Savage: ‘There’s a retrovirus in the White House’

Epidemiologist-talker diagnoses the spread of national ‘insanity’
Published: 11 hours ago

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.png
Printer Friendly
Text smaller
Text bigger

324
Republish Reprint

Michael Savage, the No. 2 top talker in America with a Ph.D. in epidemiology, has come up with a diagnosis for what’s wrong with America.

“There’s a retrovirus in the White House,” he said on his show Friday.

It wasn’t the ’60s that destroyed America, he said, after watching a collection of home movies he collected from that era.

“We keep hearing the ’60s were bad,” he said. “They say the hippie movement destroyed America. But I want to tell you the ’60s weren’t all bad.”

The movies brought him some clarity.

“I saw myself as a very straight young social worker, teacher,” he said. “Then suddenly the movie jumps to 1968 and I have a beard, I have long hair, I look like Charles Manson. The last scene of the movie is a scene of me as a free spirit on the roof of a hospital in Hawaii, a research hospital I was working in as a grad student, moving freely on this roof with the ocean behind me. … I saw myself up on the roof of that hospital and I had to make a note that the ’60s were not so bad.”

The doctor is in … at the WND Superstore. Read ALL of Michael Savage’s books.

Savage told his listeners: “It wasn’t the hippies who ruined America. It was the Communists who ruined the hippies who ruined America. You see, a free spirit is more easily manipulated or penetrated than a rigid spirit. The ’60s allowed millions of us to become freer spirits. The Communists entered our spirits just as retroviruses infect humans, causing the common cold and AIDs for example. And today we have a retrovirus in the White House named Barack Obama. He has infected the body politic with his hateful, anti-American view and invaded many other cells or people with his destructive ideas.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

A retrovirus uses an enzyme to become part of the cells it invades and facilitates many copies of the host cells, he explained.

“Does this sound like what Obama has done to this country?” he asked. “That’s exactly what he has done. The entire Democratic Party has been invaded and infected by him. Not all of them were like this originally. Not all of them were like this even seven years ago. Some of them had a scintilla of patriotism and a scintilla of sanity. Today the entire Democrat Party has been invaded by the retrovirus of Barack Obama that has infected them with his worldview that is so crazy they don’t even know what they are doing, because they are just like him now.”

And it goes beyond the Democratic Party, he said. The Republican Party has been infected too. The media are nearly all infected.

This didn’t take place in the ’60s, Savage explained. It’s happening now.

“The ’60s were not all bad,” Savage reiterated after a nostalgic view of his home movies. The problem, he said, was that some ’60s people became “frozen in time to this minute … they never evolved … they don’t know they destroyed their own country … they are stuck in the past, stuck in the past, unable to see what they are doing to this country.”

“But make no mistake about it, a president is a very powerful man,” said Savage. “And what this man is doing is beyond comprehension – like granting the most terroristic nation on the planet the right to develop nuclear weapons. It would be like, after Baltimore was burned down, instead of putting the perpetrators in jail, it would be like giving them all RPGs and tanks thinking they won’t do any more harm.”

Bringing it all home, Savage said the reason the ’60s were not all bad is because there’s nothing wrong with being a free spirit: “I would say I’m still a free spirit and I don’t want the government telling me what to do, and I don’t want you telling me what to do, and I don’t want ‘Black Lives’ telling me what to do, and I don’t want anyone telling me what to do. How’s that?”
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/09/savage-theres-a-retrovirus-in-the-white-house/#xq6cBhLYAiIM5Gfk.99

var icx_publication_id = 16633; var icx_content_id = 2420625; .icx-toolbar{padding: 0 0 5px 0;}Michael Savage, the No. 2 top talker in America with a Ph.D. in epidemiology, has come up with a diagnosis for what’s wrong with America. “There’s a retrovirus in the White House,” he said on his show Friday. It wasn’t the ’60s that destroyed America, he […]

Source: Savage: ‘There’s a retrovirus in the White House’

Inside the ISIS-U.S. border scare

Inside the ISIS-U.S. border scare.

