Thursday, July 31, 2014

Newsmax
Catholic League Chief Speaks Out on Obama's Eid al-Fitr Message

By Sandy Fitzgerald

                                                                                                                             
Catholic League President Bill Donohue is slamming President Barack Obama for his statement commemorating the end of the Muslim Ramadan observance, saying Obama doesn't "stand with people of all faiths."

Obama's brief statement, issued earlier this week to send best wishes to Muslims during the Eid al-Fitr celebration, said that the observance reminds him and wife Michelle "of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy."

Further, Obama said he and his wife "stand with people of all faiths, here at home and around the world, to protect and advance their rights to prosper, and we welcome their commitment to giving back to their communities."

"While Eid marks the completion of Ramadan, it also celebrates the common values that unite us in our humanity and reinforces the obligations that people of all faiths have to each other, especially those impacted by poverty, conflict, and disease," the president said.

Donohue wrote on the Catholic League's website that Obama does not stand with all faiths while protecting human rights.

"As you speak, Christians are being beheaded all over the Middle East because they are Christians, and those carrying out this mass murder are doing so in the name of Islam,"  Donohue wrote. "Yet you continue to say and do absolutely nothing about these unspeakable crimes. Do Christian lives mean so little to you?"

Donohue said that when he types in the phrase "President Obama Speaks Out," or "Speaks Against," into Internet search engines, subjects such as "Trayvon Martin," "Kanye West," "Fox News," and "bullying" come up.

"I can search in vain to find you condemning the genocidal slaughter of Christians by Muslims," Donohue wrote. "Muslim terrorists are killing Jews in Israel and their representatives have pledged to wipe Jews off the face of the earth. Yet your administration spends most of its time lecturing Israelis to be patient. About what? Being bombed because they are Jews? Do Jewish lives mean so little to you?"

Donohue admitted that nobody wants the president to insult Muslim Americans from the White House, "but you had an opportunity to at least call on them to speak out about what their people are doing in the Middle East, and you blew it. Instead, you decided to patronize them for all their contributions to human rights."

New Emails Show Lois Lerner Called Some Conservatives ‘A**holes’

New emails uncovered by the House Ways and Means Committee indicate that former IRS employee Lois Lerner has a strong dislike of some conservatives, and at one point called them “assholes” in an email exchange.

The committee released an email Lerner received in November 2012 complaining about the “whacko wing of the GOP.” The person mocked conservatives for believing there are “too many foreigners sucking the teat” and that it is “time to hunker down, buy ammo and food, and prepare for the end.”

The person added that the “right wing radio shows are scary to listen to.”

Barack Obama Lois Lerner Dave Camp Bob Goodlatte IRS targeting scandal
New emails released by House Republicans show former IRS employee Lois Lerner called conservatives “a**holes.” 

Lerner replied, “Great. Maybe we are through if there are that many assholes.”

The other person then wrote, “And I’m talking about the hosts of the shows. The callers are rabid.”

Lerner replied, “So we don’t need to worry about alien terrorists. It’s our own crazies that will take us down.”

Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) said this exchange shows the has a “deep animus towards conservatives,” which may have explained her efforts to target conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.

“This email shows that Ms. Lerner’s mistreatment of conservative groups was driven by her personal hostility toward conservatives,” Camp wrote in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder. ”This new evidence clearly demonstrates why Ms. Lerner not only targeted conservatives, but denied such groups their rights to due process and equal protection under the law.”

Camp’s letter recounted that his committee has found that Lerner personally directed the IRS to audit Crossroads GPS, the group run by Karl Rove, and hinted at seeking a job with Organizing For Action, the group aimed at helping to re-elect President Barack Obama.

Camp said all of this evidence combined shows that a special counsel is needed to investigate the IRS and Lois Lerner, who has refused to testify before Congress by pleading the Fifth Amendment.

“While the Committee has not seen any evidence of a serious investigation by your department, it is my sincere hope that in light of this new, strong evidence that you immediately begin aggressively investigating this matter or appoint a special counsel,” Camp wrote. “Failure to do so will only further erode public trust in not only the IRS, but the department as well.”

