from the WND Superstore and you’ll receive 25% off your purchase: http://superstore.wnd.com/Stealth-Invasion-Muslim-Conquest-Through-Immigration-and-Resettlement-Jihad-Hardcover

Civilization jihad calls for changing a nation by changing its people and its values—gradually, over time.

Stealth Invasion blows the lid off a corrupt, fraudulent program that has been secretly dumping Third World refugees, many of them radical, on American cities for three decades.

Americans have been kept largely in the dark about the radical plans to permanently transform their nation. Until now.

 

After Trump announced the first round of his border security and immigration crackdowns Wednesday, CAIR Director Nihad Awad immediately ramped up his rhetoric. He denounced the administration’s actions as “Islamophobic” and compared refusing Muslim refugees to previous U.S. policies of “slavery” and denying women the vote.

 

These are fighting words, Haney said, and sure enough CAIR’s chapters in New York and Dallas responded with their own press conferences, tweets and rallies denouncing Trump.

 

CAIR was also front and center in the protests at American airports Sunday.

 

This is just the beginning of what will be an ongoing battle of wills between Trump’s administration and the Shariah-supportive Muslim community that feels emboldened by its allies in the media and among what are mainly Marxist and left-leaning professors, lawyers and community organizers, Haney said.

 

Haney, who co-authored the whistleblower book “See Something Say Nothing” upon leaving DHS, says to watch the three trigger points going forward.

 

Any one of those three issues will be viewed as part of the “calamity” that the AMJA roadmap fatwa warned was coming under a Trump administration.

 

Trump will be challenged to find some Muslims who are not affiliated with Brotherhood organizations and give them a voice that offers an alternative to the intolerance and extremism put forth by CAIR, which has direct ties to Hamas and has had nearly a dozen of its current and former leaders investigated and charged with terrorist-related crimes.

 

See WND’S Rogue’s gallery of terror-tied CAIR officials

 

Trump comments about moving the embassy to Jerusalem reverberated all the way to the slums of Sadr City in Iraq, where Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said a U.S. Jerusalem embassy would be tantamount to an all-out war against Islam.

 

“Just the fact that our ambassador said he will move his residence to Jerusalem is provocative enough,” Haney said. “It’s a declaration of war against the USA, and Sadr is saying the Shia will fill in the void if Sunnis don’t do what they’re supposed to do.”

 

On the immigration front, Trump said he plans to restrict visa permits for 30 days from seven Islamic countries, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan and Libya, while pausing all refugee resettlements for four months or until “extreme vetting” practices can be developed.

 

These would seem to be rather mild responses to the uptick in Islamic terrorism both in Europe and the United States over the last three years. Jihadist attacks on U.S. soil have included the Boston Marathon bombing, the knife attacks at a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, and at Ohio State University, the Orlando nightclub mass shooting, the Chattanooga shooting at a Navy recruitment center, the pipe bombing in Manhattan, and the San Bernardino shooting. All of these attacks were carried out by Muslim immigrants or sons of Muslim immigrants.

 

But the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations know the importance of the Islamic principle of al hijra, the Arabic term for “migration.” Their prophet, Muhammad, used it to perfection in his conquering of Medina back in the seventh century and it has been a favorite tactic of Shariah-adherent Muslims ever since.

 

The prayer by Imam Mohamed Magid at Trump’s inaugural prayer service in the National Cathedral last Saturday amounted to a “a signal flag,” to the Muslim community, Haney said. “The context of the verse he quoted from the Quran just happens to be related to the AMJA roadmap fatwa, so what he did was he waved a signal flag and told the Islamic community, here I am, I’m making a declaration that we should stand up and oppose the calamity of the Trump administration.”

 

Magid’s Muslim Brotherhood credentials are impressive. He’s past-president of ISNA, he served on Obama’s CVE or “countering violent extremism” steering committee and he is imam of the ADAMS mosque that was at one time under investigation by the federal government for ties to Hamas. And if that’ snot enough, he’s listed on the AMJA website as a shake and a fatwa expert. A shake in Islam is higher than imam.

 

“That means he’s a trained Shariah specialist,” Haney said. “But here he is at the National Cathedral in Washington delivering an inauguration prayer.”

 

Haney goes back to the allegory Trump used of draining the water out of the swamp.

 

“Your work really begins after the water is taken out,” he said. “You have to see what is actually buried down in the muck and mire. And if Trump has experts who are qualified to go in and conduct a forensic analysis, they’re going to find all kinds of stuff there and it will set in motion a whole sequence of events, if they can catch their breath and take a look at it. It will set off a sequence of events that will allow law enforcement and immigration officials to honestly evaluate the status of our current immigration policies and they’re going to find that there are a lot of problems with it, whether it’s the State Department issuing visas to folks they shouldn’t be, the way the USCS process people coming into the country on visas and green cards, all the way to the United Nations itself and how it does the initial selection and vetting of the refugees.

 

“So this examination, if it is thorough, is going to set off a lot of events that are going to expose the methods of the Obama administration as providing no oversight or protection whatsoever.”

__________________

ONLY Refugees that Support U.S. Constitution

John R. Houk

© January 30, 2017

_________________

3 ‘TRIGGERS’ FOR ISLAMIC UPRISING UNDER TRUMP PRESIDENCY

 

© Copyright 1997-2017. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

THE CONSTITUTION vs. THE CONSTITUTIONALIST


constitution-convention

Intro to ‘THE CONSTITUTION vs. THE CONSTITUTIONALIST

Edited by John R. Houk

By J.B. Williams

Posted December 30, 2016

 

I am a great believer in the foundation of the U.S. Constitution. And by foundation, I mean the rough Original Intent (more detail of Originalism) of America’s Founding Fathers that were invested in framing our Republic’s Founding Document.

 

That being said, I am hardly a Constitutional expert. Academically I proceeded only to a Bachelor of Arts in History from a small college in the central part of Washington State (the more Conservative side of the Leftist State and in a day and time when Profs were fairly equal in Liberal and Conservative viewpoints).

 

BUT, I can read the Constitution and The Federalist Papers (the selling point of the Constitution). THIS MEANS lame duck President Barack Hussein Obama – a self-described Constitutional expert – has gone to great lengths to promote the concept of a Living Constitution which essentially tosses out the Original Intent to be replaced with a make-it-up as you go along rule of law to fit whatever Elitist concept of man-law is valid for the day.

 

J.B. Williams has some thoughts on Original Intent that most will agree with and some – including myself – thoughts Originalists might have to think twice about.

 

JRH 12/30/16

Please Support NCCR

******************

THE CONSTITUTION vs. THE CONSTITUTIONALIST

 

By J.B. Williams

December 29, 2016

NewsWithViews.com

 

After many years of abusive and tyrannical federal intrusions into state, local and private personal affairs, protected freedoms and liberties, well beyond the constitutional authority granted to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution, it has become necessary to return to our founding principles and values, to restate and enforce the Rule of Constitutional Law in preservation of our once free republic.

 

It has also become socially popular to proclaim the name of constitutionalist, an indication of both knowledge of and reverence for our Charters of Freedom. Yet too many constitutionalists are not even vaguely familiar with the Charters of Freedom, often calling for alterations to our form of self-governance in the name of constitutional conscience, but at odds with constitutional text, wisdom and intent.

 

The Obama Administration has indeed been historic in many ways, first and foremost, the failed but extreme effort to “fundamentally transform” our sovereign Constitutional Republic into a secular socialist member of a criminal global commune. No previous President has ever done so much to destroy the republic or their own political party, Obama having lost the Democratic Party more than 1000 political seats in less than eight years.

 

The 2016 revolt of the people that resulted in the historic election of political outsider Donald J. Trump also resulted in Republicans gaining control of both chambers of Congress, 2/3 of the state governorships and all but 13 of the 50 state legislatures. In short, the Obama era has been disastrous for both the country and his party.

 

Still, even Barack Hussein Obama claims constitutional expertise and reverence, as he works day in and day out to destroy everything the Founders created some 240 years ago. Like many modern lawyers trained in Common Law [noun: common law is the part of English law that is derived from custom and judicial precedent rather than statutes;] instead of Constitutional Law based in Natural Law, experts with a left-leaning agenda may be experts, but use that expertise to undermine and subvert the Rule of Constitutional Law rather than uphold and preserve it. Three great examples of this is demonstrated by the open assault on States’ Rights, the call for congressional term limits and the end of the Electoral College.

 

Because the vast majority of Americans stopped being forever vigilant in self-governance long ago, many now seek what they believe to be shortcut solutions to solve the natural consequences of a society no longer informed or engaged in self-governance. These notions are at odds with both constitutional text and intent.

 

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

 

People have referred to the U.S.A. as a “democracy” for far too long. The Founders took great pains to avoid establishing a pure “popular vote” only form of democracy, referred to by our Founders as nothing more than “mob rule.”

 

To assure that the U.S.A. would never be a pure democracy ruled by popular referendum alone, the Electoral College was created to prevent an entire nation from falling under the rule of “the mob” huddled in a handful of high population centers which always lean left politically due to the inherent challenges of inner city life.

 

The 2016 election provides a perfect example of exactly what the Founders had in mind when they established the Electoral College. Of our 50 states in the union, Trump won 30, or 60%. Of our 3142 counties across the country, Trump won 2523 (80.3%) to Clinton 490 (15.6%). Without the Electoral College, Hillary Clinton would have (allegedly) won the 2016 election by popular vote (pure democracy), despite 80.3% of the counties and 60% of the states voting against her.

 

I say “allegedly” because the actual popular vote numbers are horribly tainted by vote fraud and illegal alien votes in places like California. We actually don’t know (and never will know) the real outcome of the legitimate popular vote, which is again, why the Electoral College exists.

 

To eliminate the Electoral College would be to destroy the Founders constitutional guarantee to every state of the union under Section 4 of Article IV, a republican form of government, as opposed to a democracy.

 

So, why do many modern self-proclaimed constitutionalists demand an end to the Electoral College?

 

CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS

 

Many constitutionalists seek a quick fix for a general lack of public oversight of congress by arguing in favor of congressional term limits. Once again, this concept is wholly at odds with constitutional text and intent.

 

To be certain, past alterations in constitutional intent for congress, such as the 17th Amendment which ended states representation in the U.S. Senate by using popular vote instead of state legislatures to elect senators, along with the power of incumbency, has made the concept of term limits look attractive to many.

 

But as is the case with all alterations to the original design and intent, those alterations come at a high price. Some even seek term limits for the U.S. Supreme Court, at risk of great peril. Members of that court or any other can be removed from the court in an instant for anything deemed to be “bad behavior,” which should certainly include failing to uphold and enforce the Supreme Law of this land.

 

The House of Representatives (by congressional district) was originally intended to be the most powerful branch of the federal government, as it was designed to be the branch closest to the people with only two-year terms. Members are term limited to two years of service, unless the people re-elect.

 

The U.S. Senate was originally designed to represent States’ interests only, which is why senators were to be elected by State Legislatures (not popular vote) and each state assigned the same number of senators regardless of population, two per state. The passage of the 17th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Senate as a body representing State interests and essentially eliminate states’ rights in the process. Senators are term limited to six years of service unless reelected.

 

The problem is the people are not forever vigilant. Incumbency has become so powerful not just because of the money available to incumbent’s vs challengers, but because the people tend to reelect repeatedly unless a senator is such a bad actor that they simply must replace them.

 

The downside to additional term limits is that it is not the incumbents being tossed out, but rather the voters. The will of the people is overruled by the clock. No matter how good a member of congress might perform, they are forced to leave when the clock runs out. There are no guarantees that the seat will be filled with someone better suited to the position, just because the clock ran out. In fact, more often than not, we would end up with someone worse, as most decent and honorable people do not seek public office at all.

 

Had the Founders seen a need and benefit to additional term limits, they would have placed them in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. They didn’t… So, why do many constitutionalists seek to alter the Founders design when it comes to term limits?

 

STATES’ RIGHTS

 

The primary rights of every state of the union is to be secure in their independent sovereignty and they are guaranteed a republican form of government, not a democracy.

 

So, when the federal government becomes abusive or destructive of state sovereignty and rights, it is the power of each state to check the federal government and force it back into constitutional boundaries, alter or abolish it altogether.

 

For the past eight years of the Obama regime, many states have sought to check the federal government abuses by numerous means, from State Level 10th Amendment bills like The Balance of Powers Act to individual issue nullification efforts, or even chatter about State Conventions and secession, all of it thwarted by left-leaning politicians and courts seeking to expand federal authority beyond constitutional boundaries via broad interpretations of federal supremacy.

 

Now that Trump will be taking the reins of the federal government on January 21, 2017, even many democrat politicians are suddenly supportive of 10th Amendment protections against federal abuses of power – something they entirely opposed while their dictator-in-chief was in power.

 

But once again, many constitutionalists overlook the power of the 10th Amendment and the states to force the federal government back into constitutional compliance in their efforts to find a quick cure-all for federal tyranny. They know that the federal government was created by and exists at the pleasure of the member states, but fail to look to those states to solve federal abuses and expansions of power.

 

The truth of the matter is that no matter which political party or person is in power at the federal level at any given time, none of them will operate within constitutional boundaries unless forced to do so by the states and the people.

 

The Constitution vs. The Constitutionalists

 

Not everyone who claims the title of constitutionalist is one. Many have never even red the document much less the underpinning for everything in it, Natural Law. Thus, many find themselves working for “unconstitutional” solutions to problems easily remedied within the original constitutional text and intent.

 

Political points of view and related agendas drive the dialogue. People with progressive-leanings interpret constitutional text entirely different than those with libertarian-leanings. Those who think we are a democracy will interpret text entirely different than those who know why we are a republic. The agenda drives the interpretation, instead of the original text and intent driving the agenda.

 

No true constitutionalist believes that the original document can be improved upon with additional alterations. Every real constitutionalist knows that the document has been altered far too much already. The solution is not to alter it further, but rather to unwind some of the past alterations that have served only to undermine the original text and intent.

 

When considering which “constitutionalist” to follow in your political activism, look at who is seeking to further amend the original document vs who is looking to restore and enforce the original text and intent.

 

Despite the human tendency to see ourselves as the smartest person in any room these days, the reality is there is no one alive today who is wiser than the original Founders. There is no one alive today who can improve upon the divinely inspired work of our Founding Fathers.

 

Only someone who understands this is a true constitutionalist!

 

______________

© 2016 JB Williams – All Rights Reserved

Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.

 

JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He is co-author of the just released book – TRUMPED – The New American Revolution – with co-author Timothy Harrington, published by COFBooks.com. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, author and writer as well as a small business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization focused upon constitutionally protected Natural Rights under Natural Law. Williams also co-hosts TNALC Radio every Sunday evening at 5:00 PM ET with TNALC Lead Counsel Stephen Pidgeon and he receives mail at: jb.uspu@gmail.com

 

Web site 1: www.PatriotsUnion.org

Web site 2: www.VeteranDefenders.org

Web site 3: www.COFBooks.com

Web site 4: www.TNALC.org

Web site 5: www.patriotvoice.net/TNALC

E-Mail: JB.USPU@gmail.com

 

Obama Sells Out Israel – No Surprise


John R. Houk

© December 24, 2016

 

 un-security-council-anti-israel-resolution

UN Security Draft Resolution Condemning Israel over Jewish Settlements in eastern Jerusalem and Judea-Samaria

 

President Barack Hussein Obama has betrayed Israel by allowing the UN Security Council to create a binding international resolution that steals the eastern half of Jerusalem as well as Judea and Samaria (renamed the West Bank by a conquering Jordan in 1950) to create a national state for a group of Arabs that NEVER had an individual nation or a heritage to Judea and Samaria. Indeed, the name these Arabs are appropriating had a closer historical connection to Jews than it ever did to Muslim Arabs – Palestine.

 

The very name “Palestine” was coined by Romans weary of Jewish rebellions against Roman conquest. The English version of the word Palestine comes from the ancient enemies of Israel – the Philistines.

 

After the Romans expelled or killed most of the Jews from their national homeland the Romans decided to call the area Palastina after the Jewish ancient enemies as part of a de-Judification plan to end Jewish rebellions. Here is a decent run-down of the word “Palestine”:

 

What Does “Palestine” Mean?

 

It has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.

 

The word itself derives from “Peleshet“, a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as “Philistine”. The name began to be used in the Thirteenth Century BCE, for a wave of migrant “Sea Peoples” who came from the area of the Aegean Sea and the Greek Islands and settled on the southern coast of the land of Canaan. There they established five independent city-states (including Gaza) on a narrow strip of land known as Philistia. The Greeks and Romans called it “Palastina“.

 

The Philistines were not Arabs, they were not Semites. They had no connection, ethnic, linguistic or historical with Arabia or Arabs. The name “Falastin” that Arabs today use for “Palestine” is not an Arabic name. It is the Arab pronunciation of the Greco-Roman “Palastina” derived from the Peleshet.

 

How Did the Land of Israel Become “Palestine”?

 

In the First Century CE, the Romans crushed the independent kingdom of Judea. After the failed rebellion of Bar Kokhba in the Second Century CE, the Roman Emperor Hadrian determined to wipe out the identity of Israel-Judah-Judea. Therefore, he took the name Palastina and imposed it on all the Land of Israel. At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina.

 

The Romans killed many Jews and sold many more in slavery. Some of those who survived still alive and free left the devastated country, but there was never a complete abandonment of the Land. There was never a time when there were not Jews and Jewish communities, though the size and conditions of those communities fluctuated greatly. (The History and Meaning of “Palestine” and “Palestinians”; Derived from Tzemach Institute for Biblical Studies; Indaweb.com)

 

roman-destruction-of-2nd-temple-by-francesco_hayez

Roman Destruction of Second Temple

 

Yup Pilgrim, NO Palestinian Muslims of nationality or heritage. AND YET American Leftists and EU Multiculturalists are intent on stealing from Jewish Israel and give to interloper Arab Muslims who stole the name Palestine and Palestinian:

 

Under the Ottoman Empire (1517-1917), the term Palestine was used as a general term to describe the land south of Syria; it was not an official designation. In fact, many Ottomans and Arabs who lived in Palestine during this time period referred to the area as “Southern Syria” and not as “Palestine.”

After World War I, the name “Palestine” was applied to the territory that was placed under British Mandate; this area included not only present-day Israel but also present-day Jordan.

 

Leading up to Israel’s independence in 1948, it was common for the international press to label Jews, not Arabs, living in the mandate as Palestinians. It was not until years after Israeli independence that the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were called Palestinians.

 

The word Palestine or Filastin does not appear in the Koran. The term peleshet appears in the Jewish Tanakh [Blog Editor: Christians call the Tanakh the Old Testament] no fewer than 250 times. (Israel: Origins of the Name “Palestine”; Jewish Virtual Library)

 

After reading this information it should boggle an honest person’s mind as it does mine, that the Obama Left and Europeans under the auspices of the EU would rob land from Israel!

 

Most Americans are still very supportive of Israel and its existence. The American Left that believes in the existence of Israel yet supports Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) against Israel because of the idiotic belief the Jewish State is occupying Palestinian land are unwittingly supporting the Muslim-hatred to kill all Jews. Pay attention Left Wing Jews in America that support BDS.

 

Ergo we Americans that believe in protecting Israel’s heritage need to shout loudly from the rooftops about the Lame Duck Obama move to screw Israel by abstaining from the UN Security Council resolution that robs land from the Jews. Whoever wrote the New York Sun editorial suggesting that Congress divest American support to the United Nations is brilliant!

 

JRH 12/24/16 (Hat Tip: Don Moore of private Blind Conservative List)

Please Support NCCR

****************

A Problem From Hell, Indeed

 

Editors

December 23, 2016

New York Sun

 

The best way for President-elect Trump to view the Obama administration’s betrayal of Israel in the United Nations is as the starting bell for a campaign to defund the world body. This is already being signaled by Senator Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee on the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs. That gives him direct oversight of our U.N. budget. It puts him in perfect position to ally with Mr. Trump in charting a course away from a United Nations that has jumped its traces.

 

The resolution just passed by the Security Council, though ostensibly even handed, crosses a line that the Council has heretofore, and for good reason, shrunk from crossing. It seeks to expose Israel to legal action from an international boycott movement. President Obama, all too typically, seeks to blame Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has had the temerity to assert the right of Jews to settle in the biblical homelands of Judea and Samaria. The right policy would be to support such settlements, which are intrinsic to the Zionist ideal.

 

Instead, Mr. Obama has given us a study in perfidy. He had Secretary Kerry and Ambassador Power stand silent while the plot was being hatched. He allied with far-left factions on a policy that emboldened Israel’s foes to advance a measure could make Judea and Samaria Judenrein. Even Egypt, once it understood President-elect Trump’s position, was loath to present the measure to the Security Council. Ambassador Power claimed to be acting in the spirit of President Reagan, who never in a million years would have let such a resolution pass.

 

Samantha Power – US Ambassador to UN
U.S. State Department via Wikipedia
HELL HATH NO FURY: Hell hath no fury like Congress scorned seems to be the message from Senator Lindsey Graham in face of the prospect of the Obama administration betraying Israel in the Security Council. The vote today underlines the fact that the UN itself has become a problem from hell, to use the phrase Ambassador Power made famous in another context. The ambassador abstained today from a resolution aimed at the delegitimization of the Jewish state.

 

It’s not just Reagan who is being mocked. Ambassador Power sought to cloak her abstention in the mantle of Presidents George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush, though no such resolution passed — or even was permitted to come to a vote — during their presidencies. All of them would have vetoed such a resolution. The ambassador’s claims are part of the sneakiness, the dissembling with which she has conducted her diplomacy. She owed no special loyalty to the Jewish community, but made, nonetheless, promises that she has now broken.

 

The United Nations proceeded against a clear signal from the incoming administration and the Congress. The Security Council knows that the measure is a major departure from anything it has done before; it is worse than the measure the Obama administration vetoed in 2011. It will trigger within the United Nations court systems legal warfare that will bedevil Israel for years, exposing it to suits at, among other venues, The Hague. The UN itself has become — to use Ambassador Power’s phrase in a different context — the problem from Hell.

 

President-elect Trump gets all this. “The United Nations,” he told Aipac during his campaign, “is not a friend of democracy, it’s not a friend to freedom, it’s not a friend even to the United States of America where, as you know, it has its home. And it surely is not a friend to Israel.” The Security Council’s action today underlines the shrewdness of Mr. Trump’s plan to nominate, in David Friedman, an ambassador to the UN who understands the principle of Jewish settlement in the Biblical homeland. Mr. Trump himself this afternoon said things will be different come January 20.

 

What a tragedy all of this is for the world body that, almost 70 years ago, gave birth to the Jewish state. Israel today stands as the United Nations’ only enduring achievement. In any event, the time has come to deal with the problem of the United Nations itself. Mr. Trump can start this off by working with Mr. Graham and the bipartisan coalition he promises to curb funding for the UN. He can proceed with moving our Israel embassy to Jerusalem and enforcing American laws restricting funding of the Palestinian Arabs. In other words, he can address the problem from Hell in its own house.

_________________

Obama Sells Out Israel – No Surprise

John R. Houk

© December 24, 2016

_______________

A Problem From Hell, Indeed

© 2002-2016 TWO SL LLC, New York, NY. All rights reserved.

 

 

Trump WON’T pursue case against Clinton


hillary-the-criminal

Donald Trump has conveyed that it is not a part of his new Administration to investigate Crooked Hillary.

 

I don’t know if President-Elect Trump has learned to play politics, backing out on the “Lock Her Up” or is keeping a Clinton/Obama investigation close to the vest to prevent or avoid Dem Party obstructionism.

 

I pray in one fashion or another that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton are at least investigated thoroughly to let the American people know that a President Trump truly plans to drain the swamp of Federal Government Corruption.

 

JRH 11/22/16

Please Support NCCR

***************

Trump WON’T pursue case against Clinton

 

 clinton-corruption-lock-her-up

LOCK HER UP

 

By Pamela Geller 

November 22, 2016

Geller Report

 

Hillary broke the law. And while I understand that this may very well be an olive branch to the Democrats, Trump is in for a rude awakening. There will be no quid pro quo. The Democrats will not play ball with him or give him an easier time or stop the violent rioting or calm their base. Like jihadis, they see kindness and peace offerings as signs of weakness.

 

I am sure many Trump supporters whose chant, “lock her up!,” is now a rallying cry for government corruption and lawlessness, will be hugely disappointed.

 

Trump should allow these investigations to continue and whatever will be will be. The good news is that Jason Chaffetz, the Utah congressman finishing his first term leading the powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has vowed to continue to investigate Clinton’s email server.

 

trump-holding-sign-clinton4prison

Trump holding sign: Clinton for Prison

 

TRUMP WON’T PURSUE CASE AGAINST CLINTON, CONWAY SAYS

 

The Washington Post, November 22, 2016:

 

President-elect Donald Trump has decided that he won’t seek criminal investigations related to former rival Hillary Clinton’s private email server or her family foundation, his campaign manager said Tuesday

 

Trump’s apparent decison [sic], conveyed by Kellyanne Conway in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,’’ is a change from his campaign rhetoric, in which he issued incendiary calls for a special prosecutor to reopen the FBI’s closed investigation of Clinton’s use of a private server while secretary of state and had also urged investigations of allegations of corruption at the Clinton Foundation. He nicknamed the Democratic nominee “Crooked Hillary” and encouraged chants of “Lock her up!” at his rallies.

 

Trump’s decision to pursue or not pursue a criminal investigation from the Oval Office would be an extraordinary break with political and legal protocol, which holds that the attorney general and FBI make decisions on whether to conduct investigations and file charges, free of pressure from the president.

 

Conway said Trump sees things differently. “I think when the president-elect, who’s also the head of your party, tells you before he’s even inaugurated that he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone and content” to fellow Republicans, she said. “Look, I think he’s thinking of many different things as he prepares to become the President of the United States, and things that sound like the campaign are not among them,” she added.

 

Trump has not spoken directly about his apparent change of heart but hinted at it in a post-election interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes.’’

 

‘YOU’D BE IN JAIL’: TRUMP SWIPES AT CLINTON DURING DEBATE

 

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump responded Hillary Clinton saying that he shouldn’t be in charge of the law in the U.S. saying, “You’d be in jail.” The comment was met with rousing applause from the audience. (The Washington Post)

 

“I’m going to think about it,” he said. “I don’t want to hurt them, I don’t want to hurt them. They’re, they’re good people.’’

 

Trump’s about-face drew immediate criticism from legal experts, who said it threatens the integrity of the justice system.

 

“The president-elect has demonstrated his complete lack of understanding of how the government makes these kinds of decisions,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “The attorney general answers to the president, but the department is supposed to be independent, especially when it comes to prosecutorial decisions. Any president, especially our next president, needs to both understand and respect that – or else they risk politicizing criminal prosecutions in ways that can be damaging.”

 

hillary4prison-2016-shirt

Hillary for Prison 2016 shirt

 

The president-elect’s new position also stands in contrast with leading members of his party. Jason Chaffetz, the Utah congressman finishing his first term leading the powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has vowed to continue to investigate Clinton’s email server.

 

“It would be totally remiss of us to dismiss [the email investigation] because she’s not going to be president,” Chaffetz said after the election, referring to the defeated Democratic nominee.

 

[Top House Republican says he’ll continue Clinton probe]

 

While FBI director James Comey has repeatedly said the bureau did not find enough evidence to recommend prosecuting Clinton over the email issue, he questioned her judgement in using a private server, calling it “reckless.’’

 

_______________

Copyright © 2016 The Geller Report

 

About PamelaGellar.com

 

Pamela Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of The Geller Report and President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA). She is the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton) (Simon & Schuster) and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance (WND Books). She is also a regular columnist for World Net Daily, the American Thinker, Breitbart.com and other publications.

 

Geller’s activism on behalf of human rights has won international notice. She is a foremost defender of the freedom of speech against attempts to force the West to accept Sharia blasphemy laws, and against Sharia self-censorship by Western media outlets. Her First Amendment lawsuits filed nationwide have rolled back attempts to limit Americans’ free speech rights and limit speech to only one political perspective, and exposed attempts to make an end-run around the First Amendment by illegitimately restricting access to public fora. Her free speech event in Garland, Texas led to the capture or killing of several murderous jihadists, smoking out terror cells, leading to an increase in the threat level to READ THE REST

 

House Lawmakers to Nix Obama Admin-Backed Sale of U.S. Planes to Iran


bho-rouhani-famous-last-words-toon

Dear God in Heaven, did Obama actually believe he could sell planes to Iran and Congress would do nothing about it? Is it really too late to impeach him for treason?

 

JRH 11/16/16

Please Support NCCR

***************

House Lawmakers to Nix Obama Admin-Backed Sale of U.S. Planes to Iran

Iran angling to rebuild war fleet with American planes

 

By Adam Kredo

November 16, 2016 5:00 am

Washington Free Beacon

 

Lawmakers in the House are expected to overwhelmingly pass new legislation on Wednesday that would prohibit the Obama administration from facilitating the sale of U.S. aircraft to Iran, according to senior congressional sources who told the Washington Free Beacon that Iran is likely to use American-made planes to rebuild its aging air force.

 

The legislation is viewed as an early test for the incoming Trump administration, which has broadly opposed last year’s comprehensive nuclear agreement with Iran and intimated that it would be more confrontational with the Islamic Republic.

 

Senior congressional sources told the Free Beacon that House leaders scheduled the vote on this bill immediately following the election to signal that lawmakers are frustrated with the Obama administration’s ongoing diplomacy with Tehran.

 

If approved, the new bill would bar the Obama administration from granting legal exemptions to corporations such as Boeing, which is working to finalize a multi-billion dollar landmark deal with Iran. The Obama administration has already vowed to veto the legislation.

 

“The American people gave us a mandate to fight radical Islamic terrorism. Preventing aircraft sales to the world’s leading terror state is a pretty good start,” said one senior GOP aide familiar with the legislation. “Clearly this is a top priority for House Republicans—we are making this the first bill we put on the floor after the election. The Boeing-Iran sale is a great opportunity for President-elect Trump to claim an early national security win.”

 

Rep. Peter Roskam (R., Ill.), a vocal critic of the nuclear deal and Iran’s continued military buildup, told the Free Beacon that Republican House lawmakers will easily pass the legislation.

 

“It’s no secret I’ve been a vocal critic of the Iran deal—it was a horrible idea at the time and it has proven even worse as we’ve learned about secret side deals and more unilateral concessions to the Mullahs,” Roskam said. “But even those who supported the [nuclear deal] should support this bill. Nothing in the Iran deal obligates the U.S. to allow American banks to finance the Islamic Republic’s efforts to rebuilt its air fleet.”

 

The Obama administration said in a statement late Monday that the legislation would interfere with the United States’ ability to uphold its end of the nuclear deal, which includes guarantees that Iran would be able to access the U.S. marketplace for commercial aircraft.

 

“The bill would undermine the ability of the United States to meet our JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] commitments by effectively prohibiting the United States from licensing the sale of commercial passenger aircraft to Iran for exclusively civil end uses, as we committed to do in the JCPOA, and seeking to deter companies from pursuing permissible business with Iran,” the White House said in a statement.

 

Critics of the administration’s position have pointed to evidence that Iran has a history of converting civilian planes for use in its air force and military.

 

The Free Beacon in October disclosed several instances in which U.S.-made airplanes purchased by Iran in the 1970s had been used by Iran’s military.

 

Roskam told the Free Beacon at the time that there was reason to expect Iran would make similar use of any new planes it purchased from Boeing, which did not respond to a request for comment on the new legislation.

 

“We should not be surprised to see Iran’s latest military demonstrations feature Boeing 747s,” Roskam said. “It is incredibly irresponsible for any American company to sell products to the Islamic Republic that can easily be used for military purposes.”

 

“This is not hypothetical,” Roskam said. “We know the military has requisitioned Boeing planes from Iran Air in the past. Boeing is literally enhancing the military capabilities of the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”

_________________

Adam Kredo   Email Adam Full Bio

 

Adam Kredo is senior writer for the Washington Free Beacon. Formerly an award-winning political reporter for the Washington Jewish Week, where he frequently broke national news, Kredo’s work has been featured in outlets such as the Jerusalem Post, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, and Politico, among others. He lives in Maryland with his comic books. His Twitter handle is @Kredo0. His email address is kredo@freebeacon.com.

 

©2016 All Rights Reserved

 

About Washington Free Beacon

 

“How stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that: After 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.”

—Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address, January 11, 1989

 

The Washington Free Beacon is a privately owned, for-profit online newspaper that began publication on February 7, 2012. Dedicated to uncovering the stories that the powers that be hope will never see the light of day, the Free Beacon produces in-depth investigative reporting on a wide range of issues, including public policy, government affairs, international security, and media. Whether it’s exposing cronyism, finding out just who is shaping our domestic and foreign policy and why, or highlighting the threats to American security and peace in a dangerous world, the Free Beacon is committed to serving the public interest by reporting news and information that is not being fully covered by other news organizations.

