Amnesty On Trial

by KrisAnne Hall

If the federal government were a person, if Congress were subject to the laws they create, they would face fines, prison or both for many of their actions. The ENLIST Act, being touted as a “pathway” to citizenship for illegal aliens may be one of those actions. It could be argued that the very act itself violates federal law. Consider this:

Immigration law, 8 US Code 1324 states that it is a crime to, either knowingly or recklessly, “conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, or attempt to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection… transport, or move or attempt to transport or move” or to even “encourage or induce” an illegal alien “to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowingly or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.”

It is not only a crime to actually commit these offenses, but it is a crime to even attempt to do so. Anyone found guilty of violating 8 US Code 1324 is subject to fines, prison or both. However, if it can be proven that this person has committed this act for personal gain, the fines go up and the prison sentence can be as much as ten years.

The Act also appears to violate 8 US Code 1611 which sets forth specific federal benefits that cannot be given to illegal aliens.

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, an alien who is not a qualified alien…is not eligible for any Federal public benefit…” (NOTE: there is an exception for emergency services in this section)

Section 1611 defines a benefit as follows:
“(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States; and
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States.”

The ENLIST Act allows illegal aliens to join the military as a “pathway” to citizenship. These illegal aliens will sign an enlistment contract with the federal government. This enlistment contract will not make them citizens automatically. There will most definitely be a requirement for satisfaction of the enlistment terms before citizenship is granted. While the illegal alien is serving in our military, receiving clothing, food, housing, transportation, pay and other employment benefits, to include the GI Bill for post-secondary education and he will still be in the United States illegally.

Additionally, the entire time these illegal aliens are serving in the military they will not only be receiving benefits, the federal government will be encouraging other illegal aliens to come into the United States while housing, feeding, transporting, and shielding them from prosecution for violating federal immigration laws.

Now, if the government were a person, what would be the punishment for the above violations? The law states:
“for each alien in respect to whom a violation of this [law] occurs…be fined in accordance with title 18 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; or

Any person who, during any 12-month period, knowingly hires for employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that the individuals are aliens described in subparagraph (B) shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.”

And if granting these benefits to illegal aliens “was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain” then the punishment is to “be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”
The political parties have made it all too clear that they are creating these “pathways” to citizenship to gain reelection and to increase the federal power of their party. The Republicans believe this “pathway” will gain them a majority in the Senate, keep their majority in the house, and even get their president into the White House. The Democrats believe they will put more on the entitlement roles and get votes for goodies. Victories in elections mean monetary gain for the politician and parties; it means greater political power as well.

Perhaps the legislators will craft a “waiver” within the ENLIST Act to exempt themselves or the illegal alien from prosecution according to the law?
So once again, rather than secure the borders and actually enforce immigration policy, Congress is adding more complex contradictions to an already broken system. All the while trying as hard as they can to fill the nation and apparently our military with more and more illegal aliens who may or may not hold to the sound principles upon which this nation was founded. It appears that a fundamental transformation is well under way, don’t you think?

“O ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose, not only tyranny, but the tyrant, STAND FORTH!” Thomas Paine, Common Sense.

Lighting Liberty's Lamp

Two special guests today. Robin Koerner from the Blue Republicans and Mark Herr from the Center for Self Governance. Don’t miss the synergy between three liberty loving educators as they light the lamp of history and ignite the brush fires necessary to preserve the Blessings of Liberty to our selves and our Posterity!

USA Freedom Act

The House repeatedly voted AGAINST the Constitution yesterday in spite of their proclamation otherwise.  Lets see what the “party of the Constitution” REALLY voted for.  Let us not be fooled again by the lies and propaganda!

Listen to this edition of The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

VA Scandal Is Deep Rooted

The VA “new” VA “scandal is NOT new and NOT a scandal. Same old methods, same old plan. Will we have the same old results? That is a question that only YOU can answer. See how this is NOT new, but an old trick of tyrants to oppress. Will we repeat our mistakes or learn from them?

Listen to this edition of The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

Here Come The Drones

Rand Paul is holding another filibuster about drones.  Why is he so worked up over drones?  Today’s show will tell you what you will never hear from Rand Paul but is the REASON he is filibustering…again.  Always Truth, never fair and balanced.

Listen to this edition of The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

What Rand Paul Isn't Telling You in His Filibuster

Obama+dronesOn March 5, 2013 Sen. Rand Paul held a 13 hour filibuster against John Brennan’s nomination to head the CIA, citing his concerns over the administration’s belief in the ability to use drones to assassinate US Citizens.
On March 6, 2013 Sen. Ted Cruz grilled AG Eric Holder over the issue of using drones to assassinate US Citizens while “sitting in a café drinking a cup of coffee,” asking Eric Holder if he thought that was “Constitutional”.
Now Rand Paul is filibustering the nomination of David Barron to fill a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Why? For the same reason as before, drones. So what is the big concern? Why are Rand Paul and Ted Cruz so convinced that this administration is going to use drones against US citizens? Because they know something they are not telling you. They know that the DOJ has issued a paper, The White Paper, proclaiming their right to do just that.

On February 5, 2013, a Department of Justice document, The White Paper, was leaked to Michael Isikoff from NBC. Isikoff reported and released this paper to the world and attempted to show the DOJ’ intentions to secretly assassinate U.S. citizens in the name of national security. This DOJ White Paper is a quasi-legal analysis justifying the government’s use of lethal force to assassinate US Citizens, classified as a potential hostile by the President or by any “high level official of the U.S. government”, anywhere on the globe, with no due process, even when there is no evidence to support such an accusation. Sound too “Orwellian” to be true? Let’s see what has Paul and Cruz so worked up.

In true progressive form, this paper redefines terms to create the DOJ’s justification to use drones to assassinate Citizens. Today’s redefinition involves the words “Imminent threat” and it is redefined to include a citizen plotting about some threat at some distant time. The government does not have “to have clear evidence that a specific attack…will take place in the immediate future.” And though much is made about the Law of War, the citizen to be assassinated can be far from the “actual hostility.” The DOJ eliminates the barriers of “geographic limitations,” and asserts the ability to “follow” the target to a “a new nation.” Let us not forget the provisions of the NDAA 2012 that allow the President to transfer the powers under the “Law of War” to the FBI, DHS, and local law enforcement, making it possible for the U.S. to be the new battleground. Here is what the Democrats say were the results of NDAA 2012:

“Because I believe our national security professionals should decide the best way to detain and prosecute terror suspects, I also opposed provisions of the defense authorization act that would allow only the military to handle terror suspects…Efforts to change that language failed in the Senate. But after negotiations with the House of Representatives, the final legislation preserves the rights of the Federal Bureau of Investigations and allows the President to waive the requirements for military custody when necessary to preserve national security.” Sen. Bill Nelson, (D-FL)

No Constitutional protections, no review of a judge, no jury of your peers, no requirement of actual “imminent threat,” and no need for you to be caught on the battlefield (unless you remember that the government has already declared the ENTIRE PLANET to be a battlefield in the “War on Terror”!).

In criminal court, to put someone in prison or sentence them to death, the burden of proof that must be met by the government is “beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.” In order to get a search warrant the Fourth Amendment requires the government to meet the standard of “probable cause” as reviewed and approved by a judge. The Fifth Amendment requires that before the government can take someone’s life they are guaranteed an indictment by a grand jury and conviction by a jury of their peers. One would think that at least these standards would apply if the government is going to take a citizen’s life. Unfortunately that is not the case here and the only reference the DOJ makes to the Constitution is to point out that it DOESN’T APPLY! What is the burden of proof for the President to assassinate US citizens? According to the DOJ, the government must simply “demonstrate” that the United States’ interest in preventing an anticipated threat of violence outweighs “the person’s interest in his life,” again, with no “clear evidence that a specific attack…will take place in the immediate future.” Citing their standard of proof, the government quotes the court of Cf. Hamdi, 542 U.S. at 535: “the Court accords the greatest of respect and consideration to the judgments of military authorities…the scope and discretion of that discretion is necessarily wide.” And of course in this case, that scope the government asserts, would be transferred to the “high-level official of the U.S. government” making the determination.

It is interesting to note that throughout its paper the DOJ continually appeals to the “government’s inherent right to defend itself”. How ironic! Eric Holder doesn’t believe YOU have an inherent right to self-defense but he claims that right for the GOVERNMENT!

What’s the Big Deal?
What is wrong with the Executive branch of a government engaging in the assassination of our citizens, who are classified by the government as combatants against this country, absent due process? After all don’t they have a duty to keep us safe from terrorist attack? We WANT them to have this power, right?

If the government can secretly assassinate citizens without a “speedy and public trial,” or any due process what so ever, we are left with trusting the government to convey truthful and accurate information to justify their actions. How is that trust working out for us with Benghazi, the IRS, HHS, etc?

What about the fact that the government has already redefined who is a “terrorist”? Just look at Janet Napolitano’s report, as head of the Department of Homeland Security, warning America regarding who is a terrorist; “rightwing extremists” concerned about illegal immigration, abortion, increasing federal power and restrictions on firearms – and returning war veterans.

“Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

In this paper, the DOJ asserts that their standard involves a balancing act between the target’s “interest in his life” and the “United States’ interest in forestalling the threat of violence”. But don’t we have the Constitution to protect us from the government violating our rights? Not according to the DOJ. They claim the Constitution has no application to their “right” to assassinate:

“Were the target of a lethal operation a U.S. citizen who may have rights under the Due Process Clause and Fourth Amendment, that individual’s citizenship would not immunize him from a lethal operation.” (page 2, paragraph 2)

“The realities of combat render certain uses of force necessary and appropriate, including force against U.S. citizens who have joined enemy forces in the armed conflict against the U.S. and whose activities pose an imminent threat of violent attack- and due process analysis need not blink at those realities.” (page 6 paragraph 2)

“Under such circumstances, the intrusion on any Fourth Amendment interests would be outweighed by the “importance of the governmental interest [that] justify the intrusion. (page 9 paragraph 4)

A government not limited by the Constitution is NOT a Republic, that is a totalitarian Kingdom. Unrestrained power of the government must be continually checked against the Liberty of the people. And if the government that has the ability to define the enemy, and possesses the uninhibited inclination to define its own citizens as terrorists, and expresses no limitation to its power, tyranny is already established.
Benjamin Franklin is quoted to have said, “Those who would trade Liberty for temporary security deserve neither Liberty nor security.” How could he make such a bold statement? Because he knew from history that trading Liberty will NEVER result in greater security and once Liberty is traded, you never get it back. I find it very telling that our founders never said, “Peace must be supported at all hazards.”

Eliminating enemy combatants –good; assassinating US citizens…a destructive assault on Liberty. This is the Constitutional quagmire we have created by maintaining a completely inept political administration that is completely ignorant of the Constitution and the principles of Liberty it protects.

I ask you, how can authorizing this level of arbitrary power be acceptable in the eyes of our Congress who have sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States? How can these elected representatives justify the worst arbitrary power and the most destructive authority to our individual liberty?

The big question that remains is WHY isn’t Rand Paul or Ted Cruz telling YOU about the DOJ White Paper? Why isn’t Congress holding hearings and fighting this proclaimed authority? Why doesn’t every citizen know that their government believes the “government’s inherent right to self-defense and national security” now outweigh our “interest” in our life?

Orwellian or not…you be the judge. Read a full analysis of this DOJ White Paper HERE.

Let us head the warnings of Alexander Hamilton, and Justice William Blackstone:

“To bereave a man of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation; but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government.” And as a remedy for this fatal evil he is everywhere peculiarly emphatical in his encomiums on the habeas corpus act, which in one place he calls “the BULWARK of the British Constitution”. (Alexander Hamilton, Fed. Paper #84, quoting Justice Blackstone)

Our Banana Republic

Today I lay out the laws and the facts that PROVE that if the government were a private citizen, they would be criminally prosecuted, fined and imprisoned up to 10 years. How do our State and Federal representatives get away with such blatant lawlessness? Perhaps because we, the citizens, do not know the law? NO MORE EXCUSES! Time to put an end to lawless legislation and criminal representation, REGARDLESS of the political party.

Listen to “Our Banana Republic” on You Tube

You Be The Judge

Enter into the courtroom of truth and logic and see the evidence of tyranny before you. No tinfoil hat needed. The evidence is clear, compelling and condemning. The federal government is actively plotting to take your PROPERTY, by force if necessary. Its not just Obama’s fault. Its not just the democrats. The entire system has become tyrannical and today I will PROVE IT to you with their own documents and their own words. Enter into the courtroom of truth and logic, where truth is not fair and balanced, politicians are not given a pass, and Liberty is always first. And once you’ve heard all the facts, YOU BE THE JUDGE.

Listen to The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

Controlling The Internet

The FCC is going to address net neutrality in spite of major opposition. FCC Chairman’s response to the opposition? “Don’t be ridiculous. I have your best interest in mind. I will work hard to make sure we won’t do what the regulations allow us to do. Trust me. Why do we continually allow unelected officials to create law that destroys our liberty? Probably because Congress and SCOTUS says its okay for them to make laws the destroy private industry and violates Liberty. After all they do it all the time. Time to defend Liberty or just bow down to the fascism that so easily besets us.

Listen to The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube

Jeb's Open Borders

What do you know? The government is going to investigate itself AGAIN. This time the VA is going to be investigated by the White House. More dog and pony, more bread and circuses. Meanwhile, Jeb Bush sees no reason why we should oppose amnesty. I can give Jeb 88,000 reasons! Always the truth, NEVER fair and balanced.