The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Trump and liar-nObamacare
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
.
Illegal Minor Gets Abortion Rights Even Americans Don't Have
by Jordan Candler: Oregon lawmakers aren’t the only ones promoting taxpayer-subsidized death for illegals looking to abort their babies. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan is trying to set an incredibly dangerous precedent in Texas and elsewhere by insisting that illegal immigrant minors can terminate pregnancies at their own discretion and, even worse, at taxpayers’ expense. The baffling ruling was handed down this week in a case involving a 17-year-old minor who entered the U.S. last month and is currently situated in an Office of Refugee Resettlement shelter.
by Jordan Candler: Oregon lawmakers aren’t the only ones promoting taxpayer-subsidized death for illegals looking to abort their babies. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan is trying to set an incredibly dangerous precedent in Texas and elsewhere by insisting that illegal immigrant minors can terminate pregnancies at their own discretion and, even worse, at taxpayers’ expense. The baffling ruling was handed down this week in a case involving a 17-year-old minor who entered the U.S. last month and is currently situated in an Office of Refugee Resettlement shelter. According to Judge Chutkan, “Despite the fact that she’s in this country illegally, she still has constitutional rights.” The judge also claimed: “Plaintiff … will suffer irreparable injury in the form of, at a minimum, increased risk to her health, and perhaps the permanent inability to obtain a desired abortion to which she is legally entitled.” And in a direct effort at stifling the opposition, she exhorted: “Failure to comply with the terms of this Order may result in a finding of contempt.”
According to The Washington Post, “Late Wednesday, however, the Justice Department appealed the case, asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to stay District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s ruling.” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton countered Judge Chutkan’s ruling by noting, “No federal court has ever declared that unlawfully-present aliens with no substantial ties to this country have a constitutional right to abortion on demand. If ‘Doe’ prevails in this case, the ruling will create a right to abortion for anyone on earth who enters the U.S. illegally.”
He’s right. But that’s not stopping leftists from advocating abortion on demand, though the Texas case is alarming on a whole new level. As Family Research Council president Tony Perkins points out, “Part of [the government’s] duty is ensuring that our tax dollars don’t fund the taking of innocent human life. After all, this mother’s case is under the care of HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which means that every cent flows through the pro-life Hyde Amendment.”
Not only would a ruling upholding Judge Chutkan’s verdict for illegal minors set an incomprehensible precedent, it may force taxpayers to fund it. Even citizens don’t have that “privilege.” And it’s all because Democrats are making up rules and creating an inviting atmosphere that rewards lawlessness. As of Friday morning, the initial ruling has been stayed pending another hearing. How this plays out will have profound effects. ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/51954
.
Dobbs, Jarrett – SESSIONS COVERING UP For Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey On liar-Clinton Russia Uranium Deal
by rickwells.us
{rickwells.us} ~ Lou Dobbs points out, “Today Russia owns 60 percent of the global market in nuclear power plants and the United States must now import 90% of its nuclear fuel.”... He asks, “How could such a deal have ever been approved?” There was some anti-American funny business going on that was covered up by the FBI and DOJ, that’s how, as he and Gregg Jarrett discuss, and the corruption and perpetual cover up is continuing and has expanded well beyond just those two agencies. An exasperated Dobbs observes that “There is no order from Attorney General Jeff Sessions to lift the non-disclosure and to have that informant get over to the Senate Judiciary Committee.”... Mueller should be fired and the non-disclosure open up by Session. https://rickwells.us/dobbs-sessions-mueller-uranium/.
How Russian Firm Might
Have Siphoned Tools From The NSA
by Kim Zetter
{theintercept.com} ~ KASPERSKY LAB HAS come under intense scrutiny after its antivirus software was linked to the breach of an NSA employee’s home computer in 2015 by Russian government hackers... U.S. government sources, quoted in news reports, suggested the Moscow-based company colluded with the hackers to steal classified documents or tools from the worker’s machine, or at least turned a blind eye to this activity. The Department of Homeland Security banned Kaspersky products from civilian government systems, and Best Buy has removed the software from computers it sells based on concerns that the software can be used to spy on customers. But a closer look at the allegations and technical details of how Kaspersky’s products operate raises questions about the accuracy of the narrative being woven in news reports and suggests that U.S. officials could be technically correct in their statements about what occurred, while also being incorrect about collusion on the part of Kaspersky... https://theintercept.com/2017/10/20/kaspersky-software-russia-nsa/.
Germany: Full Censorship Now Official
A German court recently sentenced journalist Michael Stürzenberger to
six months in jail for posting on his Facebook page a historical photo
of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini,
shaking the hand of a Nazi official in Berlin, in 1941
by Judith Bergman
{gatestoneinstitute.org} ~ A new German law introducing state censorship on social media platforms came into effect on October 1, 2017... The new law requires social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to censor their users on behalf of the German state. Social media companies are obliged to delete or block any online "criminal offenses" such as libel, slander, defamation or incitement, within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint -- regardless of whether or the content is accurate or not. Social media companies receive seven days for more complicated cases. If they fail to do so, the German government can fine them up to 50 million euros for failing to comply with the law. This state censorship makes free speech subject to the arbitrary decisions of corporate entities that are likely to censor more than absolutely necessary, rather than risk a crushing fine... ttps://www.https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11205/germany-official-censorship/11205/germany-official-censorship.
