Archive | February, 2018

Senators Cotton & Grassley Lose Endorsement for Supporting Amnesty for Illegals

For National Release | February 12, 2018

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is dropping the national organization’s long standing endorsements and support for Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) in response to their new Amnesty bill for millions of illegal immigrants.

Senators Cotton and Grassley plan to push an Amnesty for illegals bill today called the Secure and Succeed Act, which gives Amnesty to more than 1.8 million illegals and is backed by other Amnesty supporting Senators like James Lankford, Joni Ernst, John Cornyn, Thom Tillis, and David Perdue.

ALIPAC originally endorsed Chuck Grassley on September 21, 2010, because Grassley publicly opposed, and promised voters his opposition to, the Dream Act Amnesty which a version of is now included in this new bill he supports!

ALIPAC endorsed Tom Cotton for US Senate on October 16, 2014, because Cotton defied the RNC’s wishes and campaigned against a Democrat incumbent’s position in support of “immigration reform” Amnesty for illegals. Senator Cotton has clearly reversed his position today as well.

“Their sponsorship of the Succeed Act Amnesty bill for illegal aliens makes it clear Cotton and Grassley can’t be trusted because they have betrayed the promise to oppose Amnesty they made to their voters and groups who elected them,” declared William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. “By attempting to triple Obama’s DACA Amnesty and make that abomination against our Constitution into a permanent law, these Senators and the Trump administration are betraying Republican voters on a massive scale. Americans want our existing immigration laws enforced, not new elaborate promises designed to sugar coat and pass an Amnesty bill for illegal aliens!”

ALIPAC recently conducted a national certified poll through the Barometer Polling Company, which found an average of 67% of likely GOP primary voters want the existing immigration laws of the U.S. enforced instead of any deals on DACA Amnesty.

In fact, ALIPAC’s poll found that the term “DACA” has become so toxic most likely voters in many states oppose DACA as well despite the fact that Congress is being inundated with false propaganda polls, from pro-Amnesty sources like CNN, CBS, and Harvard University, claiming most Americans want an Amnesty deal.

Barometer Polling Company’s certified poll found that 75% of the likely GOP primary voters in Senator Grassley’s home state of Iowawant existing immigration laws enforced instead of existing laws being changed to accommodate illegal immigrants as does his Succeed Act Amnesty.

Senator Tom Cotton finds himself in deeper hot water in his home state of Arkansas where 80% of the GOP voters who voted in three of the last four primaries said no to DACA Amnesty deals!

Today, the U.S. Senate plans to vote on Amnesty for illegal immigrants by stacking amendments into an open bill. This strategy is designed to keep the American public, and many Senators, in the dark about what is actually in the bill.

ALIPAC is calling on Republican Party groups and the voters of Arkansas and Iowa to begin organizing strong GOP primary challenge campaigns to replace Senators Cotton and Grassley in the U.S. Senate for their betrayal on their campaign promises to oppose Amnesty for illegal immigrants, while ALIPAC activists will be bombarding the Senate with calls today asking them to slow down the legislative process to allow the American public to learn what is really in their new Amnesty bill.

For more information or to schedule interviews, please visit www.ALIPAC.us

FISA is a Constitutional & Needed Weapon in This War

With news full of reports about the fraudulent dossier used to obtain the FISA warrant to intercept communications of Carter Paige and the release of the memo last week, the following is provided to UTT readers to help them understand what it takes to obtain a FISA warrant, that FISA is constitutional, and that FISA is needed for the national security of America.

F.I.S.A. stands for the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act, and was legislated by the U.S. Congress in 1978 to ensure American citizens were protected from overzealous government intrusion into their privacy in the name of “national security.”

The FISA Court provides a means for the U.S. government to collect on subjects of sensitive/classified investigations (counterintelligence and terrorism for example) without endangering sources and means of the investigation.

FISA judges are federal judges who have been confirmed by the U.S. Senate and chosen by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Understanding the Threat’s President John Guandolo served as a Supervisor in the Counterterrorism Division at FBI Headquarters during his career in the FBI. In that capacity, he was the affiant – one who swears to the veracity of an affidavit – in support of numerous FISA warrants.

When an FBI agent in the field needs a FISA warrant, he/she contacts their supervisor at FBI headquarters who acts as the affiant for the warrant. The two work through the affidavit, sometimes over 100 pages long, until the FBIHQ Supervisor is satisfied the legal standard of Probable Cause is met and the facts are verified.

The FBIHQ supervisor works with a Department of Justice attorney, and the cover sheet for the affidavit must be signed off by a DOJ official. The affidavit is also reviewed and signed off by the FBI Director or Deputy Director.

It is not unusual for the FBI supervisor and DOJ attorney to meet with the FBI Director over a weekend at his home while the Director reviews the affidavit, asks questions, and is satisfied the affidavit can go to the judge.

Then the FBI supervisor and DOJ attorney sit before the FISA judge who reads the affidavit and asks questions. When the judge signs the affidavit, the technical process begins to intercept the subject of the investigation.

This entire process is legal, constitutional and an important tool in the national security toolbox for dedicated servants inside the government.

In the current case before us, FBI and Department of Justice leaders put forth an affidavit that – as the memo released last week makes clear – was fraudulent and the FBI knew it. The dossier from Christopher Steele was fabricated and purchased by Hillary Clinton/DNC, and yet this information was not provided to the FISA judge during the initial application for the FISA warrant nor at any of the three times when the warrant was renewed.

In a vacuum, these actions are violations of federal law. At a minimum, this is perjury and tampering with a federal election by those involved.

But it is much worse than that.

Robert Mueller’s investigation was predicated on a request for Special Counsel which did not allege any crime. The FISA warrant for Paige was predicated on lies using a source known by the FBI to lack credibility (Steele).

In reality, these actions – efforts to tamper with a federal election and, now, undermine and overthrow a duly elected President of the United States – constitutes “Sedition.”