believe your own lies often?

[image: Image result for US zionist christians]

On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 10:15:01 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>
> Yes.....You do.  Your far left Anti-American rhetoric on a daily basis 
> establishes who you support, much less your choice for candidates:
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com <javascript:>>
> Date: Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Your 2016 Presidential Picks
> To: PoliticalForum <politic...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>>
>
>
> Candidates you side with...
>
> 89%
> [image: Hillary Clinton]Hillary Clinton  Democratic
>
> on economic, domestic policy, healthcare, social, education, and 
> environmental issues.
> compare answers
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556209>
>
> 82%
> [image: Bernie Sanders]Bernie Sanders  Democratic
>
> on environmental, domestic policy, healthcare, social, and economic issues.
> compare answers
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556211>
>
> 61%
> [image: John Kasich]John Kasich  Republican
>
> on environmental and electoral issues.
> compare answers
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:585676237>
>
> 56% 
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
> [image: Jeb Bush] 
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>Jeb
>  
> Bush  Republican 
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
>
> on healthcare, immigration, and criminal issues.
> compare answers 
> <http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1840736686:801556201>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:20 AM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>>  the woman who you support for POTUS
>> ---
>> wrong agian ... I don't vote for democrats or republicans.
>>
>> Trump courts Republican Jews with offensive stereotypes
>>
>> WASHINGTON – Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on 
>> Thursday invoked a series of stereotypes about Jews that are often deemed 
>> offensive and even anti-Semitic — in an address to Jewish Republicans.
>>
>>
>> “I’m a negotiator like you folks were negotiators,” the controversial 
>> candidate declared to his audience at the Republican Jewish Coalition, as 
>> he explained that he would broker a stronger nuclear deal with Iran than 
>> the one concluded earlier this year. At another point in his speech, he 
>> said: “Is there anyone in this room who doesn’t negotiate deals? Probably 
>> more than any room I’ve ever spoken.”
>>
>> His speech came at the tail end of a morning of addresses in which the 
>> other Republican candidates boasted of their pro-Israel credentials and 
>> their close ties to the US Jewish community.
>>
>> Although Trump did reiterate his tight ties with his “friend” Prime 
>> Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the audience wasn’t tolerant of the mogul’s 
>> attempts to duck a question on Jerusalem. Asked about his position on the 
>> unification of the Israeli capital, Trump refused to commit – as most 
>> Republican candidates have – to declaring the city to be the eternal 
>> capital of the Jewish state, and was greeted with boos.
>>
>> However, the audience did not offer any negative response when Trump told 
>> them, “You’re not gonna support me even though you know I’m the best thing 
>> that could ever happen to Israel. And I’ll be that.” He continued, evoking 
>> a stereotype about Jews, money and control, “And I know why you’re not 
>> going to support me. You’re not going to support me because I don’t want 
>> your money. Isn’t it crazy?”
>>
>> According to AP, he added: “You want to control your own politician.”
>>
>> Trump backtracked on comments that he made Wednesday in which he 
>> suggested that Israelis could sacrifice more than they had already for the 
>> sake of peace.
>>
>> “It has to be said that Israel has given a lot,” he acknowledged. “I 
>> don’t know whether or not they want to go that final step, you know, and 
>> that’s going to be up to them. But Israel has not been given the credit 
>> that they deserve for what they’ve done, I will say that. I will say that.” 
>> At the same time, he added that he didn’t know “if Israel has the 
>> commitment to make [a deal with the Palestinians]” or “if the other side 
>> has the commitment to make it.”
>>
>> Trump, who previously questioned whether President Barack Obama was born 
>> a US citizen, also reiterated insinuations that the president was hiding 
>> something, implying that perhaps he is crypto-Muslim.
>>
>> “Radical Islamic terrorism — we have a president who refuses to use the 
>> term,” he complained. “There’s something going on with him that we don’t 
>> know about.”
>>
>> Earlier Thursday, the head of the Republican Party in Israel said that 
>> Trump should not not be the president of the United States. Speaking on 
>> Army Radio, Marc Zell said that American voters would be sure to recognize 
>> that the candidate did not possess the necessary qualities to lead his 
>> country.
