Sen. Sessions confirms Republican Leaders may be submitting to Obama’s EO amnesty!

[johnwk]

Sen. Sessions confirms Republican Leaders may be submitting to Obama’s EO amnesty!

.

See: Sessions: GOP Has No Plan to Block Obama Amnesty

Senator Jeff Sessions says he’s not convinced his fellow Republicans have a plan to successfully combat President Obama’s newly announced executive orders on immigration.

“I haven’t seen the details of a plan to confront this unprecedented power grab,” Sessions said in a phone interview Thursday evening. He added that while plenty of his Republican colleagues have released “tough” statements following Obama’s announcement, he hasn’t seen the party coalesce around a plan.”

Unfortunately Sen. Sessions is absolutely correct! Our Republican Party Leadership’s response to Obama’s disregard to enforce existing law is to meander, beat its chest in front of every TV camera available and tell us something we already know. Obama’s executive action announcing to an estimated 5 million illegal entrants they may remain in our country if they register with the federal government, is not only disobeying existing statutory law which deals with illegal entrants, but Obama’s action is an attempt to usurp legislative power and a violation of our Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine, which in fact meets the definition of tyranny.

So, the only question in front of our Republican Party Leadership is how to respond to Obama’s tyranny? Surprising as it may seem our forefathers dealt with the same problem and their thoughtful response can be found in such documents as the Articles of Association, the Declaration of Independence and the Kentucky Resolutions, each of which were the first step in response to the very kind of tyranny engaged in by the Obama Administration!

So, let us focus on the Kentucky Resolution which was in response to the Alien and Sedition Acts.

As you will see, the State of Kentucky officially responded with a resolution condemning the alien and sedition laws and the representatives of the people boldly stated they would be faithless to themselves, and to those they represent, were they silently to acquiesce. And the people’s representatives concluded by writing in their resolution: ”… in order that no pretexts or arguments may be drawn from a supposed acquiescence on the part of this commonwealth in the constitutionality of those laws, and be thereby used as precedents for similar future violations of federal compact; this commonwealth does now enter against them, its SOLEMN PROTEST.”

Is it not the duty of the House of Representatives, which is controlled by our Republican Representatives, to “officially” adopt a Resolution listing why Obama’s actions are in violation of existing statutory law; how his order usurps legislative power and violates our Constitution; and as such is not acquiesced to by the House of Representatives in order that no pretexts or arguments may be drawn in the future to a supposed acquiescence or the setting of a precedent?

Is it not a proper course of action for our Representatives to officially reject Obama’s usurpation of legislative power as being an unconstitutional Act and inform illegal entrants that an unconstitutional act, although masquerading as “law”, “imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.” ___ 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

Would it not be a good faith effort to inform illegal entrants that registering under Obama act does not provide them any protection in the future from being punished and deported for entering our country illegally, regardless of Obama's unenforceable act?

The bottom line is, I believe our forefathers approach to the alien and sedition laws is the proper first step to take in response to Obama’s act of tyranny, and is something the Republican Party Leadership should have no problem coalescing around which would answer Senator Sessions’ rightful claim that he hasn’t seen the party coalesce around a plan.

Let us recall the warning to us about submitting to despotism:

”Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, “Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud.” It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism - the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted - is the beginning of the end of the nations ruin.”___ THE OLD GUARD, A MONTHLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF 1776 AND 1787.

JWK



The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47

 

[Anti Federalist]

Unfortunately Sen. Sessions is absolutely correct! Our Republican Party Leadership’s response to Obama’s disregard to enforce existing law is to meander, beat its chest in front of every TV camera available and tell us something we already know

You're not expecting something different, are you?

 

[Occam's Banana]

You're not expecting something different, are you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGK8IC-bGnU

 

[CPUd]

One small problem is the variety of names that mey be applied to the one knot, for examle, a Granny is a False Knot, a Clove Hitch is a Waterman's Knot, an Overhand Knot is a Thumb Knot. But when we come to snelling a hook, the length of nylon attached to the hook may be a snell or a snood.

I now find that the actual job of tying the snood may be called snoozing, while snelling is often jealously thought of as an art restricted to the fly fisherman. I have fished with bottom-fisherman on the Great Barrier Reef who routinely snell their hooks.

Snelling A Hook Restricted to lines of breaking strength less than about 20kg, the process is a simple one.