The liar-nObama Administration’s Uranium One Scandal
by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
{nationalreview.com} ~ Not only the liar-Clintons are implicated in a uranium deal with the Russians that compromised national-security interests... Let’s put the Uranium One scandal in perspective: The cool half-million bucks the Putin regime funneled to liar-Bill Clinton was five times the amount it spent on those Facebook ads — the ones the media-Democrat complex ludicrously suggests swung the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump. The Facebook-ad buy, which started in June 2015 — before Donald Trump entered the race — was more left-wing agitprop than electioneering. The liar-Clintons’ own long-time political strategist Mark Penn estimates that just $6,500 went to actual electioneering. (You read that right: 65 hundred dollars.) By contrast, the staggering $500,000 payday from a Kremlin-tied Russian bank for a single speech was part of a multi-million-dollar influence-peddling scheme to enrich the former president and his wife, then–secretary of state liar-Hillary Clinton. At the time, Russia was plotting — successfully — to secure U.S. government approval for its acquisition of Uranium One, and with it, tens of billions of dollars in U.S. uranium reserves... http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452972/uranium-one-deal-obama-administration-doj-hillary-clinton-racketeering?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Saturday%202017-10-21&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives.
New facts about Green Berets lost in Niger
are way more DISTURBING than any phone call
by Allen West
{allenwest.com} ~ If there’s one thing that must not be, should never be politicized, it’s the deaths of our Warriors deployed into combat zones around the world... What gives me the most angst is that the liberal progressive leftist media is attempting to capitalize on something that should be private. Yet, when there were four Americans who lost their lives in Benghazi, there was little to nothing mentioned. That is the epitome of partisan politicization of the lives of those serving on the front lines of freedom. In case you’re somehow unaware, I’m referring to the loss of four U.S. Army Special Forces troops in the country of Niger. We reported on this last week as it happened to highlight the spread of Islamic jihadism in North Africa, extending down into sub-Saharan Africa. We need to end this insidious game using our Warriors as some tennis ball to be volleyed back and forth. What we must focus on is an ongoing fight against Islamic jihadism and terrorism, and its global proliferation... https://www.allenwest.com/2017/10/20/new-facts-green-berets-lost-niger-way-disturbing-phone-call/.
.
Trump and liar-nObamacare
{townhall.com} ~ Late last week, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the secretaries of the treasury and health and human services to cease making payments to health care insurance companies in behalf of the more than 6 million Americans who qualify for these payments under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly known as liar-mObamacare.
liar-Obamacare is the signature legislation of former President Barack liar-Obama, enacted in 2010 and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2012. Its stated goal was to use the engine of the federal government to make health insurance available and affordable to everyone in America.
Here is the back story.
How is it up to the president to decide whether to spend federal dollars when the law requires him to do so? The answer to that question depends on whether Congress has authorized the specific expenditure of the tax dollars.
Under the Constitution, when Congress passes legislation that directs the president to spend federal tax dollars -- or, as is likelier the case today, dollars borrowed by the federal government -- Congress must appropriate funds for the expenditure. So for every federal program that spends money, Congress must first create the program -- for example, building a bridge or paving an interstate highway -- and then it must pass a second bill that appropriates money from the federal treasury and makes it available to the president for the purpose stated in the first law.
By the time the subsidy provisions took effect, the Republicans were in control of Congress, yet liar-nObama was still in the White House. When liar-nObama asked Congress to appropriate the funds needed to make the subsidy payments required by the liar-nObamacare statute, Congress declined to do so. Thus, liar-nObama -- who, as the president of the United States, was charged with enforcing all federal laws -- was denied the means with which to enforce the subsidy portion of his favorite legislation.
So he spent the money anyway. He directed his secretaries of the treasury and health and human services to take appropriated funds from unstated programs and to make the subsidy payments to the seven largest health insurance carriers in the United States from those funds. Of course, by doing so, he was depriving other federal programs, authorized and funded by Congress, of the monies to which they were entitled. But liar-nObamacare was his legacy, and he was not about to let it die on the vine.
That's because the drafters of the Constitution feared the very situation confronted by Congress and liar-nObama in 2013 -- a law that is no longer popular, is no longer supported by Congress and costs money to enforce, with a president eager to enforce it and a Congress unwilling to authorize the payments. To address this tension between a president wanting to spend federal dollars and a Congress declining to authorize him to do so, the drafters of the Constitution put the power of the purse unambiguously in the hands of Congress. The Constitution could not be clearer: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law."
It follows that where the appropriations have not been made by Congress, the funds may not be spent by the president. When liar-nObama declined to recognize this constitutional truism, the House of Representatives sued the secretary of health and human services in federal court, seeking to enjoin her from making the subsidy payments, and the House won the case. The court underscored the well-recognized dual scheme of the Framers whereby two laws are required for all federal expenditures -- one to tell the president on whom or on what the money should be spent and the second to authorize the actual expenditure. Without the second law -- the express authorization -- there can be no lawful expenditure.
Let's not lose sight of the whole picture here. President liar-nObama has triumphed over President Trump and the Republicans who control Congress because all but a handful of those who are faithful to the Constitution are behaving as if there were a constitutional obligation on the part of the federal government to provide health insurance for everyone in America. According to a plain reading of the Constitution -- and even as articulated by the Supreme Court in the case that upheld the constitutionality of liar-nObamacare -- there isn't.
Comments