>>
>> “The voters understand that to lead the United States, you need a person 
>> who knows more than how to sell products, with all due respect to Donald 
>> Trump, and everything he has achieved in his career,” Zell said. “In my 
>> opinion, he cannot be president of the United States.”
>>
>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 9:16:34 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>
>>> Plain Ol?  How is it that you can obfuscate and totally ignore the fact 
>>> that the woman who you support for POTUS is an Open Borders/Open Trade" far 
>>> left liberal extremist, who has championed increasing Syrian 
>>> Rebels/Refugees by 550%?  
>>>
>>> Nevermind.  It's really quite clear when one thinks about it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:52 AM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> *Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream*
>>>> *---*
>>>> RELIGIOUS 'CHARITIES' PROFIT FROM OPEN BORDERS
>>>>
>>>> Thousands of Central American children crossing the border illegally 
>>>> could soon turn into asylum seekers armed with immigration lawyers 
>>>> provided 
>>>> by church groups and paid for by federal tax dollars.
>>>>
>>>> WND reported Friday 
>>>> <http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/church-raising-money-for-illegals/> that 
>>>> Catholic Charities USA and other religious groups were working behind the 
>>>> scenes with the federal government to temporarily house and resettle the 
>>>> children in dozens of communities across the United States.
>>>>
>>>> Catholic Charities is running a fundraising campaign to help finance 
>>>> the resettlement of the illegal aliens, WND reported. But the religious 
>>>> charities get the bulk of their funding not from private donors or church 
>>>> members putting checks into a basket. They get it from the federal 
>>>> government.
>>>>
>>>> Alexandria, Va.-based Catholic Charities USA reported receiving $1.7 
>>>> million in government grants in 2012, according to its IRS Form 990 
>>>> <http://catholiccharitiesusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/CCUSA-2013-990.pdf>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> But one of the largest recipients of government funds to resettle 
>>>> immigrant children is the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The USCCB 
>>>> helps resettle not only unaccompanied alien children, or UACs, who enter 
>>>> the country illegally but also refugees fleeing persecution overseas who 
>>>> enter through legal channels.
>>>>
>>>> The USCCB is one of nine agencies that receive hundreds of millions in 
>>>> tax dollars to resettle refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S. under 
>>>> contract with the federal government. Six of the nine contractors are 
>>>> religious groups, WND has learned, including the Lutheran Immigration and 
>>>> Refugee Service, Episcopal Migration Ministries, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid 
>>>> Society, the Church World Service and World Relief Corp., which includes a 
>>>> plethora of evangelical groups.
>>>>
>>>> The Catholic Bishops alone received $65.9 million in federal grants to 
>>>> care for unaccompanied alien children and refugees, according to its 2012 
>>>> annual report 
>>>> <http://www.usccb.org/about/migration-and-refugee-services/upload/Annual-Report-2012.pdf>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> By contrast, the group raised $1.4 million from its own church members 
>>>> while federal loans and private-sector grants made up the remainder of the 
>>>> $71 million spent on the resettlements that year. That means 93 percent of 
>>>> the USCCB’s spending on charity work with UACs and refugees was covered by 
>>>> the American taxpayer.
>>>>
>>>> Kevin Appleby, director of USCC’s Migration and Refugee Services 
>>>> Office, did not respond to calls and emails from WND seeking comment.
>>>>
>>>> Similar funding ratios have been found to be the norm with the Lutheran 
>>>> effort.
>>>>
>>>> The Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service reported total income of 
>>>> $41.7 million in 2012, and government grants accounted for $40.4 million, 
>>>> or 96.8 percent of that amount, according to the nonprofit’s most recently 
>>>> reported Form 990 
>>>> <http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2012/132/574/2012-132574854-0989f698-9.pdf>,
>>>>  
>>>> a disclosure that nonprofits must file with the Internal Revenue Service. 
>>>> The group raised only $1.3 million from private donors.
>>>>
>>>> Miji Bell, press spokeswoman for Lutheran Immigration, also did not 
>>>> return calls Tuesday.
>>>>
>>>> The money for refugees and asylum seekers may not even include the 
>>>> federal money funneled to Catholic Charities USA and other religious 
>>>> groups 
>>>> to resettle illegal border crossers coming into Texas, Arizona or New 
>>>> Mexico who arrive by themselves. The charities often subcontract with 
>>>> other 
>>>> charities, making it difficult to track the money.
