Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'We Will Not Engage': Michele Bachmann Reveals GOP Plans to Ignore Executive Amnesty
breitbart.com/Big-Government ^ | 11-23-2014 | Robert Wilde

Posted on 11/23/2014 6:23:38 AM PST by servo1969

Breitbart News Executive Chairman Steven K. Bannon asked the congresswoman, who was a guest on Breitbart News Saturday Sirius XM Patriot channel 125, “Has there been any firm commitment from the leadership of the Republican party saying that this amnesty is not going to happen?” Bachmann replied with a question, “Do you want the truth? Okay, I’ll tell all of Breitbart listeners what happened this week. I was floored!”

In the weekly meeting called “Republican Conference” in the House of Representatives, “we all knew that the big issue for the week was going to be the president announcing his amnesty,” she explained. Bachmann recounted that all of the leadership went to the microphone, including John Boehner.

“They acted as though the amnesty issue wasn’t even an issue. They said that the President is going to do what he’s going to do, and we are not going to get down in the mud with him. We are not going to engage, and what we are going to do is to talk about our positive solutions on jobs, the economy, education, and manufacturing,” Bachmann said.

She added that each congressman who spoke reiterated that not engaging Obama and staying positive was a “brilliant strategy.”

"We will not engage," she reiterated with disgust.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amnesty; bachmann; boehner; executive; gop; michelebachmann; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-227 next last
To: Lazamataz; JRandomFreeper

Did Obama use an EO or EA to change the laws in ObamaCare moving the sign up dates around?

Or did he just say to HHS, move the dates?

This is breaking the law just like what he has done with the amnesty for the invaders.

Maybe he expects it to happen now without an EO or EA.


121 posted on 11/23/2014 11:21:56 AM PST by eartick (Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: eartick
That's why States have taken Obama directly to the Supremes over the mandated State exchanges. You have been following that, right?

/johnny

122 posted on 11/23/2014 11:23:17 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Yes, I have been following that but what I am saying is that maybe his intentions is that he will not issue an EO or EA on the amnesty.

He will just “command” DHS, ICE and others to do this and expect it done. It is then up to the States only to do something. Congress can only defund the “command” to do.


123 posted on 11/23/2014 11:28:01 AM PST by eartick (Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: eartick
Whatever he uses to 'command' will be all that is needed for the States to take it directly to the Supremes.

That is why he has been very careful to not 'command' that.

No-one in the government will do anything if it's not in writing. There will have to be a memo or something directing unlawful action.

That's why the States are taking Obamacare to the Supremes now.

/johnny

124 posted on 11/23/2014 11:30:59 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
He has to have an EO to put any amnesty into effect. No EO, no unlawful amnesty. So no, you are incorrect.

Let me rephrase then - the GOP and SCOTUS has (and will) DO NOTHING when the Emperor tells his Alphabets not to enforce existing law by his decree - which as we have already seen, does not even have to be written for the Alphabets to enact. Case-in-point: DOMA.

Same thing here with "prosecutorial discretion". We have "law" by decree, and laws that are now arbitrary based on personal assent, meaning his wishes can be verbal and the drones in the Oligarchy carry out His Heinous' wishes.

Look, we suffered a velvet coup. There is no stopping this tyranny via civil means. The rule of law is dead.

125 posted on 11/23/2014 11:31:49 AM PST by INVAR ("Fart for liberty, fart for freedom and fart proudly!" - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: eartick
He is no closer to amnesty today than he was a month or 6 years ago.

/johnny

126 posted on 11/23/2014 11:31:53 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: INVAR
No.

The States will use anything he puts out to order an unlawful act to take him directly to the Supreme court.

They are doing that now with the mandated State exchanges in Obamacare. It may bring down Obamacare.

The rule of law has not run out, regardless of how impatient you are.

No-one in the government is going to risk their pension by following a verbal order. It will be written if it happens.

Obama is no closer to amnesty today than he was a month ago.

/johnny

127 posted on 11/23/2014 11:35:10 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Ocoeeman
Obama is doing an unconstitutional "Executive Action". In other words he is going to take action not based on a law and NOT based on an EO.

Sorry you are incorrect. Please review Executive Orders: Issuance, Modification, and Revocation and get back to me.