U.S.-Mexico border

TEL AVIV – While U.S. government agencies have strongly denied a Judicial Watch report claiming there are ISIS camps near the U.S. border with Mexico, lawmakers have expressed fears the global jihadist organization is linking up with deadly Mexican drug cartels.

Such a partnership would not only help to facilitate the smuggling of jihadists into the U.S. but could ultimately translate into a devastating terrorist attack on American soil, such as an Electro Magnetic Pulse, or EMP, catastrophe.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Northern Command and the Texas Department of Public Safety all have denied the April 14 Judicial Watch report citing unnamed “sources that include a Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector.”

The sources claimed ISIS “has established its base around eight miles from the U.S. border in an area known as ‘Anapra’ situated just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua.”

Judicial Watch further reported on an ISIS camp west of Juarez, which the organization said was planning to attack towns in New Mexico.

Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, said he contacted the Mexican government, DHS and the U.S. Northern Command, all of whom told him they have no intelligence indicating ISIS is operating on the U.S.-Mexico border. O’Rourke represents the border city of El Paso and the surrounding area.

The free WND special report “ISIS Rising,” by Middle East expert and former Department of Defense analyst Michael Maloof, will answer your questions about the jihadist army threatening the West.

“Stories like these are good at scaring people and getting attention for those who spread them,” wrote O’Rourke on his Facebook page. “But they are terrible for the country’s image of the border, for El Paso’s ability to recruit talent, and for our region’s opportunity to capitalize on the benefits of being the largest bi-national community in the world.”

Department of Public Safety Deputy Director Robert J. Bodisch also denied the Judicial Watch claims.

“The Department of Public Safety and its intelligence community partners have no such credible information to corroborate or validate this today,” Bodisch wrote in an agency memo.

It’s not the first Judicial Watch report claiming ISIS was using Mexico as a base to stage attacks in the U.S.

Last August, the watchdog reported “Islamic terrorist groups are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle borne improvised explosive devices,” citing anonymous “high-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources.”

In a report that made headlines last October, two Republican lawmakers told BuzzFeed that suspected terrorists had infiltrated the U.S.–Mexico border and as many as 10 jihadists were captured. The DHS at the time denied the claims.

Numerous U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly warned about ISIS teaming up with drug cartels.

In October, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., warned in a town hall conversation that “groups like the Islamic State collaborate with drug cartels in Mexico who have clearly shown they’re willing to expand outside the drug trade into human trafficking and potentially even terrorism.”

“They could infiltrate our defenseless border and attack us right here in places like Arkansas.”

Cotton was likely referencing the Judicial Watch report.

In August, Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, a member of the House Judiciary Committee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, was asked on Newmax TV’s “America’s Forum” whether there was an ISIS-Mexican drug cartel connection.

“My opinion is yes,” he replied. “There seems to be at least a talking to each other. How much? I don’t know. But … drug cartels use the same operational plan as terrorist groups do. They kill their opponents, they behead their opponents, they brag about it and they have operational control of many portions of the southern border of the United States. Mexico doesn’t.

“The United States doesn’t,” he continued. “Otherwise they wouldn’t be crossing daily with their drugs. They’re as vicious as some of these other terrorist organizations. We need to recognize them that this is an organized international crime group. And we have to deal with them as such.”

The reports of terrorists trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border also took center stage during the 2012 presidential campaign, when candidates Rick Perry and Mitt Romney both warned terrorists infiltrating via Mexico posed a significant threat to U.S. national security.

Texas’s O’Rourke, however, was the public face of the Democrats in responding to those claims. He stated Republicans were simply trying to gin up opposition to immigration reform.

“There’s a longstanding history in this country of projecting whatever fears we have onto the border,” stated O’Rourke.

“In the absence of understanding the border, they insert their fears. Before it was Iran and al-Qaida. Now it’s ISIS. They just reach the conclusion that invasion is imminent, and it never is.”

Electrical grid

If terrorists are teaming up with Mexican drug cartels, the implications could be cataclysmic.

