As a proud Veteran, I will compare my acts of Patriotism against yours any
day of the week, Pussy....



On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:47 AM, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com
> wrote:

> How do you justify your Anti-Semitism
> ---
> I don't have anything against semites .. but you do.
>
> Sem·ite
> ˈsemīt/
> *noun*
>
>    1. a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic
>    language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.
>
>
>  ... and you're pos zionist xian and a traitor.
>
>
> On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 10:42:31 AM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>
>> Besides not being all that well informed, (you've made clear where you
>> obtain your news and who your sources are);  it's dawned on me the last six
>> or ten months that you're really not all that bright....
>>
>> How do you justify your Anti-Semitism with your obvious support for the
>> likes of George Soros, the Democratic Party; and those who subscribe to the
>> entire Jewish Socialistic/Communistic theorem?
>>
>> That's got to be perplexing for you, even though it's abundantly clear
>> that you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer......
>>
>>
>> ​
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:35 AM, plainolamerican <plainol...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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>
>>>> Date: Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:02 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Your 2016 Presidential Picks
>>>> To: PoliticalForum <politic...@googlegroups.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> > 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/rel
>>>>>>> igious-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.
>>>>> 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.
>>> 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.
>

-- 
-- 
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