You still aren't addressing my point. I haven't said that Obama is using an EO. Yet you respond to me with a handbook on Executive Orders.

LOL.

In his speech Obama has promised to use Administrative Action to register illegal aliens in our country and to set up an application procedure that will allow them not to be deported. That's unconstitutional.

He did the same thing with Obamacare, using 24 Administrative Actions.

Get back to me when you address my points.

128 posted on 11/23/2014 11:38:19 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
He is no closer to amnesty today than he was a month or 6 years ago.

Take the blinders off. He announced an unconstitutional "Administrative Action" that will allow illegals to stay in this country.

129 posted on 11/23/2014 11:42:07 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
No-one in the government will do anything if it's not in writing. There will have to be a memo or something directing unlawful action. That's why the States are taking Obamacare to the Supremes now.

Obama has "put into writing" 24 times changes to Obamacare.

130 posted on 11/23/2014 11:44:54 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Take your blinders off. He's been not deporting people for a long time. His announcement changes nothing on the ground, except to get you stampeded.

/johnny

131 posted on 11/23/2014 11:45:00 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
And there is a case before the Supremes now. It may bring down Obamacare.

/johnny

132 posted on 11/23/2014 11:46:21 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Take your blinders off. He's been not deporting people for a long time. His announcement changes nothing on the ground, except to get you stampeded.

Creating an administrative procedure that dictates no deportations by the executive branch is unconstitutional. Setting up an executive branch bureaucracy that will "stamp" illegals is unconstitutional.

You need to quit making excuses for Obama's unconstitutional actions.

133 posted on 11/23/2014 11:54:10 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
And there is a case before the Supremes now. It may bring down Obamacare.

So then we will require cases before the SC to stop Obama's unconstitutional dictates to the executive branch.

134 posted on 11/23/2014 11:56:54 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
I haven't seen any document that shows he has given unlawful orders to the executive department.

Show me the documents that create this administrative procedure that is unlawful.

I'm not excusing obama for anything. Nor do I excuse the congress for this massive mess. Nor do I excuse those that have got their panties in a wad over a speech when nothing on the ground has changed.

/johnny

135 posted on 11/23/2014 11:57:55 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Right now, you either go through the Supremes, or get congress to defund. And getting congress to defund with the current Senate isn't likely to happen.

Next session, it might. But that is next January, and you want answers NOW!

/johnny

136 posted on 11/23/2014 12:00:21 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

....”Fortunately it can be done without leadership. A few brave congressmen can lead as long as we back them up.”....

Frankly maybe it was just as well they got out of dodge and left the Democrats and Obama wondering what’s coming when they get fully back....in JANUARY especially when we have a full court!

I just cannot accept they have nothing planned...we’ve been seeing bits here an there for months now....but they haven’t revealed their hand. I just have a sense this isn’t all there is to it....there’s something coming....and at a time of their choosing not when Obama expects it or knows of it...nor can he...this card they’re keeping close to their chest IMO...

I admit I’m hanging by a thread as to if or not they are going to do anything.....but that thread is strong enough to hold for “time” and wait and see.....January is coming.


137 posted on 11/23/2014 12:05:17 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ocoeeman

....”It does not establish law,... this is not a minor point... because while he claims he is shielding the illegal’s from deportation, US citizens who help or hire illegal’s CAN be prosecuted.”.....

Well I’ve been reading some are unwilling to “come out of the shadows” because it’s basically a “temporary” reprieve. They’re not willing to be I’d, stamped and given numbers, names and addresses to identify them when they know there’s a election in a couple ears that could change this equation and threaten them once again.


138 posted on 11/23/2014 12:09:32 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
I haven't seen any document that shows he has given unlawful orders to the executive department. Show me the documents that create this administrative procedure that is unlawful.

Wait.

Are you doubting Obama has issued 24 so-called Administrative Actions on Obamacare???

139 posted on 11/23/2014 12:11:55 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

—>>There was no immigration EO. People got played.

Obama signed the Executive Order (s) on Air Force One before he got to Vegas. FoxNews showed still picture of him with his papers and pen signing EO..(signing away the end of any border control until someone does something to defund it or takes action through the Congress in January....)


140 posted on 11/23/2014 12:14:51 PM PST by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-227 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson