February 2017
S M T W T F S
« Oct    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728  
PAYPAL Donations

The The Highlands Tea Party relies on your generous donations to keep the candle of liberty burning while we work tirelessly to reign in our out of control government, educate our Patriots on the latest issues, The HIghlands Tea party is a non-profit organization financed primarily by its members and through Raffles. We have no special interest funding our efforts. Your donations make a difference. Donations are not tax-deductible. Please consider a monthly donation; click on the PayPal Button to contribute with PayPal if you have an existing PayPal account or by credit card if you do not have a PayPal account. Please send checks to the address below, PayPal a protected transaction site used around the world. Donating by PayPal is Safe and Convenient

Send Checks to: The Highlands Tea Party 4196 Smoke signal Sebring, FL 33872

All donations are greatly appreciated, Thank You & God Bless My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy! ~Thomas Jefferson

THTP - POLL
General information

Archive for the ‘8 – Articles of Interest’ Category

BEING THAT SOCIALIST & GEORGE SOROS ARE FIGHTING FOR AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION; I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT WE SHOULD EVER ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN! THEY HAVE A MISSION

This a couple year old article but an eye opener that we should be aware of.  If these elements are pushing for this Article V convention, it indicates they have a mission to try and re-write the constitution.

Wednesday, 15 January 2014

Socialists and Soros Fight for Article V Convention

Written by 

Photo of George Soros: AP Images
Socialists and Soros Fight for Article V Convention
 Recently, The New American has reported on the efforts by radio talk show host Mark Levin and others to push for a constitutional convention (a convention of the states, in the parlance of the proponents).

In his new book, Levin argues that such a convention is the last hope “to reform the federal government from its degenerate, bloated, imperial structure back to its (smaller) republican roots.”

Unfortunately, many otherwise well-educated and well-meaning conservatives have succumbed to Levin’s siren song and they have gone so far as to deny the constitutionality of nullification and to insist that an Article V convention is the only way to restore the balance of federalism in our Republic.

Fighting for the Constitution as given to us by our Founders is a noble goal and the anxiety of the conservative con-con collaborators is understandable. We at The New American and The John Birch Society welcome the help of all those courageous enough to enlist in the battle to defeat the forces of federal absolutism. We part company with those pushing for an Article V convention, however, and we believe that a constitutional convention is not the right way to stop the federal assault on our Constitution and the freedoms it protects.

 The New American and many other liberty-minded organizations promote nullification as the “rightful remedy” for curing the constant federal overreaching. We believe that as the agent of the states, the federal government has exceeded its contractual authority and the states as principals have the right to refuse to ratify any such usurpation.   Since the publication of Levin’s admittedly popular book, the battle between those promoting nullification and those advocating for an Article V constitutional convention is a topic getting plenty of coverage in the alternative media.

There is another uncomfortable aspect of the Article V movement that is not being discussed, however, but needs to be, particularly in light of the good people who have associated themselves with it.  Within the ranks of those clamoring for an Article V convention are found numerous extremely radical, progressive, and socialist organizations that otherwise would have little in common with the conservatives fighting on the same side.

Wolf-Pac is one of the groups that this reporter suspects many Levin listeners would be surprised to know is their compatriot in a call for a con-con.   On its website, Wolf-Pac pushes for an Article V “convention of the states” as the best way to accomplish its “ultimate goal:

To restore true democracy in the United States by pressuring our State Representatives to pass a much needed 28th Amendment to our Constitution which would end corporate personhood and publicly finance all elections in our country.

In order to persuade Americans to join its cause, Wolf-Pac will:

inform the public by running television commercials, radio ads, social media, internet ads, and using the media platform of the largest online news show in the world, The Young Turks.    The Young Turks? Most constitutionalists (and I imagine most fans of Mark Levin) don’t spend much time during the day watching the Young Turks, the YouTube-based news and entertainment channel that dubs itself the “world’s largest online news network.”   As unfamiliar as they may be with the Young Turks, it seems certain conservatives pushing for a con-con are even more unfamiliar with who pays the bills at this online purveyor of progressive ideology: George Soros (shown). Dan Gainor reports:

In fact, Soros funds nearly every major left-wing media source in the United States. Forty-five of those are financed through his support of the Media Consortium. That organization ‘is a network of the country’s leading, progressive, independent media outlets.’ The list is predictable — everything from Alternet to the Young Turks.

That’s right. George Soros — the financier of global fascism —  is pumping millions of dollars into the same Article V campaign that is being promoted by Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and other popular conservative spokesmen.    What will those in Wolf-Pac do if they are able to get “their amendment” proposed and accepted by an Article V convention?    “Celebrate the fact that we had the courage and persistance [sic] to accomplish something truly amazing and historic together.”

Anything a group with this anti-constitutional agenda would do to our Constitution would certainly be historic — in the worst way.    This should be enough to convince all true conservatives, constitutionalists, and friends of liberty to run headlong away from the ranks of the Article V con-con army, regardless of how popular and persuasive their generals may be.

It will likely surprise these devoted, but deluded, Article V advocates that Wolf-Pac is just the tip of the iceberg. These good people would be wise to take a look at this heavily abbreviated roster of their radical fellow travelers in the con-con movement, each of which is a registered “founding member” of theMove to Amend” coalition.

Alliance for Democracy

Center for Media and Democracy

Code Pink

Independent Progressive Politics Network

Progressive Democrats of America

Sierra Club

Vermont for Single Payer

Mind you, hundreds more groups “committed to social and economic justice, ending corporate rule, and building a vibrant democracy” are gathered under this umbrella.

This hardly seems to be a corps that most Levin listeners would be happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with in the fight for a “convention of the states.” In fairness, these allies likely don’t share their conservative cohorts’ love and loyalty to the Constitution.

It’s time these right-minded men and women know with whom they are associating.   Its doubtful that Mark Levin’s legion of listeners would be as eager to get behind his Article V con-con agenda if they knew whom they were fighting beside and how radically their new allies want to change our beloved Constitution.

And that’s the problem. Regardless of the soothing words of Levin or others in the con-con camp, they cannot guarantee the outcome of such a convention. In fact, in light of the lists of leftist groups provided above, the results of the convention could be an outright scrapping of the Constitution written by the Founders in favor of one more in line with the progressive ideologies of Wolf-Pac, the Sierra Club, Code Pink, and others.

Remember, according to the history of Article V-style conventions, regardless of any state or congressional legislation requiring them to consider only one amendment (a balanced budget amendment, for example), the delegates elected to the convention would possess unlimited, though not unprecedented, power to propose revisions to the existing Constitution, based on the inherent right of the People in convention to alter or revise their government.

The mind boggles at the potential proposals that could come out of a convention composed of such radical representatives.

Don’t forget, George Soros’s billions are funding these fringe groups and politicians aren’t known for their ability to resist hefty campaign contributions.

Conservatives should shudder at the specter of a convention endowed with power of this magnitude, populated by activists who have a Soros credit card in their pocket and a commitment to “social justice” as their purpose. All the good intentions of the conservatives in the Article V camp would not be enough to force all these devastating changes to the Constitution back inside the progressive Pandora’s Box.

Readers are encouraged to click the links provided in this article and to investigate for themselves the agenda of the various Article V advocates and to determine if it’s worth the risk to our Constitution that would be posed by the presence of these groups in the “convention of the states.”

Finally, the startling information set out in this article is not meant as an attack on Mark Levin or anyone else working to call a “convention of the states.” Rather, it is intended to help the thousands of committed constitutionalists who find themselves believing in the Article V gospel he’s preaching to realize who’s sitting in the pews with them and whose money built the church.