 

The Beacon’s chairman is Michael Goldfarb. Its editor in chief is Matthew Continetti. Sonny Bunch is the executive editor. Bill Gertz is senior editor.

 

Our Masthead

 

Letters to the Editor

 

If you would like to contact our editors and writers please READ THE REST

 

GOHMERT EXPLAINS WHY COMEY HAD TO NOTIFY CONGRESS


slick-willie-loretta-lynch-toon-branco

Rep. Louie Gohmert provides another reason FBI Director James Comey notified Congress that he was reopening the Crooked Hillary investigation. That reason had less to do with conscience and more to do with concern about perjuring himself in Congressional testimony addressing Comey’s previous decision not to recommend prosecution.

 

JRH 11/1/16

Please Support NCCR

*****************

GOHMERT EXPLAINS WHY COMEY HAD TO NOTIFY CONGRESS

Also reveals only way Hillary will ‘answer for some of the things she’s done’

 

By GREG COROMBOS

October 31, 2016

WND

 

rep-louie-gohmert-r-texas

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas

 

While many Democrats publicly fume at FBI Director James Comey and many Republicans sense political opportunity, a member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee tells WND and Radio America the letter was really Comey’s way of avoiding a perjury investigation against him in Congress.

 

On Friday, Comey sent a letter to several committee and subcommittee chairman and ranking members, informing them that new emails “pertinent to the investigation” had been discovered. Twice in the three-paragraph letter, Comey noted his duty to keep Congress up to speed on the case.

 

“Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony,” Comey stated.

 

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said this really boils down to Comey keeping his sworn promise to lawmakers given during testimony in the wake of the FBI refusing to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton.

 

“It is actually the director of the FBI avoiding lying to Congress. He said he would update us,” Gohmert told WND and Radio America. “I think at the time he said it, he probably did not anticipate that there was going to be any other developments sufficient to get him to pursue the case further.”

 

What do YOU think? Is FBI Director James Comey a hero or villain? Sound off in today’s WND poll

 

Shortly after the Comey letter was reported, sources within the FBI revealed that the newly discovered emails were found on a device belonging to Clinton aide Huma Abedin and her estranged husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y.

 

Gohmert said that is significant.

 

“If it’s true what we’re told that Weiner had emails that were for Huma Abedin, if any of those are classified, then Huma broke the law by allowing her husband – even though they’re married – to have access to those emails,” Gohmert explained.

 

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas:

 

 

WND VIDEO: Have to go to the WND article to listen to Gohmert.

 

 

He said that arrangement also made both Weiner and Abedin ripe for blackmail.

 

“One of the reasons it’s so important for our high officials to be above reproach is the fact that, because Weiner was doing all this sexting, that kind of thing could have made him vulnerable to blackmail,” Gohmert said.

 

He said the impending Weiner-Abedin divorce could have put Abedin at the same risk.

 

“If he has emails that Huma should not have let him see, then she could be a target for blackmail,” Gohmert said. “If Hillary were elected, then Huma would be the closest confidante to the president of the United States but very vulnerable to blackmail.”

 

Gohmert is also struck by the Clinton team demanding the FBI reveal everything it has since this revelation comes so close to Election Day.

 

“It takes an awful lot of gall to say, in effect, ‘I thought I destroyed all of those emails. I demand to know what emails you have found because I thought I destroyed them all.’ Basically, it’s a bit of an admission of obstruction of justice,” Gohmert said.

 

The congressman is disappointed the Clinton investigation did not broaden into a probe of Clinton Foundation activities and how they influenced Clinton’s decisions at the State Department.

 

“For heaven’s sake, when you’re allowing the sale of our uranium and it ends up going to Russia and our enemies, that’s pretty amazing,” Gohmert said. “None of that seemed to pique the interest. Some of us sure think it sounded like there may have been crimes involved. [It] certainly merited having a grand jury impaneled and at least [having] them look into these things.”

 

Sign the precedent-setting petition supporting Trump’s call for an independent prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton!

 

According to reports, the FBI did aggressively push for permission to investigate the Clinton Foundation, but it was forbidden from proceeding by the Justice Department. Gohmert said that proves nothing will happen to Hillary Clinton while Loretta Lynch runs the Justice Department.

 

“As long as she’s there, Hillary Clinton will never be prosecuted,” Gohmert said. “The only chance there is that Hillary Clinton may eventually have to answer for some of the things she’s done is if Donald Trump is elected.”

 

He continued, “We have got to clean out the cesspool. It stinks to high heaven.”

 

While the Clinton campaign demands to see what emails the FBI has and simultaneously insists they are nothing of consequence, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is taking the Comey criticism to a new level.

 

In a letter, Reid is accusing Comey of violating the Hatch Act by sending his letter so close to the election. What’s more, Reid accused Comey of sitting on “explosive” evidence of Trump’s ties to the Russian government.

 

“In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government – a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity. The public has a right to know this information,” wrote Reid.

 

Gohmert minced few words about Reid. First, the congressman contends Comey may have violated the Hatch Act if he didn’t send the letter updating member of Congress on the probe.

 

“I think it would be a potential violation of the Hatch Act to use his position to prevent Americans from knowing the substantial change, the new evidence that has been found,” he said.

 

As for Reid himself, Gohmert said the Nevada Democrat’s reputation is already worthless.

 

“For lying Harry Reid, the guy that said (2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt) Romney didn’t pay taxes for 10 years, it turned out Reid had no basis. He just totally lied. He still says he is so proud he went and lied about Romney because it helped [President Obama] win the election,” Gohmert said.

 

“That tells us that Harry Reid is a guy who is so unscrupulous, so immoral that I don’t really much care what allegations he makes.”