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS

REMINDER!!!

Today, Wednesday July 30th, on RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS…We will welcome back to the show, Jake Danishevsky…an American who grew up in Ukraine, to bring us up to date on what’s happening right now in his country of birth!!!

We will also be talking about the situation in Israel as the war against Hamas in Gaza continues.

We’ve got a LOT to cover on today’s show, from the border and amnesty to John Kerry’s epic fail in negotiating a cease fire.

Join us for RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS…TODAY…WEDNESDAY JULY 30TH FROM 2-4pm EST on CPR Worldwide Media!!!

LISTEN LIVE at http://cprworldwidemedia.com/live-radio/



And chat with live shows at https://www.facebook.com/groups/cprworldwidemedia/

Alexander Herzen, an 18th century writer from Russia, once quipped, “There is nothing in the world more stubborn than a corpse: you can hit it, you can knock it to pieces, but you cannot convince it.” Today, such a description could apply to unconstitutional gun control laws, which received what should have been a death sentence in 2008 with the Heller decision, only to languish on despite being knocked to pieces in court in the half dozen years since that seminal decision.

In Heller, one of the most important rulings for liberty in recent American history, attorney Alan Gura successfully sued the D.C. government; in the process overturning its blatantly unconstitutional, 1970s-era ban on firearms. Heller clearly affirmed the individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment; as contrasted to the mushy, collective right interpretation long-favored by gun-grabbers like Michael Bloomberg and Rahm Emmanuel. Gura then successfully sued the city of Chicago, which resulted in the High Court’s 2010 McDonald decision, thus extending Heller’s ruling to local governments across the country.

Following these two landmark Supreme Court rulings, other lawsuits picked apart the anti-gun apparatus in federal court. Yet, as stubborn as a corpse can be, anti-gun state and local government officials immediately began fashioning new ways to undermine the restoration of gun rights in their jurisdictions. Officials in Washington, D.C. -- ground zero for the modern day resurgence of the Second Amendment – refused to comply with the letter and intent of those Supreme Court decisions.

For example, the District forces its residents to obtain a permit to carry a firearm outside of the home; but the City steadfastly has refused to institute a process enabling citizens seeking to so defend themselves, to obtain permits. In essence, the city created a de facto ban on carrying firearms in public, all the while claiming to comply with the intent of the Heller decision. One can see why Gura has been so busy.
 
Fortunately, half a decade worth of post-Heller litigation paid off last week, when federal district court Judge Frederick Scullin ruled D.C.’s permitting scheme to be unconstitutional. “In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny,” wrote Scullin, “there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.”

Scullin’s refreshingly clear ruling follows one in December 2012 by federal Court of Appeals Judge for the Seventh Circuit, Richard Posner. In that ruling Posner noted that “to confine the right to be armed to the home” -- as Illinois’ then-blanket ban on the private carry of firearms did -- “is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”

Posner noted pointedly that residents of Chicago, a notoriously dangerous city despite years of aggressive gun control laws, had a far greater claim to self-defense outside the home than in it.

As Scullin and Posner’s rulings suggest, it is only logical that law-abiding citizens protecting themselves from violence outside the home is a natural and logical focus of the Second Amendment, especially given the legal clarity on the issue from two recent Supreme Court battles. Unfortunately, logic is not an attribute favored by gun-control zealots such as those controlling the levers of power in the District of Columbia; which is precisely why the fight for the Second Amendment continues long after a majority of Supreme Court justices might have thought they resolved the issue in 2008 and 2010.

And, the anti-gun grandstanding in the courts is not without financial costs to taxpayers, who are forced to pay the legal fees of both parties after each government defeat. The six years D.C. officials dragged Dick Heller through the legal system, only to be told what the language of and history behind the Second Amendments clearly proclaims to the world (that “the right of the people to keep and bear [a]rms shall not be infringed”), cost taxpayers more than one million dollars in attorney fees, just for Heller’s team.