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, the Second Amendment, and the surveillance state.  He is the co-founder of Liberty Rising, an educational endeavor aimed at promoting and preserving the Constitution. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton and he can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com

Related articles:

Article V: Con-Con or Nothing Is the Cry of This Cause Célèbre

Article V Group Ignores States’ Complicity in Federal Power Grab

Article V Convention: Dangerous Precedent, Dangerous Loyalties

Convention of States and Article V: Tearing Up the Talking Points

Compact for America Proposal Could Increase Federal Power

Convention of the States: Wrong on History, Nullification

Convention of the States: Scholars Ignore History

Repair vs. Restore: Why Constitution Doesn’t Need Article V Fix

In Defense of Con-Con, Meckler Chooses Ridicule Over Rebuttal

EX-President Obama planning overthrow of Current Adminstration

WARNING AMERICA, HARD TIMES ARE UPON US;
EX-PRESIDENT OBAMA IS PLANNING AN OVERTHROW OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, AN ACTION
CONSIDERED INSURRECTION UNDER 18 CODE US 2835 – ADVOCATING THE OVERTHROW OF GOVERNMENT.  

Check out the code at the bottom of this article, you will see it covers all the things they are planning to accomplish..
Obama will be overseeing it all from a shadow White House located within two miles of Trump. It features a mansion, which he’s fortifying with construction of a tall brick perimeter, and a nearby taxpayer-funded office with his own chief of staff and press secretary. Michelle Obama will also open an office there, along with the Obama Foundation.

Article from the New York Post………Hard to ignore the implications.

 Monday, February 13, 2017

If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America. The ex-“president” said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues, and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep. He has moved many of his administration’s top dogs over to an organization called Organizing for Action (OFA). OFA is behind the strategic and tactical implementation of the Marxist resistance we are seeing across America, and politically active courts are providing the leverage for this revolution.
 OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for progressive change, meaning Marxist revolution. Issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform. OFA members were propped up by the ex-“president’s” message from the shadows: “Organizing is the building block of everything great we’ve accomplished. Organizers around the country are fighting for change in their communities-and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines…Commit to this work in 2016 and beyond.” OFA’s website says it obtained its “digital” assets from the ex-“president’s” re-election effort and that he inspired the movement. In short, it’s the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic, picking up where Communist Party America leaves off.
 Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says OFA is an army of agitators 30,000 strong who will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the
ex-“president” “will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House.” Sperry writes that the ex-“president” is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the incoming administration through a network of leftist nonprofits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide. OFA IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate OFA has 32,525 volunteers nationwide. The ex-“president” and his wife will oversee the operation from their foundation office near the White House.
Think about how this works-Trump issues an immigration executive order; OFA signals for protests and statements from Islamic and pro-immigrant leftist groups; ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action; the twittersphere lights up with revolutionary social media; violence follows-all emanating from the ex-“president’s” signal that he is heartened by the protests.

Speaking of the end times, the Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 3:1-3,

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be…without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good.”

Indeed, perilous times are ahead for us
this
 is unprecedented in the history
Unites States of America. 
“It is a tragic irony of our time” to forget that the bloodiest tribe of our history, the Communists of Soviet Russia, were “motivated by brute power lust and a crudely materialistic greed for the unearned.”

YESTERDAY’S COMMUNIST IS TODAY PROGRESSIVE.

Obama-Communism-SC

18 U.S. Code § 2385 – Advocating overthrow of Government

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or   Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or    Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof-
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.      If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.     As used in this section, the terms “organizes” and “organize”, with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

A Letter to Stephen Curry from a Fan

Image result for AMAC Logo pictures

from – PopZette – by Lee Habeeb
I’ve been a big fan for a long time. I was a scoring point guard and captain of my high school basketball team. My dad was a very good college player. Your dad played on a bigger stage with the Charlotte Hornets. Both of our dads taught us there were more important things in life than basketball.
I first saw you play in your freshman year at Davidson College. It was clear that you were destined for a great college career. You were a point guard’s point guard. You could handle the ball, see the floor, shoot the long three, and you could drive the lane and finish.
You were small but fearless. You were a scorer, but you were selfless. You could shoot the lights out, but you could create shots for your teammates, too. And that may be the most valuable talent not only in basketball, but life — creating for others.
When you left Davidson at the end of your junior year as the nation’s leading scorer, many doubted someone as small and skinny as you could make it in the NBA. Some questioned your toughness. They thought you’d get beaten up by the bigger, stronger NBA guards. You defied the odds. And the skeptics.
And then you did something even I didn’t expect. Maybe you didn’t either. You got better. And better. Until you became one of the dominant players in the NBA.
You also became a great leader. And always, you lead by example. When you and your other half, “Smash Brother” Clay Thompson, broke the NBA record in the 2013-2014 season for most combined three-pointers (484), I was surprised. No one had deployed the three-point shot the way you guys did. Never had it been used as an offensive weapon. You changed the game, and gave every little guy with a great shot and a love of the game a reason to dream bigger.
The following season, the two of you broke that same record again (525 three-pointers), and not satisfied, the Smash Brothers went on to smash your own record with 678 three-pointers.   What was and is most pleasing to watch, however, is the joy you exhibit playing the game — the joy you exhibit when your teammates do something great. You often seem happier with them than you do with your own performance, which is the true mark of a leader.
It’s also the true mark of a Christian. Humility is the most important of the Christian virtues. I am a Christian, and love the way you carry yourself on the floor. I love it when you pound your chest and point to the sky after each shot you make. You don’t hide your faith. At the same time, you don’t hammer people with your faith, either.  I love the fact that on some of your “Curry One” sneakers, there’s a lace loop scripted “4:13.” It’s a Bible verse from Philippeans, which reads, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” I love that tattoo on your wrist from 1 Corinthians which says, in Hebrew, these words: “Love never fails.”
I love that a guy as skilled, as smart, as famous, and as rich as you is not afraid to talk about love. And show your love for God.
When you received the NBA’s MVP a few years back, the speech you gave was so beautiful. You put God first. You then thanked your mom for always being there. You fought back tears thanking your dad for teaching you how to be a man, and cried for all of the men in this world who never had a father. I cried, too.  I also admire the way you conduct yourself off the court. I know I won’t ever read a headline about you abusing a woman, or abusing anyone. You are living a life that is admirable, good, and decent. Your wife and two precious daughters are lucky to have a husband and a father like you. And you know you’re lucky to have them.
I have admired you up close at games, and from afar on TV — which is why I am so disappointed by your recent comments regarding Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank and President Donald Trump.   Plank had just left a visit from the White House with some corporate leaders when he was asked to comment on the meeting. Plank described President Trump as an “asset” to the country, and also described him as a “pro-business president.”   Rather than call Plank, with whom you have a very special partnership, to find out what he meant by those words, you did something I didn’t expect from you. You took a cheap shot at him. And President Trump. And the millions of fans who love you and also happened to vote for a man you insulted.
“I agree with that description, if you remove the ‘et,’” you told a local reporter, referring to Plank’s description of Trump as an asset.
And there it was. You called the president of the United States an a**.
It was so beneath you, Stephen. Because Plank was simply stating what millions of people who voted for Trump believed: that he’d do a better job than Hillary Clinton in growing our economy. A better job creating better jobs — better paying jobs — for millions of Americans struggling to make ends meet.
When asked whether you would consider leaving Under Armour if the company’s values began to align with Trump’s, you responded affirmatively.
“If I can say the leadership is not in line with my core values, then there is no amount of money, there is no platform I wouldn’t jump off if it wasn’t in line with who I am,” you said.
I respect that. And so I wonder: What values do you support when it comes to religious tolerance? As you may or may not know, Christians are being slaughtered or being asked to renounce their faith by radical Islamists all over the Middle East. Is that a value you support?
Muslim themselves are the biggest victims of this radical strain in the Muslim faith, and the vast majority of Muslims want what all people want, which is to live in peace. But there are many radical Islamists — too many — around the globe seeking to do harm to others who don’t agree with their worldview. Some of them wish to enter the United States. Shouldn’t that be a core value of any president, to do his best to protect fellow citizens from those kinds of evils? And can’t reasonable people disagree about how to best effectuate that outcome?
And what about the treatment of gays and women in so many Middle Eastern countries? Women can’t vote, let alone drive in many of them, and being gay is punishable by death. Does any of that resonate with your core values? We are not bigots when we point these truths out, Stephen.   You talk about your faith in God being your highest priority, and I stand with you. But when you endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton, did her position on late-term abortions square with your core values? Or the position of her party, as we watched the Democratic National Committee all but remove God from their platform?
I am a Christian who, like some, doesn’t believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned, and I am also glad that gay people have a right to marry in this country. But do your core values support the targeting of Christian businesses by gay couples seeking to do them harm solely because of their religious beliefs? Is it right to target one Christian baker when one knows many other bakers in the neighborhood willing to bake a cake and happily serve it at a gay wedding?
Who is doing the discriminating, the bullying, there, Stephen?  Isn’t doing no harm to your neighbor a core value? Shouldn’t we learn to love one another despite our differences? Love, it says right there on your wrist, never fails?   Is calling the president of the United States an a** your way of showing it?
Here is what I found most disappointing about your rebuttal to Kevin Plank. You know him. You know his heart, and his commitment to his city, Baltimore — one of the most politically progressive cities in the country, and one with a large African-American population. Plank’s commitment to that city is unrivaled. You know that. You also know very well his commitment to diversity and to building a community that includes people of every faith, class, gender, sexual orientation — and political orientation.
Yes, diversity includes diversity of ideas, Stephen. That’s what hurt the most about your little tirade. It was cheap, not clever. It was disrespectful to Plank. You should have just called him.   It was also disrespectful to people who view the world differently politically than you do. And worse, it had the feeling of a threat.   You know you can do harm to a great brand. And you didn’t mind letting Kevin Plank know, in a public way, that he’d best be careful. That’s what you, and athletes like you, were doing. And you know it.
That was your pride showing. It was ugly, a word I’ve never used before to describe you. But being a Christian, you know the perils of pride. And the ugly things we do because of our pride.
Know that I am, and will always be, a big fan of yours. I’ll be rooting for your merry band of Warriors to stick it to the Cavaliers this spring. And praying for you and your family. I will forgive this transgression because that’s what Christians are implored to do every day: Forgive ourselves and our neighbors. Those very same neighbors our God commands us to love. No matter what our political beliefs.
All the best, and hope to hear back from you,
Lee
P.S. The author sent this letter to Curry’s agent. He is hoping for a reply.

Punked! Congresswoman falls for ‘Russian hacking’ prank

Waters

This Women Seriously sits in our
Congress God Help Us!


Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif.
Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat, was pranked by two Russian comedians who engaged her in an 11-minute telephone call that included discussion of Hillary Clinton’s health, the diabolical hacking of television stations so that screens would inexplicably flip to Vladimir Putin and – oh yes, almost forgot – the fate of the very fictitious African land of Limpopo.   Limpopo is a province in South Africa, but the context of the discussion made it clear the comedy team was referring to a fictitious country from a Russian children’s book.
Waters fell for the skits, on all counts. And it didn’t take long for the YouTube version of the discussion to make media waves.
The two tricksters are named Vladimir Krasnov and Aleksey Stolyarov, better known online as Vovan and Lexus. They placed the call to Waters at her congressional offices while posing as the prime minister of Ukraine. And post-patch-through, the fun began.   Waters, following a sunny greeting that included both surprise and pleasure at chatting with whom she thought was Volodimir Groysman, first discussed the fate of U.S. sanctions on Russia.
“Yeah, [Trump] wants to remove the sanctions, that’s what he said during the campaign,” Waters said. “Recently I heard he said, ‘well, we’d have to review the sanctions to see what should be done with them. … So I don’t know what he’s doing.”

Listen to the prank phone call:

 

 

 

 

US Probing ‘Sexual Harassment Issues’ at Fox, Lawyer Says

Image: US Probing 'Sexual Harassment Issues' at Fox, Lawyer Says
Roger Ailes (AP)   Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 05:21 PM
 Federal prosecutors are investigating whether 21st Century Fox Inc. should have disclosed to investors that it made secret settlement payments to female on-air hosts who alleged sexual harassment.   The investigation came to light in New York state court on Wednesday when a lawyer, Judd Burstein, said a client he didn’t identify had received a grand-jury subpoena from federal prosecutors in New York. Burstein, who was in court on a case against Fox, said he was later told by prosecutors in Manhattan that the securities unit is investigating “sexual -harassment issues” at the company.
 The investigation centers on whether Fox’s settlement payments to women alleging harassment were so material that they should have been disclosed to investors, according to a person familiar with the matter who declined to be named because details of the probe aren’t public.

NEWSMAX – Read On>>>>>

 

Judge refuses to block work on Dakota Access pipeline

Judge refuses to block work on Dakota Access pipeline

A federal judge on Monday denied a request to block construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota.   U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said he would not grant a temporary restraining order against the project sought by a South Dakota tribe who argues the pipeline threatens their religious waters.  The Cheyenne River Sioux tribe says the oil pipeline threatens to “imbalance and desecrate” Lake Oahe on the Missouri River, which is sacred to the tribe. They asked for a temporary restraining order blocking construction of the project, which runs under the lake.
“The mere presence of the oil in the pipeline renders the waters religiously impure,” Cheyenne River Sioux lawyer Nicole Ducheneaux said Monday.   But a government lawyer said there is no reason to block construction right now because of a “lack of immediate, irreparable” harm to Lake Oahe during construction of the pipeline itself.  Boasberg agreed, ruling that construction of the pipeline doesn’t threaten the water. He said he wouldn’t issue a restraining order against the project, but vowed to rule on the tribe’s religious challenge to the pipeline before oil runs through it. He set a hearing on the matter for later this month.
“If you are worried it’s going to flow before I rule on the injunction, that’s not going to happen,” he told the tribe’s lawyers.  Also Monday, a lawyer for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe said he would file a motion asking Boasberg to give an up-or-down ruling on the validity of the government’s permitting decisions on the project.   The Hill – Read On>>>>>

9th Circuit progressive socialist “Black-Robed Bastards

This may be in the context of immigration, but it speaks to the broader point:
The writer, Brookings fellow and Lawfare editor-in-chief Benjamin Wittes, had noted the order skipped over a key part of the U.S. code on “inadmissible aliens” which Trump had publicly recited on Wednesday in defense of his immigration restrictions.
The statute reads in part: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of 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.”
The claim is correct; this is the actual cite: (read it for yourself at the link!)