>>>>
>>>> The numbers of UACs coming through the Southern border have increased 
>>>> dramatically since 2009, and so have the costs, according to the Office of 
>>>> Refugee Resettlement, which operates within the Department of Health and 
>>>> Human Services.
>>>>
>>>> Eight years ago, the program averaged 6,775 referrals a year. In fiscal 
>>>> 2013 the number reached 24,668. Now, the agency is expecting 60,000 
>>>> referrals in 2014 at a cost to the U.S. government of more than $750 
>>>> million, up from less than $500 million in 2013 and less than $250 million 
>>>> in 2009.
>>>>
>>>> The University of Texas at El Paso’s National Center for Border 
>>>> Security and Immigration conducted a study 
>>>> <http://ncbsi.utep.edu/documents/UAC%20Project%20Site%20Visits/UTEP%20NCBSI%20Final%20Report%20March%2020%202014.pdf>
>>>>  published 
>>>> in March in which it laid bare the major cause of the problem – 
>>>> exploitation of weak border enforcement policies by the U.S.
>>>>
>>>> “Both Border Patrol and ICE ERO officers agreed that the lack of 
>>>> deterrence for crossing the U.S.-Mexican border has impacted the rate at 
>>>> which they apprehend UACs. Officers are certain that UACs are aware of the 
>>>> relative lack of consequences they will receive when apprehended at the 
>>>> U.S. border,” the authors wrote on page 3 of the UTEP study. “UTEP was 
>>>> informed that smugglers of family members of UACs understand that once a 
>>>> UAC is apprehended for illegal entry into the United States, the 
>>>> individual 
>>>> will be re-united with a U.S. based family member pending the disposition 
>>>> of the immigration hearing. This process appears to be exploited by 
>>>> illegal 
>>>> alien smugglers and family members in the United States who wish to 
>>>> reunite 
>>>> with separated children.”
>>>>
>>>> How many of the Central American children will seek asylum is not clear 
>>>> at this point. The United Nations is considering granting some type of 
>>>> legal status to children in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras who can 
>>>> show evidence of being persecuted. An asylum seeker differs from a refugee 
>>>> in that the person comes into the U.S. on his own, often crossing the 
>>>> border illegally, and then seeks to gain asylum through legal channels.
>>>>
>>>> Included in President Obama’s $3.7 billion emergency aid package for 
>>>> dealing with the border crisis is $1.1 million for immigration lawyers to 
>>>> represent the illegal alien children. Another $1.8 billion would go toward 
>>>> resettling the children as opposed to deporting them.
>>>>
>>>> Don Barnett, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, said he 
>>>> would like to see the feds rein in the grants and loans to charities that 
>>>> resettle refugees and UACs seeking asylum.
>>>>
>>>> The federal government gives out not only grants but loans, and the 
>>>> nonprofit charities are able to pocket 25 percent of whatever they collect 
>>>> on those loans, Barnett explained. He said many of the loans are made to 
>>>> refugees or UACs for travel purposes.
>>>>
>>>> “They actually hire collection agents to get the money back from the 
>>>> refugees,” he said. “It’s very profitable for the nonprofits, really quite 
>>>> profitable, and it has introduced perverse incentives into the whole 
>>>> process, into decision making and policy,” he said. “It totally 
>>>> disincentivizes rational thinking.”
>>>>
>>>> These same religious charities can also be found lobbying Congress and 
>>>> the Obama administration for amnesty legislation and other policies that 
>>>> immigration watchdogs see as encouraging more illegal immigrants to cross 
>>>> the border.
>>>>
>>>> On July 2 the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a letter  
>>>> <http://www.usccb.org/news/2014/14-118.cfm>to Obama urging him not to 
>>>> send any of the unaccompanied children who had illegally crossed into the 
>>>> U.S. back to their home countries.
>>>>
>>>> “Current law permits children from non-contiguous countries to remain 
>>>> in the country until their request for asylum or immigration relief is 
>>>> considered by an immigration judge,” said Eusebio Elizondo, auxiliary 
>>>> bishop of Seattle and chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 
>>>> Committee on Migration. “This is a very vulnerable population which has 
>>>> been targeted by organized crime networks in Central America. To return 
>>>> them to these criminal elements without a proper adjudication of their 
>>>> cases is unconscionable.”
>>>>
>>>> And in 2011, the Catholic Bishops advocated for passage 
>>>> <http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15398> of 
>>>> the DREAM Act, which would provide permanent legal status, some call it 
>>>> amnesty, to young people under 35 brought into the U.S. illegally by their 
>>>> parents if they had been here in the country since the age of 16 or 
>>>> younger, provided they had completed two years of college or military 
>>>> service.
>>>>
>>>> *Conflicts of interest?*
>>>>
>>>> Dan Cadman, with the Center for Immigration Studies, says it’s a 
>>>> conflict of interest for a group that benefits financially from 
>>>> immigration 
>>>> – both legal and illegal – to try to influence immigration policy.
>>>>
>>>> “It bothers me that any private organization is using a government 
>>>> funding stream for that purpose, not only Catholic Charities but Lutheran 
>>>> World Service, the Episcopal Church, they’ve all got their hands in the 
>>>> pie,” Cadman said. “The thing is that everyone understands that, with a 
>>>> wink and a nod, this so-called emergency money (from Obama) is not going 
>>>> to 
>>>> result in any substantial number of individuals being deported. It’s just 
>>>> not. How ironic to see an emergency budget supplemental request and then 
>>>> when you look at the details you see it’s all going to be chewed up for 
>>>> things like brick and mortar buildings for resettlement and not used in 
>>>> any 
>>>> useful way to stop this tidal wave of human beings.”
>>>>
>>>> Cadman said there is “no doubt in my mind” that the religious NGOs or 
>>>> “non-governmental organizations” are working with the United Nations to 
>>>> get 
>>>> the children qualified as refugees or asylum seekers.
>>>>
>>>> “The religious charities have had a hand in that,” he said. “There’s no 
>>>> doubt in my mind they are looking to afford people status in any way, 
>>>> shape 
>>>> or form because the end game is to not get them sent back to their country 
>>>> of origin.”
>>>>
>>>> *Children don’t qualify as refugees*
>>>>
>>>> Frank Head Jr., director of Immigration Services for Catholic Charities 
>>>> of Arkansas, said the Central American children would not qualify as 
>>>> refugees under the current United Nations definition, but it’s not out of 
>>>> the question that a special legal status could be created for the children.
>>>>
>>>> “There’s no easy pat answer to that,” he told WND. “They will not get 
>>>> refugee status. That’s never been the case. There is a special set of 
>>>> regulations for children not accompanied by parents, but no immediate 
>>>> status. They get put into a special adjudication system. They never get 
>>>> called ‘refugees’ but there is a category, a process where a juvenile who 
>>>> is basically an orphan with no family to claim them could get a certain 
>>>> status (as an asylum seeker) after a lengthy court battle.”
>>>>
>>>> That court battle could be fought with federally funded lawyers, a 
>>>> development even more likely if Obama’s $3.7 billion in emergency aid gets 
>>>> passed by Congress.
>>>>
>>>> “The actual answer, everyone wants to know (about the status), but the 
>>>> Obama administration has proposed a new set of regulations and $3.7 
>>>> billion 
>>>> to fund it,” Head said. “A juvenile, aside from the fact that they get 
>>>> special treatment if caught, and only in recent years have they been 
>>>> afforded that special status – they used to get thrown into adult jails – 
>>>> they now get treated as a juvenile. But there isn’t any immediate status. 
>>>> Definitely there is intensive meetings going on to possibly create some 
>>>> new 
>>>> status because the current refugee law doesn’t apply. They couldn’t 
>>>> qualify.”
>>>>
>>>> That’s because a refuge by definition is someone who has been 
>>>> pre-screened by the U.N. and then allowed to legally enter a host country.
>>>>
>>>> “But these kids for the most part don’t qualify as refugees because you 
>>>> have to be part of a designated group facing political or religious 
>>>> persecution, but these are just kids fleeing from violence. They’re not 
>>>> running off all right-wing children or all left-wing children or 
>>>> government-inclined children,” Head said. “It’s not a religious sect, it’s 
>>>> not a political group, so they wouldn’t qualify for asylum status and so 
>>>> you would ultimately just ship them back and that’s what a lot of people 
>>>> want to do. You have a pretty good idea who that is.”
