OBAMA LOYALISTS ARE LEAKING THE 'FAKE NEWS' CREATED BY ‘AGENDA JOURNALISTS’

OBAMA LOYALISTS ARE LEAKING THE 'FAKE NEWS' CREATED BY ‘AGENDA JOURNALISTS’

There is not a minute of the day that I’m not listening to the ‘Paid to Report’ Media and their false underlying theme and disdain for the truth when it comes to dealing with the threat of the unvetted illegal immigrants and refugees saga! The deplorables that they describe in their one-way logic can’t conceive of the idea that the rule of law matters, and that Trump is only enforcing the laws that are already on the books, but never imposed by the Obama administration, and nothing more! Very few people I know who believe in what I believe, especially after witnessing what’s been going on in countries like Sweden, Germany, France, etc., just want the immigration laws followed, and if the process is followed and they take the time to assimilate, like every legal immigrant that I know that went through the process, then fine, welcome!

I don’t know if anyone noticed that they’re finding out that in most, or all of these Socialist based countries that these refugees are being funded by the government through subsides, welfare payments, and national healthcare programs, so you would have to believe that the same holds true here in America, and if that is true, which we can deduct with a little common sense, that we are funding Sharia Law, terrorists, and the anti-Christian warriors of the underworld, a.k.a. the ACLU.

I sit here watching these Sanctuary Cities going down with the ship, and now that churches are taking illegals in to protect them from the alt right’s crusade against humanity, and Donald Trump! Now these cities won’t only be losing federal funds, but laying the burden of financing these illegals through the offering plate, or in other words, the taxpayer’s pockets, again! I wonder how the ACLU will handle this version and interpretation of the separation of church and state? Now if you look at this with an open mind you would see what the taxpayers in these cities are being persuaded to do by the outsider financed opposition to the America’s Constitutional Republic ideology and Constitution.

By Constitutional law President Trump can withhold federal finances because of these cities encouraging illegals to be here illegally, and against federal law because immigration is under Federal jurisdiction. The American taxpayer pays $54 Billion dollars a year to fund these illegals, and if you didn’t know that $20 Billion gets sent home to these illegal families who are living in other countries, then you haven’t done your homework.

I don’t understand how an unelected progressive judge(s) can make law, and override the Executive Order of the President of the United states when the Constitution gives him the sole power to make the call?

The founders and framers delegated most powers of the general government to the legislature. It was done so intentionally, as one house was closely aligned with the interests of the people (The House of Representatives), while the other was representative of the sovereignty of the states (The Senate). When the courts act to create de-facto law rather than by rendering of opinion, they violate the intentional separation of powers doctrine used to diffuse powers not only between separate branches of the general government, but also the paradigm of the general government and the states. When a group of nine judges attempt to make law for a populace of 310 million and settle constitutional questions for all time, they are acting against the interests of the compact of the Constitution. Such a situation is demonstrative of an oligarchy, not a republic.

Federal law, at 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f), provides in part:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Prof. Peter Spiro from Temple University believes that this gives the president complete discretion.

But there is a problem with that. Congress cannot delegate to the president authority that Congress does not have, so if a congressional ban would be unconstitutional, then so would a president doing the same. Every president is bound to follow the Constitution always, just like Congress.

There are, however, two ways that the law (or presidential restrictions) could definitely pass constitutional muster.

One way is if Congress narrows the ban by age, gender, or nationality, such as all Muslim males ages 18 through 25, or Muslims from certain countries with serious terrorist problems like Syria. Then the restriction is not defined solely by religion.

The other is if Congress imposes an ideological test. For example, denying entry to any person who the government determines believes that America should be governed by Sharia law instead of our current constitutional system, or denying entry to any person who believes Israel should be destroyed, or who believes it is okay to kill non-Muslims, or to wage jihad against Americans. ~~

OBAMA MADE HISTORY BY ATTEMPTING TO INFUSE OUR REPUBLIC WITH DIVISION AND HATE THROUGH DECEPTION, AND IF YOU DON’T ACKNOWLEDGE HIS SOCIALIST GAME PLAN AND CALL IT FOR WHAT IT IS, LIKE OBAMA DIDN'T ALSO BY NOT RECOGNIZING ‘RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM,’ AMERICA’S NUMBER ONE ENEMY, THEN HISTORY IS DOOMED TO REPEAT ITSELF!

We have a record high 95+ million people out of the work force and out of the market because there are no jobs, we have the highest number of people in history on welfare and government subsides, and we have the highest poverty rate in the history of America, and all because of the forced implementation of Obama’s strategies that he learned from his mentors Alinsky and his disciples, Cloward and Piven, which he spent 4 years at Columbia absorbing and plotting!