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of 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. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.
The law makes clear that the President has essentially unquestionable authority to restrict entry of immigrants by mere proclamation for any amount of time he or she deems appropriate. There is no provision for that decision to be reviewable by a court; the only redress is political (via impeachment.)  The opinion claims that there is no such thing as “unreviewable” decisions when it comes to constitutionality.  That’s true but intentionally misleading.  The Congress and Constitution delegate certain powers to certain places.  A clear act beyond the delegated power is, of course, reviewable whether it is claimed to be or not.
But in this case the statute has been on the books for decades (the 1950s, to be exact) and has been used in this exact context by a huge number of previous Presidents — including Obama.  In fact when Obama suspended all immigration from Iraq he did so on this exact basis and with this exact statutory authority.  When Jimmy Carter suspended all immigration from Iran he did so on the same basis, with the same authority and did not have to, nor did he even attempt to show that the suspension was due to threats of terrorism.  In fact Carter’s suspension was a purely punitive act aimed at Iran for the actions some of their people took on their own soil.  Yes, those actions were aimed at the United States (the taking of hostages in our embassy) but they took place there, not here. Nonetheless that action was both lawful and constitutional.
The court didn’t even cite the statute that Trump used to issue his executive order.  It instead tried to use a section of the Immigration code that bears on numerical immigration targets which specifies that in that context you may not discriminate on a number of bases — nationality being one of them.  The problem is that Trump’s order doesn’t bear on that section of US Immigration Law at all; it instead relies on the lawful authority of the Executive to suspend immigration from any class of persons when it is, in the opinion of the Executive, in the national interest to do so.  The facts are that Obama took the same action against Iraqi immigrants for the same reason and that the same security concerns have continued to occur since, including a documented incident where two arrests were made early last year.
Folks, you may agree or disagree with the action Trump took.  This Ticker isn’t about that.   It’s about the willful, intentional and unconstitutional acts of the 9th Circuit that continue a long tradition in the US Court system of acting as if controlling law, including the Constitution, does not exist whenever it suits some particular group of people.
Any government body that does such a thing by accident must be called out.  If it was an accident then said body will immediately correct its mistake.
Any government body that does such a thing through evidenced intent must be disbanded and removed from power.  If it is not, when such a means exists (and it certainly does, as the Constitution gives the power to Congress to disband or reorganize any part of the court system; the only Constitutionally-required court is the Supreme Court) then all such co-conspiring components of the government have declared themselves illegitimate.   ~240 years ago our nation went to war over this exact issue and the extraction — otherwise called “theft” — that was taking place upon the citizens as a result.   Today we have the same thing going on but at an even larger scale and with far more injury than was the case 240 years ago.
We have, in this instance, a court that has stated a factual lie as the basis of its deliberation — that no “immigrant” from the named nations has been arrested or linked to terrorism.  That’s a damned and knowing lie; in point of fact there have been many such arrests and most of those arrested have either been convicted or are still awaiting trial.  In fact Obama suspended immigration from one of those nations for this exact reason after we caught immigrants” here plotting an attack.  The judges of the 9th Circus deliberately lied to both the public and arguing counsel prior to issuing their “decision”, and it was upon this lie that their decision was predicated.  As just one example of more than a dozen over the last two years two Iraqi-born individuals who came here as refugees were arrested last year.  I remind you that Iraq is one of the nations on the list.
Trump’s order for the purpose of evaluating the means by which those people got into the country and to take whatever corrective actions are necessary to prevent repeats is not only logical it’s legal under the authority delegated to him by Congress and expressed in US Code. That the 9th Circus deliberately ignored the clear text of that section of law because they didn’t like it and instead selected a section of law that does not bear on the issue is not “interpreting the law”, it is literally blacking out the sections of law they do not like, which is not within their Constitutional power — only Congress can do that through repealing said law.
It is this very same willful and intentional refusal to follow the law that has led to the issues with our health care system.  The law, which not only exists in statute it has been tested at the US Supreme Court says that monopolies and similar acts in restraint of trade are not only unlawful civilly in many cases they are criminal felonies.  This was tested in 1979 when insurance companies tried to claim an exemption under Mccarran-Ferguson, which is also law, and they lost.
That’s supposed to be the end of the discussion until and unless Congress passes something to change the state of said law.  Congress has not done so.
The courts, along with the Executive, however, have refused to enforce said law, just as they have done here with Trump’s order.  The result is that a $40,000 hospital bill comes with a more than $38,000 “discount” if you have a certain kind of “insurance.”  Such a pricing disparity is clear evidence of collusive intent to restrain trade and tie sales unlawfully, that is, to compel you to purchase something you do not want by threatening to bankrupt you if you don’t have it.
That’s illegal folks.
Either the law applies to everyone or it applies to nobody.  If the latter then there is no law that should be respected by anyone.  Do you want to live in such a nation?  You do, right here, right now, today.  You are being financially raped on a daily basis in exactly this fashion.  Those of you on the left cheering for the 9th Circuit order are cheering for your own financial rape, destruction and ultimately your own death at the very hands of those same people.
Health care is simply one aspect of this abuse — yet it is a very large one, spanning close to 20% of our entire economy.  There are others.  “Net neutrality” means that if you don’t want to buy Netflix service you still pay for it in your Internet service because Hastings managed to force carriers to pay the majority of his transport costs.  That’s nice if you want to use Netflix but if you don’t then it’s a tax leveled on you and given to the company!  That’s theft at literal gunpoint.
I can cite literally dozens of additional examples, all of which wind up screwing you.
And while there will be plenty of “I told you sos” if there is a terrorist incident originating from one of these rapefugees the fact of the matter is that the underlying issue is both far more grave and pervasive than whether a few nations have entry of their nationals into the US curtailed until we can verify that the credentials they have actually represent who they are.

The underlying issue is literally the difference between a Constitutional government and a firearm-toting mob that takes whatever it wants, including your life, whenever it wants.

Americans for Prosperity Applauds Right-to-Work Passage

Once governor signs bill into law Missouri
will become 28th right-to-work state

JEFFERSON CITY – Americans for Prosperity – Missouri (AFP-MO) today applauded the state legislature for passing right-to-work. The grassroots advocate for worker freedom has fought for right-to-work for years and was the lead proponent in 2015 when legislation was vetoed. AFP held multiple lawmakers accountable who opposed right-to-work that year and mobilized grassroots support for this year’s early session passage.
AFP-MO State Director Jeremy Cady provided the following statement:
“We applaud the lawmakers in both chambers who voted for right-to-work and stood up for all Missouri workers. Right-to-work guarantees a basic freedom – the freedom to work without mandatory union membership. No one should be fired from a job they love – in a place their skills are wanted – simply for refusing to pay a union. At long last workers in Missouri have been granted the basic freedom to work without fear of being fired for not paying a union.
“Voters sent a clear message last year when they rejected multiple candidates who opposed right-to-work and elected pro-worker freedom candidates like Governor Greitens. Today, lawmakers made good on a promise to stand up for worker freedom for all Missourians. Once Governor Greitens signs this bill into law our state will joins 27 others and show workers that they are welcome to offer their skills without being forced to pay a union.
“The data is clear that right-to-work states experience lower unemployment and greater job growth, population growth, and income growth. Between 2001 and 2011, right-to-work states added 1.7 million jobs, while forced union states lost over 2 million during the same time. From 1990 to 2011, right-to-work states experienced over 42 percent gain in total employment, compared to 19 percent for forced union states.”
Americans for Prosperity – Missouri has led the fight for worker freedom for many years. In 2015 the legislature passed right to work, but it was vetoed by the governor. In 2016 AFP held multiple lawmakers accountable for opposing right-to-work, including former Representatives Nick Haynes, Sheila Solon, and Anne Zerr. AFP volunteers placed over 15,000 calls to Missouri families over the past few years in support of right-to-work.
To read Jeremy’s op-ed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, click HERE.
To read Jeremy’s testimony on the House’s Right to Work legislation, click HERE.
BACKGROUND: 
  • Between 2001 and 2011, right to work states added 1.7 million jobs, while forced union states lost over 2 million during the same time.
  • From 1990 to 2011, right to work states experienced over 42 percent gain in total employment, compared to 19 percent for forced union states.
  • Between 2003 and 2013, right-to-work states’ private sector employee compensation increased by 16 percent, nearly double the 8.7 percent average for forced union states over that time.
  • When adjusted for cost of living, workers in right to work states have 4.1 percent higher incomes, according to the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Michigan.
  • From 1990 to 2014, eight of the top ten states for job growth were right to work states. Nine of the bottom states for job growth were forced union states.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) exists to recruit, educate, and mobilize citizens in support of the policies and goals of a free society at the local, state, and federal level, helping every American live their dream – especially the least fortunate. AFP has more than 3.2 million activists across the nation, a local infrastructure that includes 35 state chapters, and has received financial support from more than 100,000 Americans in all 50 states. For more information, visit www.AmericansForProsperity.org

HEADLINE NEWS 2016 – CLICK ON – 2016 HEADLINES NEWS – TAB

Get the Latest Headline news in one place

Click tab (HEADLINES NEWS)
at the top of this page for the latest headlines 

THTP OFFICERS

CHAIRMAN
John Nelson - jenkan04@gmail.com
VICE CHAIRMAN
Bob Gilmore
TREASURE
Dick Fankhauser