Not only do Mexican drug gangs maintain sophisticated smuggling routes, some of the more dangerous Mexican group have evidenced guerrilla-like tactics already used in terrorist-style attacks.

On Oct. 27, 2013, for example, the criminal drug cartel known as the Knights Templars attacked electrical facilities and blacked out Mexico’s Michoacan state, which boasts a population of 420,000. During the blackout, the Knights Templars reportedly entered towns and villages at will, terrorized the citizens and police, and publicly executed leaders opposed to the drug trade.

In an attack still largely unexplained, on April 16, 2013, a sophisticated assault was carried out on PG&E Corp’s Metcalf Transmission Substation outside of San Jose, California, which supplies power to San Francisco and other areas. A team of gunmen fired sniper and assault rifles on the substation, severely damaging 17 transformers.

Peter Pry, executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security and director of the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, believes the assault could have been part of a terrorist group’s preparation for a future attack on the U.S. electrical grid.

Jon Wellinghoff, the former chairman of the U.S. agency responsible for grid security, also warned that the Metcalf attack was likely a dry run for a future large-scale attack.

On the same day as the Metcalf assault, North Korea flew its KSM-3 satellite on the optimum trajectory and altitude to evade U.S. radars and carry out a potential EMP attack drill.

Networks within U.S. cities

An ISIS-Mexican drug cartel alliance could cause pandemonium in U.S. cities. Mexican drug cartels have established major networks within the U.S.

Earlier this month it was reported that federal agents arrested 976 suspected gang members across scores of American cities in a large-scale operation in February and March. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency said 199 of those arrested were foreign nationals.

Criminal street gangs are responsible for the majority of violent crimes within the U.S. and are the primary distributors of most illicit drugs, according to a previous report by the Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center, or NDIC.

The NDIC was a task force established in 1993 to coordinate law enforcement actions to stop drug trafficking and to curb the growing threat of violent gangs in the U.S. The agency was closed by the Obama administration in June 2011.

In October 2011, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement reported that in 2009 and 2010 it arrested 5,270 illegal alien gang members across all 50 states.

A 2011 FBI report draws a far dimmer picture of the nature of criminal gangs operating domestically. According to the FBI, criminal street gangs – mostly comprised of illegal aliens – are acquiring high-powered, military-style weapons to engage in lethal encounters with law enforcement members and citizens alike.

States the report: “There are an estimated 1.4 million active street, prison and outlaw motorcycle gang members in more than 33,000 gangs operating in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.”

The report notes those numbers reflect an increase from 2009 figures due “primarily to more comprehensive reporting from law enforcement and enhanced gang recruiting efforts.”

In July 2014, WND reported the risk of ISIS infiltrating from Mexico, perhaps with the help of drug gangs.

WND senior staff writer Michael Maloof, a U.S. Defense Department analyst under President Bush, warned ISIS could use the Mexican border to infiltrate America, and it could happen “sooner rather than later.”

“MS-13 already are in over 1,100 U.S. cities, and, as a consequence, the infiltration capabilities are very, very high and the threat from them can be sooner rather than later,” Maloof warned at the time.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/the-deadly-truth-isis-and-mexican-drug-gangs/#0KQDVIh2WMAdeVXD.99

Judge opens door for cops to storm your home

Judge opens door for cops to storm your home.

SWAT

The Third Amendment, which guards against the quartering of soldiers in citizens’ homes – and which came into being because of the abuse of British troops against American patriots – has just been dinged by a judge who ruled the provision doesn’t apply to police.

In essence, that means police on official business could claim the legal right to bust into a private citizen’s home and occupy it.

The determination from federal district court Judge Andrew Gordon was rendered when he dismissed a Third Amendment claim from a Henderson, Nevada, family who suffered that very fate.

“Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality” chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state, and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!

Anthony Mitchell and his parents Michael and Linda Mitchell sued the City of Henderson and several police agents in federal court for a July 2011 incident they described in court papers.

