One Illegal Thing Is Working for Obama But Three More Will Decimate His Amnesty Plan

It seems as though the one thing that should have killed Obama's latest Amnesty Plan should also have killed anything else he has concocted in six usurped years in the office of POTUS is his never-yet-proven legitimacy to actually hold that office. It is obvious by now that Americans have given up on proving that Barack Hussein Obama has usurped the highest governmental office in the United States and nobody seems to give a DAMN!

The number of times escapes me that Obama has tried to foist out-and-out false documents attesting to his so-called birth legitimacy to hold that office, if elected, and amazingly nothing has been done to follow up on the discrepancies noted by "experts" and each incident just seems to disappear in a cloud of magic fairy dust. Why have these many attempts all died of inability to execute? Well it seems to be a case of "cuz I sed so" uttered by the high potentate and prevaricator himself. He should prove he is legally qualified; not we should have to prove him unqualified. But then on November 21, 2014, Gregg Jarrett, apparently no relation to Valerie of the same family name of White House advisory fame, but of FoxNews.com authored the article, "Three things that are illegal about Obama's immigration plan" which as you can see doesn't depend on just one reason, but THREE! And this Jarrett, an assumed Obama watcher, gets some heavy evidentiary stuff from the potentate's mouth during speeches. This Jarrett, not the advisory one working WITH Obama, tells how when the faux president speaking just on the day before the penned article for FoxNews.com, in the East Room of the White House that "By executive fiat, President Obama will grant amnesty to up to 5 million immigrants living illegally in the United States. Didn't the president say, even last year, that he couldn't, and wouldn't take executive action on immigration?"

---

Well, at least one person seems dedicated to following up on another one of the "messiah's" pronouncements of his non-humbled statements, and Jarrett (Gregg again, not Valerie the advisor) momentarily assumed the White House advisor's role and offered this in his column, "If Obama ever finds himself in a court of law, he would surely be advised to invoke the Fifth Amendment. He is prone to contradiction and tends to be a good witness against himself." These Jarretts are not stingy with their helpful hints. Gregg Jarrett then explained in advisory mode after Obama used the justification for his executive action would be that "Congress failed to act." "No, Mr. President, Congress did not fail to act, it chose not to act in granting amnesty." He then spoke of Obama's "self-incriminating statements on immigration and executive powers" by citing when the president was asked a year ago "if he had the authority to end deportations of illegal aliens he said, Actually, I don't." Jarrett then gave mention to an incident, "Three years earlier, when pressed as to why he could not act on his own on immigration he said, "The notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true." Then Jarrett got the ever 'changey-changey' Obama to go into his typical double-entendres, hinted or implied, with this bon mot, "Well, now the president says it is true -- he can alter the laws unilaterally. Why the metamorphosis? What changed? The law and the Constitution are still the same. Which leaves Obama. When it comes to the truth, inconvenient or otherwise, he is a chameleon like no other politician. He never hesitates to contradict himself, conjuring a new breadth of hypocrisy." Liberal Democrats at all levels are forever condemning Republicans as being work stoppers and roadblockers in any sense of where no progress is being made. They've even been heard by persons of Majority Leader of the U S Senate (Harry Reid), Minority Leader of the House of Representative (Nancy Pelosi) the aforementioned POTUS Barack Hussein Obama and any number of the totals of both Houses individuals when they talk about the "do nothing" Republicans. This is sheer fallacy when the Republican House has passed literally hundreds of bills and, in particular, formal budget packages over the past few years and rather than act on them, yea or nay, they are just bottled up in the Senate which is controlled by Harry Reid and a majority of 53 liberal Democrats. I'd like to ask you to read this paragraph once more and then YOU tell me who the "roadblockers" are. In the discussions relative to Obama's decision to disobey our Constitutional laws on immigration the inevitable pronouncements from liberals that Republicans will "roadblock" any effort the Usurper president may try to use to break the law and force his "act alone" un-legislation to give millions of illegal aliens the authority to vote for more Democrats in order to gain back the entire Congress they just lost only days ago. As Gregg Jarrett says, "There is a difference. A determination not to act is, by itself, a deliberate act. This is how the framers constructed our system of government. Congress considers and debates a great many bills. Not all of them pass. This is not "failure" in the conventional sense, but decision by declination. It constitutes a prudent and calculated process." But study the differences in what is being blocked and with particular attention to WHY it is being blocked. In the case of the present Congress, the Liberal Democrats refuse to deal with legislative matters that make the country better and in Obama's insane amnesty, in the way of welfare - food stamps raids on our taxpayers U S Treasury and for the gathering of more votes for the LibDems. In my next column i will expound on the three reasons why Gregg Jarrett feels they are as illegal as the persons the LibDems falsely say will have helped. Keep in mind, the ones the Liberal Democrats will ever help, are themselves, and the only legislation they like to work on are illegal things which help to destroy our country.