>>>>
>>>> Head said he doesn’t expect the Obama package to pass the 
>>>> Republican-dominated House.
>>>>
>>>> Pursuing the U.N.’s channels would be a totally separate approach.
>>>>
>>>> “That would have to be for people who hadn’t entered the country yet,” 
>>>> Head said. “The U.N. would have to setup an office in say Guatemala or El 
>>>> Salvador and you could come there, make a case and possibly get refugee 
>>>> status and get a safe place to come. Even if the U.N. approves you it 
>>>> doesn’t mean the U.S. will let you in. But if someone’s already here you 
>>>> have to apply for asylum status.”
>>>>
>>>> He said the U.S. lets in 75,000 to 85,000 foreign refugees a year. “And 
>>>> at any given time there’s several million in the world.”
>>>>
>>>> This is separate from the unaccompanied alien children who illegally 
>>>> cross the border and offer themselves up to be apprehended by Border 
>>>> Patrol 
>>>> agents then get turned over the Health and Human Services and given a 
>>>> piece 
>>>> of paper ordering them to appear at a deportation hearing two to three 
>>>> years down the road.
>>>>
>>>> Read more at 
>>>> http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/religious-charities-profit-from-open-borders/#S3JjHEIbWJ61tGx8.99
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-5, Travis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>> Thursday, 13 October 2016 
>>>>>
>>>>> *Will Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream End Up Deciding Election 
>>>>> — for Trump? *
>>>>>
>>>>> Written by  William F. Jasper 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/itemlist/user/53-williamfjasper>
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>> [image: Description: Will Hillary Clinton’s “Open Borders” Dream End 
>>>>> Up Deciding Election — for Trump?] 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/media/k2/items/cache/88753bd16644c0558ada2e5c88abfccd_XL.jpg>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategists surely breathed a huge sigh of 
>>>>> relief when the 2nd Presidential Debate 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/24245-media-s-anti-trump-bias-obvious-in-second-presidential-debate>ended
>>>>>  
>>>>> without any mention of Clinton’s “open borders” comments, which had 
>>>>> recently been released by WikiLeaks. They know that, as with the 
>>>>> Brexit vote 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/23501-independence-day-historic-brexit-victory-uk-votes-to-leave-eu>
>>>>>  
>>>>> in the UK in June, the deadly reality of “open borders” could end up 
>>>>> having 
>>>>> a much greater impact on Election Day than the pro-Hillary media polls 
>>>>> are 
>>>>> showing. British voters revolted against the massive “Project Fear” 
>>>>> campaign 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/23488-brexit-crunch-time-cameron-co-ratchet-up-project-fear-before-vote>
>>>>>  
>>>>> waged by Prime Minister David Cameron, President Obama, and virtually all 
>>>>> of the British political, banking, academic, and media establishment. 
>>>>> British voters demanded a return of their independence and sovereignty. 
>>>>> Especially, they demanded control over their own borders, defying the 
>>>>> European Union’s claim of the right to decide who (and how many) may 
>>>>> migrate to Britain.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, Team Hillary’s strategists were undoubtedly relieved when CNN’s 
>>>>> Anderson Cooper and ABC’s Martha Raddatz did them a big favor in the 
>>>>> second 
>>>>> presidential debate last Sunday by saving their candidate from having to 
>>>>> face her record and policies on open borders, immigration, refugees, 
>>>>> illegal alien amnesty, and trade treaties. Specifically, Cooper and 
>>>>> Raddatz 
>>>>> made sure nobody brought up the matter of Hillary Clinton’s speech to 
>>>>> Brazilian bankers in which she told of her “dream” of an EU-style 
>>>>> hemispheric union of “open trade and open borders.”
>>>>>
>>>>> The “open borders” speech was one of many Clinton bombshells to be 
>>>>> dropped by the WikiLeaks organization, in a dump of thousands of hacked 
>>>>> e-mails, two days before the debate. It goes to the heart of a timely and 
>>>>> vital issue that millions of American voters consider very important. 
>>>>> However, Cooper and Raddatz were intent on avoiding the open borders 
>>>>> issue 
>>>>> and insisted on obsessing instead on the conveniently leaked video of 
>>>>> Donald Trump’s vulgar comments from more than a decade ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Specifically, in a speech to the Brazilian megabank, Banco Itau, Mrs. 
>>>>> Clinton said: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade 
>>>>> and 
>>>>> open borders, sometime in the future with energy that's as green and 
>>>>> sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every 
>>>>> person in the hemisphere."
>>>>>
>>>>> The social chaos, terrorism, debt, banking crisis, currency crisis, 
>>>>> and other crises under which the European common market is 
>>>>> disintegrating, 
>>>>> offer little to commend the European Union as a hemispheric model for 
>>>>> Americans. The ongoing migration tsunami that is wracking and ruining the 
>>>>> EU gives us a pretty good picture of what “open borders” look like. 
>>>>> Europeans are finding out that the ugly reality is far different from the 
>>>>> rosy pictures painted for decades by their politicians — politicians of 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> same internationalist mold as Hillary Clinton. Borders matter; if you 
>>>>> don’t 
>>>>> have them you can’t enforce them, and you don’t really even have a 
>>>>> country.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hillary Clinton is extremely vulnerable on this issue, even if we do 
>>>>> not experience another terror attack by Islamic extremists in this 
>>>>> country 
>>>>> before the November election.
>>>>>
>>>>> Clinton has leapfrogged over her former boss, President Obama, and 
>>>>> called for an even more radical Syrian refugee policy than his very 
>>>>> unpopular program. In fact, she called for more than six times the number 
>>>>> of refugees proposed by Obama. In a 2015 interview, she said the United 
>>>>> States should accept 65,000 refugees from Syria; President Obama’s Syrian 
>>>>> refugee plan, at the time, was for 10,000.
>>>>>
>>>>> "We're facing the worst refugee crisis since the end of World War II 
>>>>> and I think the United States has to do more," the former secretary of 
>>>>> state said on CBS's *Face the Nation*. 
>>>>> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-u-s-should-take-65000-syrian-refugees/>
>>>>>  "I 
>>>>> would like to see us move from what is a good start with 10,000 to 65,000 
>>>>> and begin immediately to put into place the mechanisms for vetting the 
>>>>> people that we would take in."
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, the “mechanisms for vetting people” comment was an 
>>>>> obligatory throwaway line meant to placate voters’ national security 
>>>>> concerns. But it was totally devoid of content, since our top 
>>>>> security officials have repeatedly pointed out 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/21638-no-vetting-of-syrian-refugees-in-obama-s-resettlement-invasion>
>>>>>  
>>>>> there is no way for us to properly vet these “refugees.” However, the 
>>>>> refugee issue is only one part of Hillary’s “open borders” equation; she 
>>>>> has also spent a political lifetime — as first lady, senator, secretary 
>>>>> of 
>>>>> state, Clinton Foundation chieftess — promoting and supporting 
>>>>> <http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-and-immigration/>illegal 
>>>>> alien amnesty, increased immigration, entitlements of every kind for 
>>>>> immigrants (legal and illegal) and fast-track citizenship, and fast-track 
>>>>> voting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Beyond the refugee/migrant/immigrant matters that are big-ticket items 
>>>>> for the large pool of voters Donald Trump is aiming at, there is the 
>>>>> “open 
>>>>> trade” and “hemispheric common market” component that crosses party and 
>>>>> ideological lines, energizing huge numbers of conservative Republicans, 
>>>>> Ron 
>>>>> Paul Libertarians, and Bernie Sanders Democrats and Independents. To this 
>>>>> broad swath of Americans, the WikiLeaks “open borders” leak confirms 
>>>>> Hillary’s firm commitment to the deadly trade deals such as the 
>>>>> Trans-Pacific 
>>>>> Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 
>>>>> (TTIP) 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/21010-10-reasons-why-you-should-oppose-obamatrade>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> For the past year and a half, Hillary has been trying to convince 
>>>>> voters that despite her role in helping craft the TPP and TTIP (as 
>>>>> secretary of state), publicly praising it more than 45 times (as even 
>>>>> the pro-Clinton CNN notes 
>>>>> <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/15/politics/45-times-secretary-clinton-pushed-the-trade-bill-she-now-opposes/>),
>>>>>  and 
>>>>> having described the TPP as the “gold standard” of trade agreements. Much 
>>>>> of the opposition to the TPP, the TTIP, and other multilateral "trade" 
>>>>> agreements of this type has focused on the enormous economic harm that 
>>>>> NAFTA has done, especially in terms of millions of lost jobs and the loss 
>>>>> of America's once world-dominant manufacturing and technology base. 