Volokh reported: “On the morning of July 10, 2011, officers from the Henderson Police Department responded to a domestic violence call at a neighbor’s residence. … [Police] told [Mitchell] police needed to occupy his home in order to gain a ‘tactical advantage’ against the occupant of the neighboring house. Anthony Mitchell told the officer that he did not want to become involved and that he did not want police to enter his residence.”

Police went to the Mitchell family house anyway, and “banged forcefully on the door and loudly commanded Anthony Mitchell to open the door to his residence,” his complaint read.

Mitchell then reportedly contacted his mother to let her know what was going on – and police “smashed open” his door with a metal ram, court documents indicated.

From there, the situation grew even more chaotic. Mitchell wrote in court papers police pepperballed him and his dog, gave him conflicting orders and ultimately arrested him. He was released the next day from jail.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

But Mitchell and his parents turned around and sued, alleging their Third and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated – the Third, because the police were acting like members of the military. The case was closely watched by legal minds, given the unusual nature of the Third Amendment alleged violation.

But Gordon dismissed that claim in a court action that fell largely under the nation’s radar.

He wrote, the Washington Post reported: “Various officers … entered into and occupied Linda’s and Michael’s home for an unspecified amount of time (seemingly nine hours), but certainly for less than 24 hours. The relevant questions are thus whether municipal police should be considered soldiers, and whether the time they spent in the house could be considered quartering. To both questions, the answer must be no. I hold that a municipal police officer is not a soldier for purposes of the Third Amendment.”

As Ilya Somin, professor of law at George Mason University, opined, however: The judge’s dismissal should be regarded with wary eyes.

One “complicating factor,” he said, in the Washington Post, “is the increasing militarization of police forces in many parts of the country, which has resulted in cops using weapons and tactics normally associated with military forces. If a state or local government decides to quarter a SWAT team in a private home, it is not clear whether that is meaningfully different from placing a National Guard unit there.”

WND reported there are some 17,000 police departments nationwide equipped with $4.2 billion worth of equipment ranging from Blackhawk helicopters and battering rams to explosives, body armor and night vision.

Military assault rifles, grenade launchers and 14-ton Mine-Resistance Ambush-Protected vehicles built for taking down terrorist enclaves are becoming part of the toolbox of local police departments under the federal 1033 program that supplies “surplus” military weapons to local officers, departments and agencies on request and without charge.

WND recently reported the American Civil Liberties Union was critical of the 1033 program, and a growing number of cities and counties are now returning the war weapons.

“Whenever this kind of armament is brought into a community, it should only be done with the knowledge and consent of the citizenry,” John Whitehead, a constitutional attorney based in Charlottesville, Virginia, said in a statement released to WND.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/cops-can-storm-homes-court-suggests/#jfYfdFMRFkiDhZkG.99

“Appropriate and Necessary” Is Whatever We Say It Is

Mises Daily | Mises Institute.

patronizing April 4, 2015Gary Galles Tags The EnvironmentHealthInterventionism The Supreme Court has recently heard oral arguments in Michigan vs. EPA challenging regulations slashing mercury emissions from fossil-fuel power plants. However, the central issue was not, as commonly represented, preventing harm from mercury. The central issue is the use of mercury as a bait-and-switch excuse for more stringent restrictions on fine particulate emissions. The EPA utilized what Justice Scalia called “a silly way to read” the law to do what Chief Justice Roberts described as an “end run” around its statutory limits, and the case well illustrates how government agencies are able to use open-ended legislation to get whatever they want. The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments instructed the EPA to study whether mercury exposure posed a health hazard that would make restricting it “appropriate and necessary.” Justification therefore first required demonstrating harm from mercury. That proved impossible to do honestly. CDC surveys showed blood mercury levels for American women and children falling and already below the levels found safe by the EPA, FDA, and WHO. The EPA even rejected a high mercury exposure study simply because it found “no observable health effects.” So they cheated. The EPA instead constructed a model of hypothetical women that “consume extreme quantities (99th percentile) of the most contaminated fish from the most contaminated bodies of water,” according to one amicus brief. It then added on a 50 percent “cooking adjustment factor.” It then estimated “the potential effect of this exposure on their hypothetical children’s neurological development in utero.” Given that power plants add a very small fraction to mercury deposition, that effect was minuscule. Even after more eye-glazing assumptions to inflate the damage, the estimated economic gain from reducing exposure to mercury was $6 million or less annually. Ignoring the Costs of Regulation However, the EPA then estimated that its “solution” to mercury emissions of fossil fuel power plants would cost $9.6 billion annually. That 1,600 to 1 disproportion clearly puts the lie to any assertion of those mercury regulations as “appropriate and necessary.” So the EPA sidestepped that minor detail by asserting they were not required to consider costs in coming to a health hazard determination. But there is no way to know whether a regulation is appropriate (or sensible, suitable, or proper) in the absence of a consideration of the costs. Both the word itself and the reality that every choice imposes a cost means that costs are undeniably relevant. One might also mention that “arbitrary and capricious agency action” on the part of the EPA and other government agencies impose separate costs of their own on society. The Legal Gift That Keeps on Giving Having supposedly justified regulating mercury by creatively “finding” benefits and ignoring the costs, the EPA turned to what has become their “go-to” mechanism for finding that their policies’ benefits outweigh their costs — fine particulate pollution. Virtually every dollar of benefits they estimated from mercury reduction ($36 to 89 billion annually, though using very misleading methodology) actually comes from reduced fine particle emissions, not mercury reductions. However, the EPA has regulated fine particulate pollution for thirty-five years under Sections 108-110 of the Clean Air Act, as part of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). And under Section 109, the EPA already sets national ambient air quality standards that, “allowing an adequate margin of safety, are required to protect the public health.” If the federal fine particulate standard they set in 2013 is “adequate to protect public health,” how can the benefits from further reductions in fine particulate emissions be tens of billions of dollars yearly? They can’t. Legal Entrepreneurship by Government Agencies So why does the EPA want to stack the mercury restriction deck with a fine particulate wild card? Because under NAAQS, they can set a standard for fine particulates that states must meet, but states determine how to meet them. The EPA cannot single out coal-fired power plants as their intended “victims.” Further, they cannot dictate the form or extent of their victimization. But if they can employ minuscule or imaginary mercury damage as an excuse, and dress up tighter fine particulate restrictions on power plants as if they addressed mercury damage, they can ramp up their limited power to determine fine particulate standards into almost unlimited direct command and control over whoever they choose to target, even though the Clean Air Act denies them such power. In other words, the law as passed by Congress provides so many options and so many tools to the EPA, that it’s only a matter of mixing and matching different pieces of law to target whomever they want to get whatever they want. The mercury “backdoor” the EPA is claiming, continuing an ongoing pattern, shows their intent to increasingly get whatever they want regardless of what the law may say. Image source: iStockphoto Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute. Creative Commons Licence 16

JADE HELM 15 is REAL & Here’s the Proof – Freedom Outpost

JADE HELM 15 is REAL & Here’s the Proof – Freedom Outpost.

The news of JADE HELM 15 has caught the internet on fire. Now, coming out of the woodwork are the nay sayers, propagandists, and straight out liars. Yes, I am calling them exactly what they are, liars. Political Correctness stops here. The truth may hurt, but it is the truth. If you don’t like that, then either go to a different site or change your behavior.

There have been individuals from “trolls” to others that “claim” they are ex-Special Operations Command stating “this is not a real drill,” Or that “the documents have been modified.” These statements are not true, and are only being used in another “PSYOP” upon the American People. I will prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt this operation is, in fact, true, and call these people out for what they are, liars! Anyone who tells you this is not a planned drill is lying to you either blatantly or by complete ignorance, neither of which is acceptable.