That is why some members of Congress are starting to use the power of the purse strings to rein in D.C. officials who continue to violate the clear directive of the Supreme Court. Earlier this month, for example, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) successfully passed an appropriations amendment that prohibits the District of Columbia from using federal tax dollars to enforce its unconstitutional gun control laws. While the fate of such a common-sense measure remains unclear in the Senate, the fact that many Democratic incumbents facing reelection in November hail from states whose voters are strong Second Amendment supporters, raises the legislation’s odds considerably.

It is now all the fashionable rage in Washington, D.C., to proclaim solidarity with America's working poor in front of the cameras -- while stabbing them in the back behind closed doors. 
 
Privileged Illinois Democratic Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and others have taken to Twitter, posting photos of themselves eating tuna sandwiches and buying Ramen noodles to show how much they empathize with minimum-wage workers. On the other side of the aisle, GOP Rep. Paul Ryan has wrapped himself in a cloak of compassion, putting a cheesy Taylor Swift hand heart around conservatism by proposing government "life coaches" for those in poverty.

Message: They care! Reality: They fake. The cognitive dissonance on Capitol Hill is so thick you need a V8-powered chainsaw to slice it.

While cynical politicians prattle on about protecting the American Dream, they're working together to destroy it. If these elected officials care so much about reducing poverty, why are they working so hard to import more of it from around the world? Leaders in both political parties have thrown struggling Americans under the bus to feed the cheap illegal alien labor machine.

The working poor are the biggest losers in D.C.'s amnesty game. U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow has been a lonely voice warning about the impact of mass illegal immigration and perpetual amnesty on low-income black Americans. "The country's economic woes have disproportionately harmed African-Americans, especially those with little education," he warned this spring. "The economy has a glut of low-skilled workers, not a shortage," which is driving wages down.

Stagnant wages and depressed economic growth affect working poor Americans of all colors, while illegal alien amnesty beneficiaries cash in. Steve Camarota and Karen Ziegler of the Center for Immigration Studies reported last month that "since 2000, all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level."

President Obama has already granted administrative amnesty to an estimated two million illegal aliens and renewed "temporary" work permits for 520,000. The administration is planning an expansion that would grant amnesties to at least six million more lawbreakers.

Where is the opposition? Appeasement Republicans refuse to support Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz's on-target proposal to repeal Obama's "DREAM" magnet and Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions' clarion call to block any more executive amnesties as a precondition to border bill negotiations.

According to my sources on the Hill, the staffs of Sens. McCain, Flake and Murkowski met privately and opposed any changes to Obama's DREAM passes for illegals -- which makes them willing and suicidal accomplices in the perpetual Democratic voter recruitment drive. On the House side, GOP House Speaker John Boehner is also openly opposed to stopping the DREAM nightmare.

There are no longer two separate parties in Washington. There's just one big Amnesty Inc. conglomerate addicted to Big Business donations and Big Government grievance politics. The Obama White House needs to buy off Hispanic voters, keep immigration lawyers employed and secure a left-wing permanent ruling majority. Establishment Republicans need to pay off the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, pander to minority lobbyists and curry favor with open-borders CEOS led by Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg.

The real crisis is not at the border. It's being fomented inside our nation's capital. The "border crisis" is a bipartisan D.C. catastrophe of craven politicians abandoning their constitutional duties to defend our sovereignty and put American workers first.

Third rocket arsenal found in UN school in Gaza

/ Jihad Watch
201407_gaza_operation1

There needs to be an investigation of the UNRWA over this. Could it really keep happening without any UN officials knowing what was going on? The problem is, who can investigate the United Nations? Not Obama’s investigative or intelligence apparatus.

In any case, if we had a President who had America and its allies’ best interests at heart, that President could announce that no U.S. funds would go to the United Nations if any more jihad rockets were found in its schools — and the schools would thenceforth be clear of the rockets.

“THIRD Rocket Arsenal Found At UN School In Gaza,” by Jordan Schachtel, Breitbart News, July 29, 2014:
The United Nations Relief & Works Agency For Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) announced Tuesday that another rocket stockpile has been found at one of its schools in Gaza. This instance marks the third time since the beginning of Operation Protective Edge that a weapons arsenal has been found at an UNRWA school in Gaza.
UNRWA has yet to place blame on any individuals or organizations for placing the weapons stockpile within a children’s school. The UN body refused to do so on the past two previous occasions as well.
The UN body, after both previous findings, has handed the rockets it had found back into the possession of “the local police,” otherwise known as the terrorist group Hamas.
This week, UNRWA supplies and building materials had been found in Hamas’s tunnel infrastructure, which has been used to smuggle weapons and carry out attacks on the State of Israel.
The UN agency has a well-documented history of using their US taxpayer-funded facilities to promote anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda. It has in the past been accused of aiding and abetting radical Islamists in Gaza and elsewhere.
UNRWA was created in 1949 to provide relief and public works programs for displaced Arab refugees that had formerly inhabited the British mandate of Palestine. UNRWA is currently the largest agency-subdivision of the entire UN, employing over 30,000 staff.
UNRWA has objectively failed in its primary goal of finding homes for those it has deemed “refugees”. From 1949 to present day, refugees recognized by UNRWA has grown from 750,000 to 5,000,000 people.

Leaked Transcript of Phone Call Between Obama and Netanyahu

20140729-133719.jpg
Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

Publicly, both sides are denying this. But Obama is a liar, an unabashed, pathological unconscionable liar (“You can keep your doctor,” “Not a smidgen of corruption” at the IRS, “Benghazi was a spontaneous attack because of a youtube video”). And Bibi is in no position to upset the jihadophile in the White House.

But if true — it gives us a glimpse at the monster running the country.

There are so many alarmingly wrong things that jump out from this short transcript, it is like the US was hijacked by a MB agent…

Channel 1 reporter says PM-POTUS transcript legit: Despite rejections by American and Israeli officials, Channel 1′s Or Nahari insists that the transcript leaked to him by a “senior American official” is authentic, but acknowledges that the quotes he published were merely an except from a long conversation. (TOI)

The State Department is running for cover. They can leak Israel intel that jeopardizes their national security  (here and here too) but don’t reveal what Obama is actually doing.
Shocking and disappointing someone would sink to misrepresenting a pvt convo between POTUS and PM in fabrications to Israeli press 2/2
— @NSCPress (@NSCPress) July 29, 2014

It certainly hurts Israel to alienate Obama but maybe Israel wants the world to know what a savage Obama really is.
“Leaked Phone Conversation between Obama and Bibi,”  J Space
Below is a transcript that was reported on the IBA...

IRANIAN official says “Iran will arm the West Bank with missiles”

Bare Naked Israel

Former Iranian defense adviser says Tehran would seek to arm Palestinians in the West Bank with “strategic weapons” including missiles to target Tel Aviv and Haifa, which will be much easier to hit from Judea and Samaria than from Gaza.

10509611_10152576568449717_8501732861550222034_n  

Times of Israel  Iranian researcher Amir Mousavi told Lebanon’s Mayadeen TV channel that “a major reshuffle awaits the region” as “new and significant fronts will be opened all of a sudden, to support the Palestinian cause in the West Bank and Gaza.”

GAZA 15-11-12 ROCKET GRAPHIC 

Mousavi added that Gaza would also receive increased military support from Iran. As for the Palestinian Authority which controls the West Bank and has in recent years cooperated closely with Israel on security issues, Mousavi remarked: “We hope that the brothers in the Palestinian Authority will help rather than impede this.”

 


On Tuesday Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged the Islamic world to arm Palestinians to allow them to counter what he called Israel’s “genocide” in the Gaza Strip. In a speech marking the Muslim festival of Eid al-Fitr, Khamenei said Israel was acting like a “rabid dog” and “a wild wolf,” causing a human catastrophe that must be resisted.

 

Click on link to see video:  

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/07/30/iranian-official-says-iran-will-arm-the-west-bank-with-missiles/


Report: Administration Likely Knew Some Obamacare Subsidies Illegal

By Melanie Batley / Newsmax

The recent ruling by the D.C. Circuit that the implementation of Obamacare is illegal has uncovered the possibility that the Obama administration was aware of this all along, Politico Magazine reported.

The Halbig v. Burwell lawsuit ruled that the Affordable Care Act does not allow for Obamacare to provide subsidized health insurance for the 5 million Americans living in the 36 states using the federal healthcare website, HealthCare.gov.

Instead, the legislation stipulated that subsidies would be extended only to those who enroll through an exchange "established by the State."

The administration, including Jonathan Gruber, who helped craft the ACA legislation, has insisted since the ruling that Congress never intended to withhold subsidies from residents of states that did not choose to set up their own exchanges.

Gruber, an MIT economist, described the ruling as "implausible," "screwy," "nutty," and "stupid."

But a 2012 video has since surfaced indicating that Gruber told an audience, "If you're a state and you don't set up an exchange, that means your citizens don't get their tax credits."

Another 2012 recording has also emerged of Gruber making similar comments, both of which may have been an attempt to try to "squeeze" the states into establishing their own exchanges, according to Politico.

Politico said Gruber's 2012 comments "demolish" the administration's case against Halbig.

"When the chief architect of the [Affordable Care Act] admits it withholds tax credits in uncooperative states, that establishes that the plaintiffs' interpretation of the statute in Halbig was not only plausible but that it had currency among the law's authors," Politico said.

Gruber has since tried to play down his 2012 comments, calling them a "speak-o," but Politico argues his explanation doesn't stand up.

"It is precisely because of Gruber's intellect and profound familiarity with the PPACA that his attempts to explain away his past statements are not credible," Politico added.

"Back in January 2012, before anyone knew 36 states would refuse to establish an exchange, Gruber understood and had no problem with what the law says. When it became apparent that two-thirds of the states would not establish exchanges, and that this language therefore threatened the PPACA's survival, Gruber changed his tune," Politico said.

"To claim Gruber didn't know what he was saying is as absurd as saying a conductor might fail to notice that the brass section suddenly stopped playing."

Politico added, "Gruber's comments raise questions about whether this (correct) interpretation of the law was also understood by the members of Congress and administration officials Gruber advised. They also corroborate other evidence showing that the administration was aware it was breaking the law all along."

The publication also noted that last year, seven career Treasury and IRS officials told congressional investigators they knew that the healthcare law did not authorize them to issue tax credits in federal exchanges and that their regulations only pertained to exchanges "established by the state."

"At the direction of their political-appointee superiors, however, they dropped that language and announced that tax credits would be available through exchanges established by the federal government, as well," Politico said. "Further investigation is in order and should proceed with all deliberate speed so as to inform the courts that will consider the appeals of these rulings."

Thanks To War On Terror, Islamic Extremists Have Everything They Need To Kill Americans

by / Personal Liberty Digest
Thanks To War On Terror, Islamic Extremists Have Everything They Need To Kill Americans
THINKSTOCK

A top military official who heads the Defense Intelligence Agency told journalists at the Aspen Security Forum last week that the United States is no safer than it was before the World Trade Center attacks that set the Nation’s perpetual war machine into motion. In fact, the Nation is likely far less safe than it was in 2001.

“We have a whole gang of new actors out there that are far more extreme than al-Qaida,” Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn said, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Of course, Flynn’s remarks certainly don’t come as a surprise to anyone paying attention to the current state of global affairs.

Hawks intent on keeping U.S. military action alive in the Mideast have commonly argued that the U.S. must fight them (whoever they are) over there (wherever that is) to prevent bloodshed in the homeland. Other times, those hawks have warned Americans of depraved despots in possession of dangerous weapons.

As a result, many Americans gladly and patriotically supported U.S. invasions in the Mideast — most importantly those to pursue extremists in the deserts of Afghanistan and its neighboring countries and to cripple Saddam Hussein’s regime and bring Democracy to Iraq. In the past 13 years, the United States has spent trillions of dollars and lost thousands of American soldiers as the world’s leading self-appointed crusader against terror, an enemy with no concrete face or nation, and purveyor of democracy, a form of government best served self-earned.

So how have we done?

In October 2001, U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of Osama bin Laden who claimed responsibility for the Trade Center attacks. The war was sold to an emotional American public as a straightforward operation to cut off al-Qaida’s head and install a government that would, unlike the Taliban that seized control in 1996, prevent extremists from ever again using Afghanistan as a terror staging ground.

The Taliban were eventually replaced by a farcical sham of a democratic government in Afghanistan. And elections, rife with predictable corruption, have taken place in the country from time to time. After repeated U.S. troop surges and withdrawals over the course of several years, the U.S. military eventually settled into a routine of training Afghan forces (who routinely turned to be infiltrated by extremists intent on killing U.S. soldiers) to defend themselves without American support.

If you squint really hard, it almost looks like the U.S. achieved its goal in Afghanistan. With eyes wide open, however, one would be able to see all the way back to the 1970s — when the U.S. first attempted Afghan regime change — and realize that history is on repeat.

The New York Times reported last week:
The Taliban have found success beyond their traditional strongholds in the rural south and are now dominating territory near crucial highways and cities that surround Kabul, the capital, in strategic provinces like Kapisa and Nangarhar.
Their advance has gone unreported because most American forces have left the field and officials in Kabul have largely refused to talk about it.
So extremists are taking over larger swaths of land than they had previously influenced in Afghanistan. That’s not so bad. At least we won Iraq, right?

In March 2003, President George W. Bush ordered an invasion of Iraq to eliminate the country’s weapons of mass destruction.

“They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat,” Bush said at the time.

They weren’t. Actually, we never found them.

The U.S. invasion did manage to take Saddam and his Baath Party out of power and install a new, more democratic government. Unfortunately, good ole apple pie democracy evidently was not enough to calm the tensions of nearly 1,500 years of tribal conflict between Sunni and Shiite Islam in the region.

Under the Baath Party’s rule, Iraq was led by its Sunni minority, as it had been since the Ottoman Empire. That, of course, wasn’t pleasant for many members of the majority Shiite population. So when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite at the helm of a largely Shiite government, took control in Iraq after Saddam’s ouster, things got predictably nasty for the Nation’s Sunnis.

The Islamic State terror group (aka ISIS/ISIL), mostly consisting of violent extremists intent on turning the whole Arab world into a jihad training camp, has profoundly benefited from the tribal tensions that were inflamed by the U.S. invasion. And with the help of wealthy Sunni donors the group is quickly taking control of much of Iraq.

“The speed that [ISIS] came into this northern city of Iraq, into Mosul, and they were able to, you know, kind of [cut through Iraqi security force defenses] like a hot knife through butter through really about four [Iraqi Army] divisions,” Flynn said of the current situation, “I would say that, yeah, that caught us — that level of speed that they were able to do that — caught us by surprise.”

With Iraq’s democratic government likely a stone’s throw (pun intended) from collapsing and Afghanistan having never really managed to have a legitimate governing structure following the U.S. invasions, the situation in the Mideast looks about as bad as it possibly could. But thanks to the United States’ decision to aid rebels overthrow relatively stable — though sometimes despicable — regimes in places like Libya and Syria, the situation is actually much more volatile that the Pentagon would like to admit.

Syria’s civil war has given the Islamic State group an opportunity to take over large portions of the country for the borderless Islamic state it is bent on creating. Libya, meanwhile, is in a state of chaos and largely under the control of al-Qaida militants.

The United States’ war on terror has expanded al-Qaida’s reign and created the opportunity for more extreme extremists under the Islamic State group flag to gain a firm foothold throughout the Mideast. How is that possible?

Flynn contends that it’s because it’s hard to attack an idea with a military.

“I, you know, have been going against these guys for a long time. The core is the core belief that these individuals have — and it’s not on the run,” he said. “That ideology is actually, sadly, it feels like it’s exponentially growing.”

Meanwhile, the United States’ southern border is too poorly defended to stop illegal immigrants, most of them people with no ill-intent toward the Nation and no fanatical religious drive to murder, from making it into the country. When you consider how a highly organized and opportunistic group of jihadists like those who make up the Islamic State group might exploit the border weaknesses, it becomes pretty obvious where those trillions of taxpayer dollars would have been better spent.