 

While he does encourage a quick report on these new findings, Gohmert is pleading with the FBI to do a thorough job examining the new emails and not feel that it has to make a conclusion to meet a political deadline.

 

“The FBI needs to get their reputation back, and the only way to do that is to handle this more professionally,” he said.

____________________

© Copyright 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

 

2 News Pieces on Crooked FBI


Compiled by John R. Houk

October 2, 2016

 

After Rep. Trey Gowdy questioned Jason Herring FBI Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs about the uncooperativeness the FBI has been in releasing investigative data pertaining to Crooked Hillary’s illegal use of a private email server that passed on classified messages. The deflective answers by Mr. Herring demonstrates the collusion of the Obama Administration to keep Crooked Hillary away from criminal prosecution.

 

JRH 10/2/16

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Trey Gowdy Destroyed Obama’s Cover-Up of Hillary’s Email Scandal

trey-gowdy-at-oversight-hearing 

Update sent by Steve

Sent Oct 2, 2016 at 7:04 AM

American Patriot Daily

 

The FBI thinks they can hide the truth about their investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server from the American people.

 

The Bureau does not believe it needs to share the mechanics of how they conducted their investigation with Congress.

 

But Trey Gowdy was having none of it.

 

The House Oversight Committee has been in a fight with the FBI since the Bureau has refused to turn over all relevant information to the Committee.

 

Jason Herring, the FBI’s Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs, appeared before the Committee and wasn’t as forthcoming as some would have liked.

 

Gowdy reacted just as you would expect him to.

 

RedState reports:

 

But that wasn’t all Trey Gowdy did during the recent hearing. When Jason Herring, the FBI’s acting Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs, was being a bit dodgy with information requested by Congress, Gowdy was not having it.

 

Gowdy was after a document called a 302, which is essentially a summary of interviews of key witnesses. The FBI wasn’t giving those to Congress, and instead was getting a “summary of a summary of an interview” instead. This is something the Committee, and Gowdy in particular, was not pleased with. This, especially, with Herring telling Gowdy that he had been provided with all the relevant information, and the rest of it would come out through the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request.

 

“I think we’ve given the relevant ones-” started Herring.

 

“Relevant according to whom? I’m telling you, I don’t think you’ve given me all the relevant 302s!” said Gowdy.

 

“Well, the remainder of the 302s will come out through the FOIA process,” returned Herring.

 

“But since when did Congress have to go through FOIA to obtain 302s from an investigation that’s not even resulting in any prosecutions that your boss has already said was over? Since when did we have to go through FOIA?” Gowdy fired back.

 

At that point, Gowdy was out of time, but before he relinquished his spotlight, he reminded the FBI agent of how things really are.

 

“With all due respect, you don’t get to decide what we think is relevant.” said Gowdy.

 

You can watch the video below.

 

VIDEO: Trey Gowdy Presses FBI Agent on Classified Info Being Sent and Received by Hillary Clinton – 9/12/16


 

Posted by TheDailyTrump

Published on Sep 12, 2016

 

The lack of transparency in the email scandals starts with Hillary Clinton, but it doesn’t end there.

 

Many Americans believe the decision not to charge Hillary Clinton was a political choice made by FBI Director Comey.

 

Unless the FBI comes clean and provides all the relevant information to Congress, that perception will continue to grow.

+++

Related

+++

Trey Gowdy Just Devastated The Cover Up Of Hillary Clinton’s Crimes

james-comey 

Oct. 2, 2016

American Patriot Daily

 

FBI Director James Comey appeared before Congress for the third time.

 

Once again, he fumbled through another session, trying to explain away the reasons why he overlooked Hillary Clinton’s criminal behavior.

 

And Trey Gowdy just destroyed his answers.

 

Many Americans believe Hillary Clinton knowingly transmitted classified information on her private email server.

 

Suspicions were raised when the FBI handed out five grants of immunity to Hillary’s underlings – including former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, who was the mastermind behind the private server.

 

Many wondered why immunity was given to so many people and no charges were filed.

 

Gowdy echoed those concerns in the hearing preview on Fox News.

 

.@TGowdySC: We can survive a president who’s not that good, but we can’t survive a justice system that people do not have confidence in.” pic.twitter.com/fUtF9GuADn

 

— FOX & Friends (@foxandfriends) September 28, 2016

 

Gowdy continued to press the issue during the hearing.

 

Politico reports:

 

“GOP lawmakers focused in particular on the Justice Department’s decision to give a form of immunity to Clinton lawyers Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson to obtain computers containing emails related to the case.

 

 “Laptops don’t go to the Bureau of Prisons,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said. “The immunity was not for the laptop, it was for Cheryl Mills.”

 

 The FBI director repeated an explanation he gave for the first time at a Senate hearing Tuesday, that the deal to get the laptops was wise because subpoenaing computers from an attorney would be complex and time consuming.”

 

“Anytime you know you’re subpoenaing a laptop from a lawyer that involved a lawyer’s practice of law, you know you’re getting into a big megillah,” Comey said.

 

Some twitter users applauded Gowdy and mocked Comey’s testimony.

 

Gowdy just made a great point. How could Comey ever prove intent if everyone who knew Hillary’s intent was given immunity?

 

— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) September 28, 2016

 

@davidharsanyi I can’t believe how Comey got upset because Gowdy lost faith in the FBI. Wonder why that isDuh?!

 

— Michele Kozal (@MicheleKozal) September 28, 2016

 

Gowdy spoke for many Americans when he declared he has lost faith in the FBI.

 

Anyone else would have faced serious consequences – including criminal charges.

 

But Hillary Clinton – because of her position of power and her endorsement from Obama to succeed him as President – walks free.

_______________________

Copyright © 2016 American Patriot Daily. All Rights Reserved.