Obama used the Democratic Party as a stepping stone, and when you have people like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the counterpart version on the right of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, you know he struck while the iron was hot, and while we were all asleep! Who would have ever thought that our elected officials would ever turn on the ‘Will’ of the American people and ignore the rule of law and the constitution?  They did, they will, and they are continuing on behind the scenes, and after watching the smug and unrepentant John Brennan yesterday, former Director of the CIA, and knowing his thoughts about the outsider nonpolitician, Donald Trump, you know I was captivated by his comments and observations.

Click here>  BRENNAN GETTING A PARTING SHOT AT TRUMP AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!

IS JOHN BRENNAN, THE MAN BEHIND THE LIES OF OBAMA’S LEGACY?

JOHN BRENNAN’S EXTREMISM AND DISHONESTY REWARDED WITH CIA DIRECTOR NOMINATION!

Obama's top terrorism adviser goes from unconfirmable in 2008 to uncontroversial in 2013, reflecting the Obama legacy

Prior to President Obama's first inauguration in 2009, a controversy erupted over reports that he intended to appoint John Brennan as CIA director. That controversy, in which I participated, centered around the fact that Brennan, as a Bush-era CIA official, had expressly endorsed Bush's programs of torture (other than waterboarding) and rendition and also was a vocal advocate of immunizing lawbreaking telecoms for their role in the illegal Bush NSA eavesdropping program. As a result, Brennan withdrew his name from consideration, issuing a bitter letter blaming "strong criticism in some quarters prompted by [his] previous service with the...CIA."

This "victory" of forcing Brennan's withdrawal proved somewhat Pyrrhic, as Obama then appointed him as his top counter-terrorism adviser, where he exerted at least as much influence as he would have had as CIA Director, if not more. In that position, Brennan last year got caught outright lying when he claimed Obama's drone program caused no civilian deaths in Pakistan over the prior year.

He also spouted complete though highly influential falsehoods to the world in the immediate aftermath of the Osama bin Laden killing, including claiming that bin Laden "engaged in a firefight" with Navy SEALS and had "used his wife as a human shield." Brennan has also been in charge of many of Obama's most controversial and radical policies, including "signature strikes" in Yemen -- targeting people without even knowing who they are -- and generally seizing the power to determine who will be marked for execution without any due process, oversight or transparency.

As it typically does in the US National Security State, all of that deceit and radicalism is resulting not in recrimination or loss of credibility for Brennan, but in reward and promotion. At 1 pm EST today, Obama will announce that he has selected Brennan to replace Gen. David Petraeus as CIA chief: the same position for which, four short years ago, Brennan's pro-torture-and-rendition past rendered him unfit and unconfirmable.

Although I actively opposed Brennan's CIA nomination in 2008, I can't quite muster the energy or commitment to do so now. Indeed, the very idea that someone should be disqualified from service in the Obama administration because of involvement in and support for extremist Bush terrorism polices seems quaint and obsolete, given the great continuity between Bush and Obama on these issues. Whereas in 2008 it seemed uncertain in which direction Obama would go, making it important who wielded influence, that issue is now settled: Brennan is merely a symptom of Obama's own extremism in these areas, not a cause. This continuity will continue with or without Brennan because they are, rather obviously, Obama's preferred policies.

Still, this is worth commenting on because the drastic change between the reaction to Brennan in 2008 and now is revealing. The New York Times article this morning on the appointment claims that "it is uncertain whether the torture issue will now cause any problems for Mr. Brennan." Of course, there is nothing at all uncertain about that: "the torture issue" won't cause any problems for Brennan, as it did in 2008, because Obama has buried that issue with his "Look Forward, not Backward" decrees; because most people who claimed concern over such issues back in 2008 have resigned themselves to Obama's posture in this area; and because, with very rare exception, there are no more serious campaigns mounted against Obama's decisions except from the American Right. It is a perfect illustration of the Obama legacy that a person who was untouchable as CIA chief in 2008 because of his support for Bush's most radical policies is not only Obama's choice for the same position now, but will encounter very little resistance. Within this change one finds one of the most significant aspects of the Obama presidency: his conversion of what were once highly contentious right-wing policies into harmonious dogma of the DC bipartisan consensus. Then again, given how the CIA operates, one could fairly argue that Brennan's eagerness to deceive and his long record of supporting radical and unaccountable powers make him the perfect person to run that agency. It seems clear that this is Obama's calculus.

UPDATE

There's one more point worth noting: the reason Obama needs a new CIA chief is because David Petraeus was forced to resign. Here we see the ethos and morality of imperial Washington: past support for torture and rendition does not disqualify one for a top national security position; only an extramarital affair can do that.