>>>>> Equally 
>>>>> important, though less understood, however, are the numerous attacks on 
>>>>> national sovereignty woven into the fabrics of NAFTA, TPP, and TTIP. Like 
>>>>> the various treaties that have incrementally transformed the EU into the 
>>>>> centralized and increasingly tyrannical behemoth it has become, these 
>>>>> regional "trade" treaties actually establish bodies with legislative, 
>>>>> executive, and judicial functions that are designed to gradually 
>>>>> transform 
>>>>> into a regional government that will override our own constitutionally 
>>>>> limited government. Hillary Clinton is well aware of these dangers that 
>>>>> she 
>>>>> has helped build into the TPP and TTIP. The believability of her 
>>>>> convenient 
>>>>> flip-flop on this crucial issue is about zero; she can be counted on to 
>>>>> flip again, if she gets to the Oval Office. Her current anti-TPP stance 
>>>>> is 
>>>>> most certainly her “public position,” at the moment, but what does she 
>>>>> really intend to do on the matter? One of the other inconvenient (for 
>>>>> Clinton) WikiLeaks revelations concerned her admission of duplicity, in 
>>>>> one 
>>>>> of her high-paid speeches to high-end investors, asserting that 
>>>>> politicians 
>>>>> need to be two-faced, having "both a public and a private position."
>>>>>
>>>>> *Project Fear/Project Smear*
>>>>>
>>>>> The political/business/media/academic elites that targeted the Brexit 
>>>>> vote for defeat with “Project Fear” are the same combined forces that 
>>>>> have targeted Donald Trump with Project Smear 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/23440-bilderberg-elites-stop-trump-boost-hillary-stop-brexit-boost-migration>.
>>>>>  Following 
>>>>> the Brexit victory, an obviously chastened Richard Haass, president of 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> world government-promoting, pro-EU, pro-open borders Council on 
>>>>> Foreign Relations 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/1213-council-on-foreign-relations>
>>>>>  (CFR), 
>>>>> commented 
>>>>> <http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-brexit-warning-trump-2016-6>:
>>>>>  "For 
>>>>> Hillary Clinton's campaign, this is something of a warning not to 
>>>>> underestimate this disaffection, not to underestimate political and 
>>>>> economic nationalism."
>>>>>
>>>>> Hillary Clinton, who, while secretary of state, famously said (in the 
>>>>> presence of her “good friend” Richard Haass) that she depended upon the 
>>>>> CFR 
>>>>> to tell her what to do and what to think (see video of her confession 
>>>>> here 
>>>>> <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/15288-cfr-brookings-celebrate-obama-lovefest-for-international-criminal-court>),
>>>>>  
>>>>> is obviously listening to the advice of Haass. She has flip-flopped on 
>>>>> TPP 
>>>>> and has sort of flip-flopped on migration-refugees. She is trying to 
>>>>> appeal 
>>>>> to all sides; appealing for the Hispanic/immigrant vote by supporting 
>>>>> “comprehensive immigration reform” — the longtime code phrase for amnesty 
>>>>> and open borders — while at the same time attempting to appeal to Middle 
>>>>> America by insisting she intends to implement stringent vetting of 
>>>>> refugees/immigrants. The open question is how many American voters will 
>>>>> believe her new “public position” on open borders — and how many will 
>>>>> believe — or be influenced by/distracted by — Project Smear.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>>>>>
>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
>>>>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> __._,_.___
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> Posted by: "Beowulf" <beo...@westerndefense.net> 
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Visit Your Group 
>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMzgwdTJwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NzY0MDIzNzE->
>>>>>  
>>>>>    
>>>>>    
>>>>> [image: Yahoo! Groups] 
>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlN2sxc2c4BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ3NjQwMjM3Mg-->
>>>>>  
>>>>> • Privacy 
>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • 
>>>>> Unsubscribe • Terms of Use 
>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> 
>>>>>
>>>>> __,_._,___
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>  
>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>
>>>> --- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>  
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to politicalforu...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to