JADE HELM 15 is a (SOC) Special Operations Command (RMT) Realistic Military Training planned drill for the South Western United States covering seven states which broke in alternative media almost a week ago. Freedom Outpost’s Joe McMaster covered this on March 20, 2015. I will not sit idly by and allow our alternative media to be portrayed as “conspiracy theorists” by those that are ignorant or liars. I stand in defense of all the alternative media that have reported and helped to expose this very real “exercise/drill,” JADE HELM 15, to the American Public. I challenge the propagandists, liars, and PSYOP’s to debunk this! You have been caught with your pants down and now you are trying to do “damage control.” It’s not going to work.

On OFFICIAL: February 10, 2015 the Brazos County Commissioners Court held a meeting about “JADE HELM 15”. Ref: #4

OFFICIAL: Thomas Mead the JADE HELM Operations Planner/MSEL addressing Brazos County Commissioners on February 10, 2015. Including them planning “surgical strikes”, while the county commissioner makes a joke of it. Listen below:

Audio Player
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/03/jade-helm-15-is-real-heres-the-proof/#2otfDbO1JveJe1uE.99

 

 

Will Obama force U.S. to submit to ‘climate justice tribunal’?

Will Obama force U.S. to submit to ‘climate justice tribunal’?.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/01/gavel.jpg

gavelWhile Washington focuses on whether President Obama will sign on to a nuclear agreement with Iran without submitting the deal for Senate approval, the administration is following a similar strategy on a global climate change policy that could leave the U.S. beholden to an International Climate Justice Tribunal.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCCC, recently released the negotiating language for the agreement to the public. The official purpose of pursuing a “universal climate agreement” is to renew the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 deal championed by then-Vice President Al Gore but resoundingly condemned by the U.S. Senate. President George W. Bush eventually cut all U.S. ties to Kyoto.

Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Chris Horner, who raised alarm about the proposed tribunal in Sunday’s edition of the Washington Times, says that provision is ominous for the United States.

“What is climate justice? This is troubling for several reasons,” said Horner, who added that his first concern is President Obama attempting an end run around the Senate’s role in ratifying any international treaties.

“The Senate has an advisory and a confirmation role in international agreements,” he said. “Whatever comes out of these Kyoto II talks, the president said, ‘It’s not a treaty, so I don’t need to go through the Senate.’ But now we see this draft that has a court. That’s a problem.”

The first problem, he said, is that the U.S. has always vigorously resisted being subject to any international court, despite the best efforts of the political left.

“You know about the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). That was a global environmental treaty as well as a wealth transfer,” he said. “It had a court as well, and that was a major reason the United States never ratified it. The first thing Ronald Reagan did was push that aside. Bill Clinton later signed it, but we’ve never ratified it because it had a court. It was Kyoto with a court.”

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Chris Horner:

Horner said it’s also a problem in part because this tribunal will mainly be looking to punish one country – the United States.

“Now we actually have a Kyoto court and the president saying ratification has proven to be a problem. We’ve seen that when our system causes him obstacles, he decides he doesn’t have any use for our system. Now we see there’s going to be, in a treaty, a climate justice tribunal, which I assure you has one country in mind and it will not be stacked with the Antonin Scalias of the world,” said Horner, who elaborated more on what the tribunal would likely be about.

“It will be stacked with people who style themselves as climate jurists seeking climate justice, which as we’ve seen in recent years, means pretty much any grievance there is, climate is an excuse to force a wealth transfer to remedy it,” he said.

Why would the United States have any interest in joining an agreement that largely targets it for climate violations or makes us subject to a legal entity outside of our own judicial system?  Horner said it’s part ideology and partly driven by policy.

First, he said there are many leaders and activists on the political left in America and around the world who don’t like our system.

“There are a lot of people, including the head of the UNFCCC, which is the U.N. body running this and some academics and some authors who have come out saying, ‘Look, capitalism is the problem. This is how we solve the problem. This is how we solve capitalism.’ There are a lot of people who believe that, including some in the administration,” said Horner, who said the climate-change movement has had the U.S. economy in its cross hairs from Day 1.

“It was transparently all about us when [Kyoto] was drafted in the ’90s,” he said. “When Asia happened and all this development occurred, thank goodness, and their emissions began skyrocketing while ours did not, it remained about us. Now that’s odd if it really was about greenhouse gas emissions.”