Pass the end of the line, trace or tippet through the eye twice, leaving a loop hanging below the hook.
Hold both lines along the shank of the hook.
Use the loop to wind tight coils around the shank and both lines, from the eye upwards. Use from 5 to 10 turns.
Use the fingers to hold these tight coils in place. Pull the line (extending from the eye) until the whole loop has passed under these tight coils.
With coils drawn up, use pliers to pull up the end of the line.


Another end loop can be tied quickly and easily using the Blood Bight Knot.

Double the line back to make a loop of the size desired.
Bring the end of the loop twice over the doubled part.
Now pass the end of the loop through the first loop formed in the doubled part.
Draw the knot up into shape, keeping pressure on both lines.

The Blood Bight Knot is often used for attaching a dropper when fishing deep water with several hooks.

Some anglers attached the hook directly to the end of the loop, which should be at least 30cm from the end of the line.

This is not a good practice, especially when the fish are shy. Far better to attach a single strand of nylon to a short Blood Bight Knot, using another Blood Bight Knot, or a Surgeon's Knot.

 

[Anti Federalist]

One small problem is the variety of names that mey be applied to the one knot, for examle, a Granny is a False Knot, a Clove Hitch is a Waterman's Knot, an Overhand Knot is a Thumb Knot. But when we come to snelling a hook, the length of nylon attached to the hook may be a snell or a snood.

I now find that the actual job of tying the snood may be called snoozing, while snelling is often jealously thought of as an art restricted to the fly fisherman. I have fished with bottom-fisherman on the Great Barrier Reef who routinely snell their hooks.

Snelling A Hook Restricted to lines of breaking strength less than about 20kg, the process is a simple one.

Pass the end of the line, trace or tippet through the eye twice, leaving a loop hanging below the hook.
Hold both lines along the shank of the hook.
Use the loop to wind tight coils around the shank and both lines, from the eye upwards. Use from 5 to 10 turns.
Use the fingers to hold these tight coils in place. Pull the line (extending from the eye) until the whole loop has passed under these tight coils.
With coils drawn up, use pliers to pull up the end of the line.


Another end loop can be tied quickly and easily using the Blood Bight Knot.

Double the line back to make a loop of the size desired.
Bring the end of the loop twice over the doubled part.
Now pass the end of the loop through the first loop formed in the doubled part.
Draw the knot up into shape, keeping pressure on both lines.

The Blood Bight Knot is often used for attaching a dropper when fishing deep water with several hooks.

Some anglers attached the hook directly to the end of the loop, which should be at least 30cm from the end of the line.

This is not a good practice, especially when the fish are shy. Far better to attach a single strand of nylon to a short Blood Bight Knot, using another Blood Bight Knot, or a Surgeon's Knot.

 

[johnwk]

One small problem is the variety of names that mey be applied to the one knot, for examle, a Granny is a False Knot, a Clove Hitch is a Waterman's Knot, an Overhand Knot is a Thumb Knot. But when we come to snelling a hook, the length of nylon attached to the hook may be a snell or a snood.

I now find that the actual job of tying the snood may be called snoozing, while snelling is often jealously thought of as an art restricted to the fly fisherman. I have fished with bottom-fisherman on the Great Barrier Reef who routinely snell their hooks.

Snelling A Hook Restricted to lines of breaking strength less than about 20kg, the process is a simple one.

Pass the end of the line, trace or tippet through the eye twice, leaving a loop hanging below the hook.
Hold both lines along the shank of the hook.
Use the loop to wind tight coils around the shank and both lines, from the eye upwards. Use from 5 to 10 turns.
Use the fingers to hold these tight coils in place. Pull the line (extending from the eye) until the whole loop has passed under these tight coils.
With coils drawn up, use pliers to pull up the end of the line.


Another end loop can be tied quickly and easily using the Blood Bight Knot.

Double the line back to make a loop of the size desired.
Bring the end of the loop twice over the doubled part.
Now pass the end of the loop through the first loop formed in the doubled part.
Draw the knot up into shape, keeping pressure on both lines.

The Blood Bight Knot is often used for attaching a dropper when fishing deep water with several hooks.

Some anglers attached the hook directly to the end of the loop, which should be at least 30cm from the end of the line.

This is not a good practice, especially when the fish are shy. Far better to attach a single strand of nylon to a short Blood Bight Knot, using another Blood Bight Knot, or a Surgeon's Knot.

Why do you post in the thread if you are not interested in the subject?


JWK

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

Not like there was anything they could have done. They're not going to do another government shutdown and risk further damaging what image they feel they have left.

 

[johnwk]

S.C. has exclusive jurisdiction if States file suit against Obama’s E.O. amnesty

According to our Constitution’s legislative intent, if a number of states decide to file suit against Obama’s usurpation of power by setting his own arbitrary public policy dealing with an approximate 5 million illegal entrants, the States would in fact do well to file directly in the Supreme Court of the United States which is in accordance with the legislative intent of our Constitution. This case should not be filed in District Court which would prolong the case for years and compound the devastating financial and social consequences of 5 million illegal entrants no longer being subject to existing statutory law because of Obama’s arbitrary policy dealing with illegal entrants.

Our Constitution states: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”

"Original jurisdiction" is that bestowed upon a tribunal in the first instance, and “shall“, as used in, “the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction”, preempts another tribunal, such as the inferior district courts created by Congress, from assuming the case in the first instance.

Additionally, “exclusive jurisdiction” is that which gives to one tribunal sole power to try the cause.


Hamilton, in Federalist Paper No. 81 confirms a case in which a State is party ought to be heard by the Supreme Court and not a district court which is one of the inferior courts created by Congress:

Hamilton says:

“Let us now examine in what manner the judicial authority is to be distributed between the supreme and the inferior courts of the Union. The Supreme Court is to be invested with original jurisdiction, only "in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which A STATE shall be a party.'' Public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns. All questions in which they are concerned are so directly connected with the public peace, that, as well for the preservation of this, as out of respect to the sovereignties they represent, it is both expedient and proper that such questions should be submitted in the first instance to the highest judicatory of the nation. Though consuls have not in strictness a diplomatic character, yet as they are the public agents of the nations to which they belong, the same observation is in a great measure applicable to them. In cases in which a State might happen to be a party, it would ill suit its dignity to be turned over to an inferior tribunal.”


And this is why, under “An Act to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States“ Act of 1789, 1 Stat. CH. 20 see: Supreme court, original jurisdiction (scroll to bottom of page) we find:

"SEC. 13. And be it further enacted, That the Supreme Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies of a civil nature, where a state is party, except between a state and its citizens; and except also between a state and citizens of other states, or aliens, in which latter case it shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction."

In fact, by the wording of our Constitution, and by the documented intentions under which our Constitution was adopted as expressed in the Federalist Papers, the Supreme Court and not an inferior court created by Congress, has exclusive jurisdiction over Obama’s usurpation of power, should a State decide to file suite against Obama’s exercise of Congress’ exclusive power to set public policy dealing with naturalization and illegal entrants.


Additionally, should a number of States, especially border States, decide to file suit, they should immediately ask the Court for an injunction prohibiting Obama’s Administration to follow Obama’s Executive Order while its constitutionality is being adjudicated. To not grant the injunction would allow the devastating financial and social effects of 5 million aliens being exempted from statutory law to be compounded.

JWK




The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47

 

[DFF]

There are no Republicans or Democrats anymore. It's just "the Party."

 

[JustinTime]

Not like there was anything they could have done. They're not going to do another government shutdown and risk further damaging what image they feel they have left.

Id applaud another government "shutdown", it wasn't actually a shutdown anyway, it just temporarily cut federal activities to something closer to what the Constitution authorizes. I hope they do it, but this time make a more effective case for why, and what is actually happening as a result.

But sadly they probably secretly want Obama to give amnesty by exec order. The only reason most Republicans talk big on immigration is to maintain the illusion that we have two parties.

 

[johnwk]

Tennessee may sue over Obama’s executive order tyranny!

See: Tennessee lawmakers want to sue Obama over immigration plan
November 21st, 2014

”Two Tennessee state legislators said this morning they are filing a joint resolution asking Gov. Bill Haslam to file a lawsuit against the Obama administration on behalf of the state.

State Rep. Andy Holt, R-Dresden, and Sen. Mae Beavers, R-Mt. Juliet, say the president's immigration plan, which he outlined to the nation Thursday night, is "an illegal usurpation of undelegated power."

Thumbs up to State Rep. Andy Holt, R-Dresden, and Sen. Mae Beavers, R-Mt. Juliet who have correctly indicated Obama’s order to set public policy dealing with naturalization and illegal entrants is "an illegal usurpation of undelegated power."


JWK




If the America People do not rise up and defend their existing Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people it was designed to control and regulate?