Conservative Political Views


When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. 

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.  

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

MY TWO SENSE: Within the evidentiary list of charges against the King of Great Britain, and before the signatures of fifty-six patriots, of thirteen colonies, we find a shocking resemblance and relevance to today’s government at work. During the latter half of the eighteenth century, a tyrannical monarch was already in place. In this twenty-first century, we watch a new kind of king usurp our nation, at his will, and we see the success of that oppressive will continue to dismantle our way of life. Like all abuses of power, there is one thing they have in common; that is incrementation of degrees.A government takeover, without armed support, does not happen overnight. Neither does power and control over single individual in domestic situations. But both are such that breaking free the bonds is an exceedingly difficult maneuver. To do so requires a well thought out plan, willingness to follow through, and use of available tools. It is now necessary to remove and replace Washington DC’s corrupted career politicians (the plan), with mass voter turnout in November (use of available tools), and a demand that voter fraud be punished to the fullest extent of the law (follow through).  We must replace cronies with honorable liaisons of We The People before we can begin to rebuild our nation.Let us not forget that the signers of this Declaration pledged their Lives, Fortunes, and Sacred Honor for FREEDOM, and let us not be paralyzed to inaction with fear. To do nothing is to assign meaningless the deaths of our Founders, the deaths of all our past and present soldiers who gave their lives in the name of FREEDOM.

Take the words above to heart, remember the sacrifices those men made to create a FREE nation, and then compare their efforts with ours. Are we doing our part?  


March 29, 2014 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


60 Minutes STOCK Act Followup Sends Warning Signal to Congress

After being featured Tuesday on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Breitbart News contributor and Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer once again found himself the focus of national media in a 60 Minutes Sunday report highlighting his work uncovering congressional insider trading and championing the Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act to ban it.

In 2011, 60 Minutes’ veteran reporter Steve Kroft ran an investigative report based on Schweizer’s New York Times bestselling book, Throw Them All Out.

“A year ago he began working on a book about soft corruption in Washington with a team of eight student researchers who reviewed financial disclosure records,” said Kroft in the original 2011 CBS 60 Minutes report. “The results became a jumping off point for our own story, and we have independently verified the material we used.”

Kroft won the Joan Shorenstein Barone Award for excellence in Washington-based journalism for the report. Kroft thanked Schweizer at the awards ceremony and made a rare joint interview appearance with Schweizer on MSNBC.

After the release of Schweizer’s book and the award-winning 60 Minutes segment it sparked—as well as at least 26 articles by Breitbart News published on the subject—President Obama included the issue in his 2012 States of the Union Address. Eventually, Congress passed the bill in an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 417-2 in the House and 96-3 in the Senate.

Two weeks ago, however, Congress gutted the bill by killing a key provision that would have put already publicly available financial disclosure records of federal officials in an online format to increase transparency.

Sunday night, Steve Kroft took to the airwaves to hit back.

“Our 2011 report shamed Congress into passing the STOCK Act,” said Kroft. “But earlier this month, Congress quietly repealed parts of the law.”

Kroft’s 60 Minutes Sunday update featuring Peter Schweizer may have telegraphed to members of Congress a warning of sorts: neither he nor Schweizer are finished reporting on or exposing instances of insider trading and self-enrichment by members of Congress or their staffs.


60 Minutes Follows Up On STOCK Act

April 29, 2013 Posted by | Home, Videos | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

WND by GARTH KANT {MY TWO SENSE: The following is a copy of the fax I’m sending to Judge Reed O’Connor, which lets him know we support him. “April 25, 2013 District Judge Reed O’Connor; Your Honor, it has been a long time coming that a person of authority, who sees the actual state of our nation, stands up for the side of right. I do not know the rule of ethics pertaining to contacting a District Judge, and I have no wish to even attempt to influence any decision on any case before you. The point of this communiqué is to tell you that American citizen-patriots are proud of you. Your apparent sense of fairness and of the laws of our land is uncommon today in our judicial system with respect to the agenda of government, backed by so much power. We, the People, want you to know that we support you. Truly, Missouri, American Citizen ” (Contact information is: District Judge Reed O’Connor, 1100 Commerce Street, Room 1520, Dallas, Texas 75242-1003, Courtroom: 15th Floor, Chambers: 214-753-2650 / Fax: 214-753-2657, Courtroom Deputy: Tyler Crowley- 214-753-2650, Court Reporter: Denver Roden – 214-753-2298) JM}

Official photographic portrait of US President...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia) Obama and his Madonna smirk, a slight smile that my mother used to call “a sh* t-eating grin. That’s more appropo.


Gutsy federal judge whacks Obama

Threatens to overturn ‘amnesty’ policy for young illegal aliens

Published: 12 hours ago

Garth Kant is a WND staff writer. Previously, he spent five years
writing, copy-editing and producing at “CNN Headline News,” three years
writing, copy-editing and training writers at MSNBC, and also served
several local TV newsrooms as producer, executive producer and assistant
news director. He is the author of the McGraw-Hill textbook, “How to
Write Television News.”

rss feed Subscribe to feed

A federal judge has a message for President Obama: Stop bypassing Congress on immigration.

Obama issued a directive in June 2012 halting the deportation of many
young illegal aliens after Congress refused to pass the DREAM Act,
which would have provided conditional permanent residency to young

A federal judge in Dallas is now threatening to reverse that directive.

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor said Tuesday that he will likely
rule in favor of a lawsuit seeking to overturn the new policy. He has
asked both sides to file additional arguments by May 6.

The administration’s policy directs U.S. Immigration and Customs, or
ICE, agents to defer deportation for illegal aliens under 30 who entered
the country before the age of 16, are in school or have a high school
diploma, haven’t been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor or
multiple misdemeanors and are not a threat to public safety or national

The ICE agent union challenged the policy, arguing that the Obama
administration is disciplining agents who enforce federal immigration

The president of that union, the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, also said the policy is being abused.

In his April 8 testimony, Christopher L. Crane said, “Officers are
applying the directive to people detained in jails, not kids in school.”

He told the court, “It is now the story in the jails for aliens to use to avoid arrest and deportation.”

Those aliens appear to be taking advantage of the policy with great success. National Review
found, “Since the policy took effect in August 2012, the Obama
administration has approved 268,361 applications for ‘deferred action’
status, and denied just 1,377 – an approval rate of 99.5 percent.”

While critics argue the policy is ineffective in securing the border,
Judge O’Connor indicated it’s also illegal for the Obama administration
to tell immigration agents not to arrest an illegal alien who is a low

“The court finds that DHS (Department of Homeland Security) does not
have discretion to refuse to initiate removal proceedings,” Judge O’Connor wrote.

O’Connor issued a court order stating that Congress, not the
president, sets priorities for arresting illegal aliens and that the law
requires them to face deportation.

A recent analysis by Politico based on U.S. Census and Pew Research
Center estimates of illegal alien populations by state brings into
question the Democrats’ motivation for what they call comprehensive
immigration reform – also dubbed “amnesty” by critics.

After crunching the numbers, Politico said the immigration proposal
now in Congress would give Democrats a decisive advantage at the polls
for a generation or more.

It would happen by “pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters
into the electorate a decade from now in ways that, if current trends
hold, would produce an electoral bonanza for Democrats and cripple
Republican prospects in many states they now win easily.”

William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, or
ALIPAC, told WND the legislation would “completely wipe out the
center-right group of people that have governed America for over 200
years. And it would replace true conservatives with illegal immigrants
willing to vote for anyone willing to give them more power and control.”

Gheen believes the DHS policy is in response to a drop in illegal
immigration after the economy began plummeting into recession in 2008
and states began cracking down on illegal immigration.

“If the ICE agents can win their case and we can stop amnesty, the
American public may get one more shot at this in the 2014 election, in
which case we could restore the reversal of illegal immigration,” he

Gheen said ALIPAC may file a friend-of-the-court brief to help the ICE agents’ union.

“To us its very clear that the U.S. Constitution says immigration is
the purview of the U.S. Congress. And the fact that Obama’s memo, or
decree, so perfectly emulates failed legislation reinforces our belief
this should have been done legislatively, it if were done at all.”

Gheen added, “[W]e have contended for years, and accurately so, that
those very powerful groups behind the deadly and costly illegal
immigrant invasion of the United States are not concerned about
democracy; they’re all about authoritarian governance. It’s just part of
what it’s going to be like if they ever get their group of 20 million
illegal immigrants on board as a new voting bloc.”

He said those “powerful groups” include Fox News.

“I know that Fox News is pushing amnesty. They’ve had very few
anti-amnesty people on at all, except for Ann Coulter and Michelle
Malkin. All of their main hosts, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, have
come out in support of amnesty,” he added.

Gheen also cited what he called bogus immigration polls by Fox News.

“This time, the amnesty battle is different because two high-profile
groups have run designer polls and paid for the results, with Fox News
and the Associated Press trying to convince Americans that if they’re
against amnesty they are in the minority. It is a very powerful and
Orwellian thing that we have to deal with,” Gheen contended.

He added, “We have a whole list of polls showing our position of
enforcement rather than amnesty are supported by a supermajority of
Americans, and we’ve been collecting those polls for eight years at”

website currently features a Reuters poll released Tuesday showing
“more than half of U.S. citizens believe that most or all of the
country’s 11 million illegal immigrants should be deported.”

April 25, 2013 Posted by | Here And Now, Home | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


Barack Obama — our imperial emperor in chief


Published January 17, 2013

  • Obama_ceiling.jpg

    January 14, 2013: President Obama at a news conference at the White House in Washington, D.C. (REUTERS)

One definition of “imperial” on is, “of the nature or rank of an emperor or supreme ruler.”

At his news conference Monday, a petulant, threatening and confrontational President Obama spoke like an emperor or supreme ruler. All that was missing was a scepter, a crown and a robe trimmed in ermine.

This president exceeds even Bill Clinton in his ability to evade, prevaricate and dissemble. I didn’t think that possible.

Not only did he supply long answers to relatively easy questions, but much of what he said bore no relation to reality.

A petulant, threatening and confrontational President Obama spoke Monday like an emperor or supreme ruler. All that was missing was a scepter, a crown and a robe trimmed in ermine.

He spoke of having had the debate over the economy during the 2012 campaign and boasted, “…the American people agreed with me.”

By the way, can we now retire the phrase “the American people”? Too many politicians overuse it, including Speaker John Boehner. Forty-seven percent of voters supported Mitt Romney and other Republicans in the last election. Ninety-four million people eligible to vote didn’t vote. Can Obama really claim “the American people” agreed with him?

The president won the election, but he has yet to win the debate over smaller vs. larger government, and more vs. less spending.

The question Major Garrett of CBS News posed to the president on raising the debt ceiling in tandem with spending cuts exposed his hypocrisy and that of many congressional Democrats: “You yourself, as a member of the Senate, voted against a debt ceiling increase. And in previous aspects of American history, President Reagan in 1985, President George Herbert Walker Bush in 1990, President Clinton in 1997, all signed deficit-reduction deals that were contingent upon or in the context of raising the debt ceiling. You yourself, four times have done that. Three times, those were related to deficit reduction or budget maneuvers. What Chuck (NBC’s Chuck Todd) and I and, I think, many people are curious about is this new adamant desire on your part not to negotiate when that seems to conflict with the entire history of the modern era of American presidents on the debt ceiling and your own history on the debt ceiling. And doesn’t that suggest that we are going to go into a default situation, because no one is talking to each other about how to resolve this?”

The president dissembled, talking again (he repeated this at least three times by my count) about how Congress had authorized all the spending and how we must now “pay our bills.” But as Garrett noted, the president had a different view of the debt ceiling when he was an Illinois senator and voted against raising it. In 2006, he said, “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.” Except when he’s the leader, then it’s someone else’s failure.

In 2003, during another debate over raising the debt ceiling, Sen. Max Baucus, (D-Mont.), said, “The federal debt is like the family credit card. Sooner or later you have to pay down the debts that you have already incurred. If you don’t, your credit rating will suffer. The way the government raises the debt limit is also like a family who just keeps calling the bank every time they hit the credit limit and asks the bank over and over again for an increase in their credit limit without regard to anything else. Rather than pay down their debt, they just keep on asking for a higher debt limit.”

Many other Senate Democrats, including Senators Harry Reid, (D-Nev.), and John Kerry, (D-Mass.), shared Baucus’ concerns, but that was during the George W. Bush administration.

The president says he will reduce debt with a “balanced approach,” by which he means offsetting higher taxes on the wealthy with spending cuts, which will never materialize. It won’t work. Whatever tax revenue government manages to save, Congress will always find a way to spend it.

The president has submitted a budget proposal to Congress for each fiscal year he’s been in office, but Congress has failed to pass a single one. That’s a staggering repudiation of his leadership.

President Obama will not negotiate about raising the debt ceiling? Not surprising. Imperial leaders don’t negotiate.

Cal Thomas is America’s most widely syndicated newspaper columnist and a Fox News contributor. Follow him on Twitter@CalThomas. Readers may e-mail Cal Thomas at


January 18, 2013 Posted by | Home | , , , , , , , | 3 Comments


Obama suspends deportation for thousands of illegals, tells GOP to pass DREAM Act

Published June 15, 2012



President Obama said Friday the United States will stop deporting hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants and give them work permits, a move praised fellow Democrats but criticized by Republicans on Capitol Hill who said the administration has side-stepped the country’s legislative process.

The executive order will apply to illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. before they were 16 and are younger than 30. They also must have no criminal record, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have graduated from a U.S. high school or have earned a GED, or served in the military.

“These are young people who study in our schools and play on our playgrounds,” the president said. “They are Americans in every single way but one – on paper.”

Those now eligible also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed.

The change is expected to impact roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants.

The election-year announcement was met with surprise and question by several GOP lawmakers.

 “This is another example of executive overreach,” Florida GOP Rep. Allen West told Fox News.

West said he just learned about the policy change Friday morning and that such a move should have come through legislation on Capitol Hill where it could be debated.

“That’s how we do business in the United States,” said West, R; Fla.

New York GOP Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, vowed an “immediate review” into the possibility that the Department Of Homeland Security will direct U.S. Border Patrol agents to conduct selective enforcement.

GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney said the president’s order makes reaching a long-term solution more difficult.

“If I’m elected president, we’ll do our best to have the long-term solution,” he said.

Obama suggested he ordered the policy change because Capitol Hill Republicans have blocked the so-called DREAM Act, buts said the lawmakers still have time to pass such legislation.

 “I’ve said this time and again to Congress,” the president said at the Rose Garden press conference. “Send me the DREAM Act, put it on my desk, and I’ll sign it.”

In urging Congress to pass the legislation, the president said his change was “stop gap” and not “a permanent fix.”


The president also made clear his change was not amnesty, immunity or a path to citizenship.

The policy is similar to one by Florida GOP Sen. Marco Rubio in that it is an alternative to the DREAM Act. However, the first-term senator did not support the president’s order.

“Today’s announcement will be welcome news for many of these kids desperate for an answer, but it is a short-term answer to a long term problem,” Rubio said. “And by once again ignoring the Constitution and going around Congress, this short-term policy will make it harder to find a balanced and responsible long term one.”

The president was briefly interrupted by a reporter who asked: “Mr. President, why do you favor foreign workers over Americans?”

Obama sternly told the reporter – identified as Neil Munro of The Daily Caller – not to interrupt.

“Excuse me, sir, but it’s not time for questions,” Obama responded.

“Are you going to take questions?” Munro asked.

“Not while I’m speaking.” Obama said.

The reporter later said he though the president was finished talking.

Earlier in the day, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the change takes effect immediately and is needed to ensure enforcement resources are not expended on “low-priority cases.”

“Young people brought to U.S. by no fault of their own and meet several criteria no longer are removed from country or entered into removal proceedings,” Napolitano said in a conference call with reporters.

The policy change was reported first by the Associated Press.

The move comes in an election year in which the Hispanic vote could be critical in swing states like Colorado, Nevada and Florida.

While Obama has support from a majority of Hispanic voters, Latino enthusiasm for the president has been tempered by the slow economic recovery, his inability to win congressional support for a broad overhaul of immigration laws and by his administration’s aggressive deportation policy.

Romney and many Republican lawmakers want tighter border security measures before considering changes in immigration law. Romney opposes offering legal status to illegal immigrants who attend college but has said he would do so for those who serve in the armed forces.

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll last month found Obama leading Romney among Hispanic voters 61 percent to 27 percent. But his administration’s deportation policies have come under fire, and Latino leaders have raised the subject in private meetings with the president. In 2011, Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported a record 396,906 people and is expected to deport about 400,000 this year.

Under the administration’s plan, immigrants whose deportation cases are pending in immigration court will have to prove their eligibility for a reprieve to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which will begin dealing with such cases in 60 days. Any immigrant who already has a deportation order and those who never have been encountered by immigration authorities will deal with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Last year, Napolitano announced plans to review about 300,000 pending deportation cases and indefinitely suspend those that didn’t meet department priorities. So far, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has reviewed more than 232,000 cases and decided to stop working on about 20,000. About 4,000 of those 20,000 have opted to keep fighting in court to stay in the United States legally. For the people who opted to close their cases, work permits are not guaranteed.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Read more:

June 17, 2012 Posted by | Here And Now | , , , , | Leave a comment


Political Vel Craft

Veil Of Politics

Political Film Blog

money, power, injustice, sex, violence, propaganda, anti-fascism...


Fighting Against Government Harassment

Constitutional Clayton

Politics surrounding the Constitution


Smile! You’re at the best site ever

John Groves Art Stuff

Art from johngrovesart


Swiss Defence League

the seaton post

A little bit of this and a little bit of that

Jericho777's Blog

Correcting Misinformation!

%d bloggers like this: