Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Mark Krikorian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Krikorian. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

Congress Did Not Get Fitton's Message! Ethics Was First Item Passed.


FITTON: The First 100 Days—An Anti-Corruption Agenda

6

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

At our special educational forum on December 6, expert panelists offered specific recommendations to the incoming Trump administration and the new Congress for rolling back corruption and ushering in a new era of transparency in these areas: Freedom of Information Act reform, election fraud, pay-for-play politics, IRS targeting, immigration and border enforcement, executive order overreach, and more.  You can view the complete video of the event here.

We had a tremendous line up: Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH), who is a member of both the Judiciary Committee and the Oversight and Government Reform Committee; Edwin Meese III, former United States Attorney General and Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow Emeritus at The Heritage Foundation; Mark Krikorian, Executive Director for the Center for Immigration Studies; Andrew McCarthy, Senior Fellow for the National Review Institute and former chief assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York; and Ramona Cotca, senior attorney at Judicial Watch.
I moderated the panel and outlined the challenges for the new administration:
The big decision for President-elect Donald Trump now is what to do with the Clinton scandals. He promised to drain the swamp, and he’s coming into a city that has a lot of park rangers for that swamp so it’s going to be a challenge.  And, of course, now he has a Congress that is controlled by his own party, and so independent observers are going to be concerned that one party isn’t going to be able to police itself well in terms of the legislative branch analyzing the executive branch.
There needs to be a serious investigation of what went on with the national security implications, the government records implications, the pay-for-play implications with the Clinton scandals. It wasn’t just about Hillary Clinton. It was about President Obama’s misconduct, the FBI’s misconduct, the Justice Department’s misconduct, the State Department’s misconduct. It’s also about crony capitalism and cronyism with our corporate culture, giving money, obviously, to the Clinton Foundation. And of course you had the foreign influence peddling that was going on as well.
Congressman Jordan spoke first and joined our call to continue the quest for real accountability:
And so our task in the 100 days, real simple: reform welfare, incentivize work, get rid of Obamacare, secure the border, and then focus on the things that are going to help our economy. But, ultimately, in the end, so many people were focused in this election on adherence to the rule of law and making sure the Justice Department is focused on justice and not on politics. And right now, we know it’s the opposite.
And so we have to continue the investigations because we’re either going to have equal treatment under law or we’re going to have a double standard. And that’s why we need to hold people accountable. [IRS Commissioner] John Koskinen needs to be held accountable for his conduct. He was brought in to clean up with the IRS and he hasn’t done so.
Jordan also announced the House Freedom Caucus planned to file a resolution today to force a vote on impeaching Internal Revenue Service Commissioner John Koskinen.
“John Koskinen needs to be held accountable,” Jordan said. “Later today on the House floor, we will make the motion to impeach Mr. Koskinen.”
Jordan and his conservative colleagues in the House did offer up the resolution to impeach Koskinen.  True to form, the House Republican leadership opposed this and joined with Democrats to table the effort and send it back to committee to die.  Only 72 members of the House voted to hold Koskinen accountable through impeachment.
My hero Ed Meese focused on the Justice Department:
There’s a lot to be done about the Justice Department, about the whole government. For example, the first threat to public safety that needs to be corrected is the attitude of this administration, which has been hostile to police throughout the entire eight years of Obama’s reign. And, as a result, the police officers feel both threatened and also disappointed.
The investigations of police officers and police departments by the so-called Civil Rights Division – I think one of the things that the president ought to do, the new attorney general is to take the investigations of police out of the Civil Rights Division entirely.  That is, quite frankly, the worst cesspool of liberal lawyers in the entire government.  And that’s something that absolutely has to happen.
Former prosecutor Andy McCarthy’s remarks reminded us just how much the rule of law suffered in the Obama administration:
We have to get back to the top two obligations of the executive branch, which are faithfully executing the laws and protecting the national security of the United States.
On the first, I was so glad that Congressman Jordan talked about Koskinen and the impeachment proceeding. I was actually proud to testify at that hearing. And impeachment, which gets everybody hackles up when the word gets mentioned, the framers thought impeachment was, as they put it, the indispensable tool that was given to Congress for purposes of reining in a rogue executive branch. And, you know, that was one of the main concerns that the framers had in drafting the constitution, to create a suitably, awesomely powerful presidency but yet be able to control it, particularly given the potential for illegality and damage done to the country.
The really tragic thing about the Justice Department in the last eight years is that we’ve gone from what we aspire the Justice Department to be, which is something that bolsters the rule of law, to what it’s become, which is something that realizes that the law can be used as a weapon and that the process is often the penalty.
Mark Krikorian, one of the leaders advocating for a rule-of-law approach on immigration, laid out an agenda to address the immigration crisis:
The contempt for the rule of law in this administration on immigration is just breathtaking. And there’s a lot of things that the new administration can do right away.
First is just changing the climate, because the assumption really under this administration is that immigration law is something to apologize for, that really everybody in the world is kind of allowed to come here. That’s the way these guys look at it, and that is obviously going to change at noon on the 20th of January. Specifically, there are the executive orders and memos and directives and edicts that the president has used to govern. And it isn’t just immigration. You saw it in EPA and health care and elsewhere, but with immigration specifically, this president basically has openly said, Congress won’t give me what I want so I’m just going to do it anyway.
In addition, Krikorian recommended immediate action in these areas:
  • Turning off the flow of federal money to sanctuary cities and states;
  • Curtailing the rampant release of criminal aliens;
  • End the sloppy use of refugee law to admit people who aren’t truly refugees, and
  • Tighten up the H-1B program for foreign workers.
Our own Ramona Cotca reminded us of the unfinished business of the past few years, particularly with regard to our Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuits concerning Benghazi and the IRS.
We’re trying to get records on a particular subject, whether it’s IRS targeting or Benghazi. But then our suits spiraling into all this litigation that’s happening because of the agencies’ not being forthcoming to the courts, and to us as a plaintiff, in telling us what they’re doing to search for the records, do they have the records, are the records being destroyed while we are pending in litigation? So that’s been our experience so far.
We’re going to continue doing what we have been doing It will be interesting to see if the culture actually changes from the agencies and also the attorneys representing the agencies.
As these patriots spoke, I couldn’t help but reflect on the past eight years. Barack Obama was a disaster for the rule of law.
I want to be hopeful, but I’ll join Ramona in waiting to see what we get in the new administration. I encourage you to watch the full discussion here.

Thursday, December 10, 2015

If 10% of Muslims In This Country Want Jihad, That Means 14,400 Potential Terrorists. What Damage Could That Do?



  • Text bigger
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/05/FranklinGraham.png
Rev. Franklin Graham
Rev. Franklin Graham
Franklin Graham, who heads the Samaritan’s Purse organization as well as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, has endorsed GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s idea of halting Muslim immigration into the United States, at least temporarily.
He warns there’s a good reason: some 144,000 Muslims already in the United States “who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified!”
Graham’s comments have been posted over the last 24 hours on his Facebook page, where he noted the mantra from “political leaders and world experts” that “the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people.”
“Some have suggested that as many as 99 percent fall into this category. Well, we don’t have to guess or estimate; the Pew Research Center has released extensive research on how Muslims in the U.S. self-identify on questions of violence – and the conclusions are frightening.”
Graham cited the 1.8 million Muslim adults in the United States.
“Pew Research released that eight percent of adult Muslims in the U.S. said that suicide bombings and other forms of violence in the name of Islam are ‘sometimes’ or ‘often’ justified. Think about it – that’s 144,000 Muslims who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified!
“That’s not ‘peaceful’ and that’s not a small number – it’s about the size of the entire population of Syracuse, New York!” he wrote.

“I’m 100 percent sure of this – our nation and our politicians need to realize the dangers of allowing people into this country that are not properly vetted.”
Earlier he wrote, in endorsing Trump’s idea, that the simple fact a part of America’s Muslim population believes the Constitution should be ruled by Shariah is a concern.
“For some time I have been saying that Muslim immigration into the United States should be stopped until we can properly vet them or until the war with Islam is over,” he wrote.
“Research shows that there are 2.75 million Muslims living in the U.S. According to a poll commissioned by the Center for Security Policy, 51 percent of Muslims living in America believe ‘Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah’ [Islamic law] instead of the U.S. Constitution.”
He continued, “Twenty-nine percent agree that violence against those who insult Mohammad is acceptable, and 25 percent agree that violence against America can be justified as part of global jihad. … This is frightening.”
Trump had called for a halt to Muslim immigration into the U.S. until those in Washington can figure out what to do regarding Islamist terror, especially that inside the U.S. His comments came in the aftermath of the Islamic terror attack in California where a radicalized husband and wife shot and killed 14 and wounded another 21 at a county Christmas party.
Trump has made it clear he is not insulting a religion, but addressing a security concern.
The result of Trump’s comments is that he’s gotten more popular in polls and the Washington Times reported now nearly two-thirds of “likely Republican primary voters support Donald Trump’s plan to bar Muslims from the United States.”
That report cited a Bloomberg Politics poll showed 65 percent of likely Republican voters approved of the Muslim ban, compared to 22 percent who opposed it and 13 percent who didn’t know.
WND had reported on the Pew results just this week. and the report explained that with only 1 percent of the nation’s population, Muslims managed to account for half of all the nation’s terror attacks following the 9/11 terror attacks.
Mark Krikorian, chief of the Center for Immigration Studies, explained, “That means Muslims in the United States are about 5,000 percent more likely to commit terrorist attacks than non-Muslims.”
The Pew results also suggested a political reason for a Democrat White House to be pursuing hundreds of thousands of such immigrations to bring to the U.S.
Pew found that 70 percent of Muslims in the U.S. vote Democratic, while only 11 percent vote Republican.



Copyright 2015 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/franklin-graham-144000-american-muslims-not-peaceful/#xPw38CSVofIIlL2I.99

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Isn't It Time To Enforce Immigration Laws? Or Do We Need More Needless Killings To Get People Upset?

Bob Goodlatte: Obama Immigration Rules Put 'Criminals Back on Streets'

Image: Bob Goodlatte: Obama Immigration Rules Put 'Criminals Back on Streets'(Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)
By Melanie Batley   |   Tuesday, 07 Jul 2015 10:09 AM
The killing of Kathryn Steinle at the hands of an often deported Mexican criminal has reignited fierce criticism of the Democrats' deportation policies, The Washington Timesreported.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte has blasted the Obama administration for making federal requests to detain illegal immigrants into "something voluntary" and "releasing criminals back onto the streets."

"This administration is not enforcing our immigration laws," the Virginia Republican told the Times. "And, quite frankly, I don't think they care."

"This tragedy in San Francisco — which is repeated every day around the country but doesn't get this kind of notoriety — is a product of that lack of caring about the rule of law," Goodlatte added.

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump cited the murder as an example of what he says is the Mexican government's routine tendency of forcing "their most unwanted people into the United States."

"This was evident just this week when, as an example, a young woman in San Francisco was viciously killed by a five-time deported Mexican with a long criminal record, who was forced back into the United States because they didn't want him in Mexico," he said.

"This is merely one of thousands of similar incidents throughout the United States. In other words, the worst elements in Mexico are being pushed into the United States by the Mexican government."

Meanwhile, the alleged killer, Francisco Sanchez, gave an exclusive jailhouse interview toABC News in which he admitted that he repeatedly returned to San Francisco because of its sanctuary policies.

"Did you keep coming back to San Francisco because you knew that they wouldn't actively look for you to deport you?" an ABC News affiliate asked him. Sanchez responded, "Yes."
Latest News Update

Sanchez, who has seven prior felony convictions, is accused of shooting Steinle, 32, last week as she walked along Pier 14 with her father.

According to the Times, Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, said on Twitter, "Another American killed by sanctuary city policies shielding illegal aliens from deportation."

As Republicans attempted to point the finger at Democrats over the affair, the White House has tried to shift the blame to Republicans for their failure to support comprehensive immigration reform legislation, the Times reported.

"The president has done everything within his power to make sure that we're focusing our law enforcement resources on criminals and those who pose a threat to public safety," White House press secretary Josh Earnest said, according to the Times.

"It's because of the political efforts of Republicans that we have not been able to make the kind of investment that we would like to make in securing our border and keeping our communities safe."

But critics strongly rejected that view.

"What you see right now is a Department of Homeland Security that's been intentionally isolated, not just from state and local agencies, but also from other federal agencies in what is an overt and malicious effort to jeopardize public safety and security in a quest to try to lock up the Latino vote for the next 50 years," Dan Stein, president of the anti-amnesty Federation for American Immigration Reform, told the Times.

Related Stories:
© 2015 Newsmax. All rights reserved.