UPDATE II

The ACLU today said that the Senate should not proceed with Brennan's nomination "until it assesses the legality of his actions in past leadership positions in the CIA during the early years of the George W. Bush administration and in his current role in the ongoing targeted killing program". By Glenn Greenwald, a Friend of America! ~~

Report: Muslim Sympathizers at CIA Behind Trump Leaks

Obama loyalists still at CIA fuel radical Islam!

WASHINGTON, D.C. – It’s time to “drain the swamp” at the CIA, as former CIA Director John Brennan, a clear Muslim sympathizer, packed the agency with Obama loyalists determined to bring down the Trump administration. It started from the early days of Obama's unconstitutional appointments of his 'Czars' to the Brennan's appointment, and Brennan's hiring of loyal Muslim sympathizers....Click here>  OBAMA'S CZARS ASSIGNED TO ATTACK THE INNER WORKINGS OF OUR REPUBLIC!

Looking for anti-Trump leakers, President Trump needs to be as concerned about the CIA as the NSA.

Few remember that it was John Brennan’s private security company that was responsible for the breach of State Department files which sanitized the passport records (still never seen by the public) of presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama prior to the 2008 presidential election.

On March 21, two unnamed contract employees for the State Dept. and a third were disciplined for breaching Obama’s passport files. Two were found to be employees for Stanley, Inc., a security firm based in Arlington, Virginia, that was headed by former CIA agent John Brennan, who was then serving as an advisor on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.

Brennan was an undergraduate at the American University in Cairo in the 1970s, where he studied Arabic.  In 1976, he voted in the presidential election for Communist Party USA candidate Gus Hall.  He speaks Arabic fluently, having served in the CIA as station chief in Saudi Arabia.

On Feb. 13, 2010, as President Obama’s chief counterterrorism advisor in the White House, Brennan hosted a public forum, co-hosted by the White House Office of Public Engagement and the Islamic Center at New York University, where he quoted a lengthy statement in Arabic which he didn’t translate for his English-speaking audience.

Previously, in a speech Brennan delivered on Aug. 9, 2009, to a conference sponsored by Center for Strategic and International Studies, Brennan attempted to legitimatize the term “jihad,” arguing it signified an internal moral struggle of peaceful introspection, and not the advocacy of violent Islamic terrorism.

At this conference, Brennan also tried to argue that Hezbollah was no longer an Islamic terrorist organization, arguing instead that it had “evolved,” such that Hezbollah now has “members of parliament in the cabinet; there are lawyers, doctors, and others who are part of the Hezbollah organization.”

In Egypt, Obama administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood when the “Arab Spring” ousted Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and elected Muslim Brotherhood-backed Mohamed Morsi as president on June 30, 2012.

Under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt has since criminalized the Muslim Brotherhood and is determined to root out its members that gained positions of authority in parliament and government under Morsi.

Yet, even today, support for the Muslim Brotherhood remains strong in a CIA still dominated by Brennan loyalists.

On Feb. 8, Politico reported that Trump administration officials pushing to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization are being opposed by CIA analysts who claim it “may fuel extremism” and damage relations with America’s allies.

According to Politico, a CIA internal document, dated Jan. 31, boasts that “a minority of Muslim Brotherhood members have engaged in violence, most often in response to harsh regime repression, perceived foreign occupation, or civil conflicts.”

“MB [Muslim Brotherhood] groups enjoy widespread support across the Near East-North Africa region and many Arabs and Muslims worldwide would view an MB designation as an affront to their core religious and societal values,” the document continues, as reported by Politico. “Moreover, a US designation would probably weaken MB leaders’ arguments against violence and provide ISIS and al-Qaida additional grist for propaganda to win followers and support, particularly for attacks against US interests.”

Through a spokesman, Brennan declared he was “deeply saddened and angered at Trump’s despicable display of self-aggrandizement” when Trump traveled to CIA headquarters and delivered a speech before the agency’s memorial to CIA officers deceased in the line of duty.

Departing his position at the CIA, Brennan criticized Trump’s approach to national security, suggesting Trump should not be “talking and tweeting” without understanding Russia’s threat to the United States.  Brennan also took “great umbrage” at Trump’s suggestion that intelligence agencies biased against him were behaving as if the U.S. were Nazi Germany.

“Now that he’s going to have an opportunity to do something for our national security as opposed to talking and tweeting,” Brennan told Fox News Sunday, on Jan. 15. “He’s going to have tremendous responsibility to make sure that U.S. and national security interests are protected. I think he has to be mindful that he does not have a full appreciation and understanding of what the implications are of going down that road.” ...Hmmm..

With the current threat of Facebook's feckless ability to be bipartisan, feel free to befriend me at 'Jonathan E P Moore' to get direct and instant access, or follow 'While You Were Sleeping' at www.whileyouweredozing.blogspot.com Don't forget to follow the Friends Of Liberty on Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, and Google Plus, and PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

Friends Of Liberty is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights.