JUDICIAL
TYRANNY: BLACK ROBED TYRANTS USURP EXECUTIVE LAW
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Kelleigh Nelson
February 8, 2017NewsWithViews.com
The
very heart of being a sovereign nation is providing security of one's
borders, of one's internal situation, and security against anyone attacking
one's nation. That is the very heart of what I believe is sovereignty.
—Senator John Warner
I have
to laugh because even the incorrigible Howard Stern has made some strong
statements against Democrats, albeit this was back in 2008. Stern claims
to be a libertarian, and he said, “I have vowed, I will never vote
for a Democrat again. No matter who they are. I don’t care if God
becomes a Democrat. These Democrats are communists. This is communism.
This is gangsterism. This is crazy.”
Robart
is No Laughing Matter
As Senator
John Warner stated, protecting our borders is at the heart of sovereignty,
and Democrat Judge James Robart’s actions are no laughing matter.
He has put the kibosh on Trump’s executive order to check refugees
coming in from seven different terrorist-promoting Islamic nations to
make sure they do not wish to do harm to American citizens. Why would
any sane person want to stop the President from protecting us? As my retired
attorney friend, Joe, said to me, “That’s really it Kelleigh,
they’re insane.”
What
really blows my mind is the fact that not one Federal Judge in America
tried to stop even one of Obama’s unconstitutional Executive Orders,
but President Trump’s EO to protect America is stopped by a leftist
Democrat judge. God help us! But then, in reality, they have no right
to do so. This belongs to the executive branch alone.
Robart’s
Nomination
On December
9, 2003, Robart was nominated by President George
W. Bush to a seat on the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Robart
was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate on June 17, 2004.
George W. Bush also nominated Gorsuch to federal court and he too was
confirmed unanimously. The Senate, knowing Bush was left of center, and
really pro-choice, easily confirmed this democratic lawyer to the high
court, just as they confirmed Neil Gorsuch in 2006.
Robart’s
Ruling
This
Democratic Liberal Judge is a full-fledged socialist. His ruling didn’t
consider any opinions on the law. He believed, without legal authority,
that the president wasn’t making a smart move, and he stayed it.
This decision on the immigrant ban from terrorist promoting countries
went to the Ninth Circuit court, the most liberal court in the nation
and of course, they stayed it. Protecting America from Islamic terrorists
was one of Trump’s promises, and who is delaying our safety? None
other than the Democratic Socialists…again! This time of the judiciary!
But
hey, Judge Robart has even praised
the Black Lives Matter anarchists in a lawsuit against Seattle police!
And
Judge Michelle Friedland of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit,
who ruled on the Trump travel order won the ACLU’s “LGBT Award.”
[Link]
The
Ninth Circuit has continued the stay, and now the higher court’s
denial of an immediate stay means the legal battles over the ban will
continue for days at least. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San
Francisco asked challengers of the ban to respond to the appeal, and for
the Justice Department to file a counter-response by Monday afternoon.
It could
go to the Supreme Court. But what if the Senate holds up Trump’s
confirmation of Judge Gorsuch? A four to four vote by the Supremes could
leave us high and dry with the last decision holding. We may be overrun
with terrorists from Islamic terrorist states, all because of one socialist
judge.
It is
NOT a “Muslim ban.” You will search the Executive
Order in vain for mentions of Islam, or any other religion. Trump
reminded reporters that ISIS specifically said that they would use the
migration system to infiltrate the United States and other countries.
The order is based on security reviews conducted by President Barack
Obama’s deputies. The moratorium is temporary, and the executive
order is absolutely legal, and is a security measure. [Link]
Vetting
Foreigners from Terrorist States
President
Trump wanted to vet foreigners arriving from Somalia, Syria, Sudan, Iraq,
Iran, Libya and Yemen. Trump’s order bars citizens of the seven
countries from entering the U.S. for 90 days, all refugees for 120 days
and indefinitely halts refugees from Syria. Pretty simple and straightforward.
Chuck
Schumer recently stated, “There are tears running down the cheeks
of the Statue of Liberty tonight.” He said this in response to Trump’s
EO on immigrants from these pro-terrorist states, but that is quite a
change from the tweet Schumer sent out in 2015 when he said, “We
must tighten loopholes in the Visa Waiver program, ensure passports can’t
be faked, and stop terrorists who want to exploit the system.”
Many
other presidents have implemented travel bans in the past. Jimmy Carter
implemented a travel ban on
citizens from Iran after the Shah was deposed and students seized
the U.S. Embassy in 1979.
And
will wonders never cease, even Obama implemented a ban against refugees
from Iraq in 2011. It was two Iraqi Muslims living in Kentucky who were
sending
weapons and cash to al-Qaida in Iraq. They were arrested, tried, convicted,
and are in prison. Apparently, the Judge was unable to access this information.
Ann
Coulter’s recent article
reminded us of Elian Gonzalez. The Clinton administration used the executive
branch's broad power over immigration to send a 6-year-old boy back to
a communist dictatorship. The courts were completely powerless to stop
him.
State
Department Whistle Blower
Mary
Doetsch, a
retired U.S. State Department veteran has blown the whistle on the
entire refugee program by sending a letter to the Chicago Tribune. She
wrote, “As a recently retired 25-year veteran of the U.S. Department
of State who served almost eight years as a refugee coordinator throughout
the Middle East, Africa, Russia and Cuba, I have seen first-hand the abuses
and fraud that permeate the refugee program and know about the entrenched
interests that fight every effort to implement much-needed reform. Despite
claims of enhanced vetting, the reality is that it is virtually impossible
to vet an individual who has no type of an official record, particularly
in countries compromised by terrorism. U.S. immigration officials simply
rely on the person’s often rehearsed and fabricated ‘testimony.’
I have personally seen this on hundreds of occasions.”
Mary
goes on to say that she is in complete agreement with President Trump’s
EO, and that she doesn’t believe it goes far enough!
Robarts
Inaccuracy on Arrests
Judge
Robart asked DOJ attorney Michelle Bennett how many arrests of foreign
nationals had come from the states in Trump’s EO.
She
said she didn’t have that information, and then Robart claimed that
there were none, but Breitbart
reported that according
to a database built by the Senate’s immigration subcommittee,
the federal government has arrested and convicted at least 73 people from
the seven countries of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan, and Yemen.
That fact alone tells us the huge inaccuracy of this judge’s rationale
for imposing a “Temporary Restraining Order” ban on the president’s
popular reform of the expensive refugee and immigration programs allowing
untold numbers of terrorists into our nation without the vetting that
has always been customary.
Several
sites have verified that these countries and even others not listed, are
hotbeds of terrorism training and activities with plans against the United
States. Here
is a list of some of the terrorists who have committed crimes from these
very countries, and here
are the countries with a large terrorism presence. Somali refugees who
have come to this country have even been involved in terror plots, including
more than 40 of which left the country to join ISIS, al-Shabab and al-Qaida,
according to the FBI.
Somalis
seem to be a big problem as they are ripe for recruitment by ISIS. Minnesota’s
Attorney General said, “We have a terror
recruitment problem in Minnesota” involving the Somali refugee
community in the state.” Obama actually had to approve grants to
teach Somali youth how to avoid being recruited. But there’s more,
these same refugees have carried out knife attacks in malls and on college
campuses injuring a number of people. We know this judge doesn’t
live in a cave, his entire stay on President Trump’s order is purely
political.
Pamela
Geller, editor in chief of the Geller Report and president of American
Freedom Defense Initiative, said Robart’s decision, if upheld, smacks
directly at the sovereignty of the United States and strips the president
of his constitutional authority to protect the nation.
Companies
Suing Trump Over Ban
Can
you believe there are 97 companies suing President Trump over his temporary
refugee ban? Gateway
Pundit reports that these companies use refugees as cheap labor in
their manufacturing; of course, it’s all about money…not safety.
Apple,
Google, Facebook, Spotify, Airbnb, Citrix, eBay, Etsy, Intel, Microsoft,
Netflix, Snap, Twitter and Uber are just some of the high-profile companies
that participated in filing the brief, the goal of which is to make clear
that the technology industry and American businesses in general oppose
Trump’s ban. Here
is the entire list from the website.
I would
urge folks not to buy Chobani yogurt inasmuch as Chobani announced the
hiring of Syrian Muslims. The owner of Chobani was tied
to the Clinton campaign and Clinton Global Initiative. The same now
goes for Starbucks Coffee regarding their hiring. What about jobs for
the American citizens?
Judge
Napolitano Weighs In
Martha
MacCallum interviewed Judge Andrew Napolitano on Judge Robart’s
stay, and he stated clearly and unequivocally that President Trump has
the power to do exactly what he’s doing. Here’s what he said
in this interview
with MacCallum.
“We have a federal district court judge in Seattle who basically second-guessed the President on the wisdom and propriety of the President’s executive order. And that is absolutely not the job of federal judges in our society.”“The law on which President Trump relied is crystal clear. A 1952 statute which says, just as John Roberts read from the government’s brief, that the president of the United States has the authority to suspend any immigration of an individual or a group or a class of people, for public health, public safety or national security. It’s not the President and the courts, it’s not the President and the Congress. It’s the President alone.”
Judicial
Tyranny
Black
robed tyrants are legislating from the bench. Our President is right,
should someone arrive on these flights who is a terrorist and acts to
kill Americans, the blame will land directly on these judicial tyrants.
That a district judge would overrule the president of the United States
on a matter of border security in wartime is subversive.
When
politicians don black robes, and seize powers they do not have, they should
be called out for what they are – usurpers and petty tyrants. It
is our elected representatives who make the laws and rule the nation,
not judges or justices!
Selwyn
Duke made it clear in his recent
article.
Does our current status quo make our Constitution a suicide pact? Thomas Jefferson certainly said as much, warning that accepting judicial supremacy would make our founding document just that, a “felo de se,” (suicide) as he put it in Latin.Acceptance of judicial supremacy, by the way, is precisely why President Trump's temporary ban on immigration from seven Muslim-majority nations is on hold. Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, No. 78 that the judiciary is the "least dangerous" branch of government because it "has no influence over either the sword or the purse," yet it's trumping the man with the sword, the president. But does it have to be this way?No, Trump could simply ignore the court ruling suspending his ban.Outrageous!? Unconstitutional!? Actually, it's wholly constitutional.Jefferson explained why in 1820, writing that "to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions" is "a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an Oligarchy." This is where we are now, and have long been – suicide-pact territory. The will of a nation 320-million strong is expressed through its duly elected representatives and laws are passed....And then that will is thwarted by five black-robed lawyers in a central-government tribunal.Does this sound like a government of, by and for the people to you?
The
Bottom Line
American
citizens have seen terrorist activities on our own soil for years now.
Here
is a full list, starting in April of 1972. We have welcomed immigrants
with open arms since the nation’s inception, but with caution to
protect our people. There are many reasons most citizens want immigrants
vetted, not only for the harm they might intend, but for assimilation,
and disease…diseases we have not seen in decades. We do not want
“no-go” zones throughout our country. And yes, I’ve
seen women in full burkas in my local grocery.
I have
two British friends, one who is an American citizen and one who is still
in UK, who would so love to come to America and become a naturalized citizen.
The UK today is overrun with so many Islamists that British citizens,
women especially, are afraid to be in certain parts of the country.
My friend
Stan, who has been here for decades, told me that it took him many steps
to become an American citizen and all told, it was about two years. He
is an absolutely wonderful addition to our citizenry. My friend Shirley
should also come to the USA, she loves our country.
However,
today, plane and shiploads of refugees from countries known to breed terrorists
are being dumped in cities all over America. Without the vetting, it has
become a breeding ground for terrorist training and terrorist activity.
Trump
Senior Advisor, Steven
Miller said, “The U.S. has an absolute sovereign right to determine
who can and cannot enter our country.”
Laura
Ingraham says our President should address the nation to make his
case for the executive order, and I agree. The reality is, his action
is absolutely legal, and it is being done for the safety of all Americans.
Our
President needs to tell these judges to go pound sand!
[P.S.
In order to wake up the population, we need to reach more people. Please
use this material, and call into talk radio programs (like Sean Hannity,
Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh etc.) and mention NewsWithViews.com on the
air while discussing the content of this article, write letters to newspaper
editors, and speak to your friends. Spread the word, and in doing so,
we have a chance to save America.]
_______________________________________________________
BOYCOTT CHOBANI & STARBUCKS NOW!
Published on Nov 2, 2016
Calls
to boycott yogurt giant Chobani have proliferated as the company has
welcomed refugees into its two factories, located in the generally
conservative areas of upstate New York and Idaho. When Hamdi Ulukaya
came to the United States, the Turkish immigrant made a modest living
selling homemade feta cheese. Now, Ulukaya is a self-made billionaire
thanks to Chobani, the yogurt empire he founded in 2007. And the CEO of
the nation's number one-selling Greek yogurt wants to give other
immigrants a shot at the American Dream, too. So, over the years, he has
hired 300 refugees. He also started a refugee advocacy foundation,
Tent, through which he enlists other companies to employ struggling
migrants who flee the European border crisis. The criticism has included
death threats, and is driven primarily by members of the extreme right,
who have latched onto Chobani's business practices as an election issue
— even though Ulukaya has actually employed refugees for about five
years.http://www.nbcnews.com/business/busin...
http://www.wochit.com
Chobani founder Hamdi Ulukaya signs up to Bill Gates' Giving Pledge and promises to donate most of his self-made $1.4bn fortune.
- The Turkish-born yogurt entrepreneur, 43, is committed to The Giving Pledge, created by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates
- The effort asks billionaires to commit to giving away more than half their wealth during their lifetimes or in their wills for philanthropy
- Ulukaya, who is based in New York, is divorced with no children