“Now that they’re putting in a court and claiming they’re going to go around the U.S. Senate, you need to be very concerned because these climate jurists will not be those who have our best interests at heart,” he said.

Horner said another major motivation for Obama to get involved in this climate agreement is to help lock his own environmental policies in place.

“He’s trying to make sure that his EPA rules are too politically hot-buttoned that his successor will not touch them and undo them,” Horner explained. “Congress will not undo them and the courts will be reluctant to undo them.”

Does the Senate have a way to stop this if the agreement is never presented for ratification? Horner said there is and it means following the strategy we’ve seen Senate Republicans already take this week on Iran.

“They need to make the same statement, either in a letter or perhaps through a Sense of the Senate Resolution saying that anything he does that purports to bind us in Paris on climate is freelancing,” he said. “Do not think this is a treaty because we don’t.”

Horner cited a Sense of the Senate Resolution passed unanimously in the 1990s to denounce the Kyoto Protocol before it was even adopted at the conference. As a result, the Clinton administration never submitted the plan for ratification and the U.S. was never bound by it.

He admits the Senate can no longer get a unanimous vote on this issue, but he says you don’t need that many when two-thirds of the Senate would be required to approve it.

“Fifty-one votes is plenty,” he said. “To be honest, 34 votes is plenty. You have to put the world on notice, because of something called customary international law which our courts sometimes bow to, that whatever happens is not a treaty if it doesn’t go through the Senate.”

 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/will-obama-force-u-s-to-submit-to-climate-justice-tribunal/#Ffd86HoYRoYabczP.99

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has A Dire Warning For Judge Standing In Obama’s Way

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has A Dire Warning For Judge Standing In Obama’s Way.

U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen ordered federal agencies to cease implementing Obama’s amnesty plan.


image: http://www.westernjournalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/shutterstock_10129684.jpg

Chris Curtis / Shutterstock.com  Chris Curtis / Shutterstock.com

An attorney for Sheriff Joe Arpaio made a filing with the federal judge who ordered the halting of President Obama’s executive amnesty, asking that a hearing be held on Obama’s refusal to comply with the court’s order.

The attorney, Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, stated to the judge in the filing:

“Several reports indicate that the executive branch under the Obama administration has not complied with this court’s temporary injunction, but continues full-speed to implement a grant of amnesty and related benefits to approximately 5 million citizens of foreign countries who are illegally in the United States under the defendants’ November 20, 2014, executive action programs implemented by several memoranda issued by Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson.”

Advertisement-content continues below



U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen ordered federal agencies to cease implementing Obama’s amnesty plan; but, since then, Obama has warned that “one federal judge” will not stand in his way toward implementing amnesty.

Obama, according to the Washington Times, “told a Miami crowd that he will move ahead with his executive action on immigration and vowed that his administration will become even more aggressive in the weeks and months to come.”

Klayman noted in the filing: “The Obama administration is continuing to signal not only its disagreement with the court’s order, which is its right, but beyond that its non-compliance with the court’s order.”

Advertisement-content continues below



He went on to write:

“In short,” Klayman told the court, “President Obama’s defiant pledge in Miami, Florida, on February 25, 2015, to move forward aggressively with implementation of his deferred action amnesty by executive over-reach …  more than suggests that the Obama administration is continuing to implement the executive action amnesty in defiance of the court’s temporary injunction.

“Given the strong reports that DHS is continuing to implement the programs that the court enjoined, the court should issue an order to show cause and call for clarification and assurance from the defendants that they are and will comply with the court’s temporary injunction, and if not take immediate remedial actions to [ensure] that the order is being complied with.”

Klayman also noted that Obama is threatening “consequences” to federal employees who obey the federal judge’s ruling to cease implementation of his amnesty.

Share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you believe that Obama has blatantly ignored the judge’s ruling and the rule of law.

Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/sheriff-joe-arpaio-now-warning-federal-judge-obama/#zmKG4yvTkC3OWior.99