Posted on 05/01/2007 12:47:00 PM PDT by Carry_Okie
Read this Hellish article tonight BUMP!
Gonzales has publicly admitted that he has illegal alien relatives living and working in the USA
He said he was not aware if they are working here legally
Gonzales, the DOJ, the WH agenda on deliberately ignoring “certain” crimes all wrapped in nicely
- Myself - I’d say many Americans may start using the illegal alien’s very sucessful methods of ignoring the IRS
Selective enforcement or prosecution of the Constitution and federal criminal and civil statutes does seem to be in direct violation of a certain Amendment.......
Bump!
If (D-CT) Zoie Baird was bounced as Slick Willie’s first choice for his Attorney General because she knowingly employed illegal aliens
Then (D-NY) Kimba Wood because she knowingly employed illegal aliens
Then #3 was the charmer: (D-FL) Janet Waco
—
Funny part is (R-wherever!) Linda Chavez had criticized Zoie Baird - yet she was bounced from consideration in President George W Bush’s cabinet for having “an illegal alien *houseguest!”
*(Ho!-Ho!-Ho!)
Why should (D-then-R-TX) Aberto Gonzales ever have been nominated for Bush’s AG and then approved by Congress?
So you are implying or suggesting Bush had no idea about who he was appointing as Attorney General of the United States?
I noted you declined comment to the above.
Probably another d*mn ‘diversity’ candidate with BS for brains.
“Yet another betrayal!”
This is starting to look like real problems.
When he flipped Rumsfeld to appease the dems, I thought he was going into a self destructive tantrum.
Some of us, stuck by Alberto because we did not want the dems to be able to claim another victory.
What the heck is going on?
Berger the felon does no time--but the Border Patrol does a dime.
Grassley holds Gonzales by a thread.
From the NRA on the matter:
The New York Times praises it as anti-terrorism legislation, but what they’re not telling you is that Senator Frank Lautenberg’s bill would strip away the fundamental American right of due process... not to mention the Second Amendment.
I’ll be very clear-Frank Lautenberg’s proposal is un-American. There’s no other way to put it.
His legislation would give the Justice Department the full power to put anyone they “suspect” of being involved in terrorism on a secret watch list and deny them the right to purchase a firearm.
Don’t get me wrong. I do NOT want terrorists to be able to buy a firearm, and neither do the millions of members of the NRA. I don’t even want terrorists walking around on our streets.
But the Lautenberg bill isn’t about terrorists-it’s about “suspects.” And a secret government list.
Lautenberg is the New Jersey senator who’s voted for virtually every gun ban, ammunition ban, and registration scheme that’s ever been proposed. He ought to just admit the very real impact of his legislation: It would give the Justice Department the authority to put the name of every law abiding American citizen who owns a firearm on a permanent, secret government list.
In one sweeping legislative act, our Second Amendment freedom could be gutted.
Not to mention the basic right of due process. If they declare you a “suspect,” your rights are gone. With no rights at all-just because some government bureaucrat calls you a “suspect” -the attorney general can deny you a firearm, a Right-to-Carry permit or an FFL license.
Just imagine if that attorney general were Janet Reno, or Dianne Feinstein, or Chuck Schumer! American gun owners chosen by whim or at random would have no rights at all!
I agree that we need to be tough on terrorists. But if someone is suspected of terrorist activity-don’t just put him on a list. Investigate, arrest and prosecute them. Kick them out of our country.
But we cannot tear up our rights under the Constitution in the name of fighting terrorism. We gain nothing by destroying the precious freedoms that separate us from the rest of the world
link: http://www.nranews.com/blogarticle.aspx?blogPostId=212
NRA Bump
“this legislation would give the Attorney General discretionary authority to deny the purchase of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm license or permit because of some vague suspicion that an American citizen may be up to no good.”
Sign it, Mr. President, because the Supreme Court will overturn it, it’s obviously unconstitutional. You know, just like they overturned McCain-Feingold!
/bitter sarcasm
“Like Roberts and Alito?”
Let’s see what they do in United States v. Santos (06-1005), which will interpret the money laundering statute, first. If they are really constitutionalists, they’ll toss the whole damn statute as federal action out of bounds with a limited federal government. If not, well, we know they’re both business-as-usual, uberfederalist, ‘conservative’ appointees like Rehnquist was.
And they still don’t seem to have ruled on anything brightline ‘constitutional or not,’ which isn’t a surprise, since their docket load has dropped like a rock, notwithstanding some amazing disparity of law in federal circuit decisions. A conservative CJOTSC would entertain appeals bent on at least making the Constitution clear, and he sets the agenda for cert. Seems to me the ‘conservative’ CJOTSC’s agenda is awful light so far.
Does anyone in the government know “We the People” anymore?
Kitty, the problem is with the people themselves. They have forgotten, so they continue to elect thes kinds of politicians. Immigration has not helped.
Should be said again.
The government should *NEVER* have any more power that we would want it to have with the worst possible POTUS and a completely Democratic Senate, House and SCOTUS. That’s why I didn’t like the Patriot act.
I thank you for the comment and I believe you.
If I was working for POTUS Hitlery I’ go for the lists of everyone who’s bought gun safes:-(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.