Friday, March 2, 2018

Nunes: FBI May've Broken the Law in FISA Applications 
Leah Barkoukis / Townhall Tipsheet

Nunes: FBI May've Broken the Law in FISA Applications Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the FBI is in clear violation of its own internal procedures and may have broken the law in its applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

“Former and current DOJ and FBI leadership have confirmed to the committee that unverified information from the Steele dossier comprised an essential part of the FISA applications related to Carter Page,” Nunes wrote in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions Thursday.

This, he argued, violates the FBI’s requirement that only “documented and verified” information should be used in applications to the FISA court.

“In this instance, it’s clear that basic operating guidance was violated,” he said.
Nunes listed five criminal statutes that were possibly violated, including conspiracy, obstruction of justice, contempt of court. It also cites statutes that make it a crime to willfully deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution and another preventing unauthorized electronic surveillance.
In the letter, Nunes asks Sessions whether these protocols requiring verified information have changed, and if not, what steps the DOJ or FBI taken to hold officials behind the Page application accountable. (
The chairman is requesting answers no later than March 8.

Read entire article here:

YouTube secretly using Southern Poverty Law Center to police videos
By Robert Spencer / Jihad Watch


The Southern Poverty Law Center libels and defames those who are calling attention to the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat by lumping us in with the likes of the KKK and neo-Nazis. Then compounding that defamation is the fact that the establishment media uniformly acts as if the SPLC were an impartial and […]
Read in browser »

Three Muslim women forced to remove hijabs for mug shots snag $180,000 payout from city

This is a simple matter of identification. One of the first things Bill de Blasio did when he became Mayor was dismantle a surveillance program in Muslim communities that was perfectly legal, but came under fire from the likes of Linda Sarsour. Sarsour and her ilk now have full influence over the way New York City conducts counterterror operations. This insane decision is in line with that perspective, and represents still more submission to sharia.

“Three Muslim women forced to remove hijabs for mug shots snag $180G payout from city,” by Andrew Keshner, New York Daily News, February 27, 2018:

New York City will pay a total of $180,000 to three Muslim women who were forced to take off their hijabs for mug shots, the Daily News has learned.

Settlements in the three cases were filed Monday in Brooklyn federal court, with the lawsuits spurring new NYPD procedures on photographing people donning religious head coverings.

Read entire article here:


Today, Friday, March 2nd from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss the two hot-button issues of DACA and guns; another aspect of the Parkland school shooting; and important news of the day.
DACA and Guns...Two Hot-Button Issues of Contention
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

The DACA program — which provides work permits and myriad government benefits to illegal immigrants en masse — is clearly unlawful.”
- White House Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah

The Democrats are rejoicing as they wildly applaud the Supreme Court justices decision not to take up the Trump administration's “preemptive strike” appeal of a lower court's order to continue accepting renewal applications for all DACA recipients. Originally set by Trump to see DACA (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program) being phased out starting this upcoming March 5th, the Democrats still fail to closely examine the high court's actual decision itself for if they did they would see that they won not a thing accept the buying of a bit more time to grandstand for those...the 'so-called' Dreamers...they only care about for their votes.

Saying that with the Supreme Court justices letting stand Obama's executive ordered in DACA program...the very program that allows illegals brought to the U.S. as young children to continue to apply for both work permits and protections from deportation...what the Democrats forget is that the justices actually sent the case back to the San Francisco based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hoping that the lower court would reconsider federal judge William Alsup's injunction to keep DACA in place. And why reconsider...because Judge Alsup took it solely upon himself to rule that President Trump's repeal was based upon what he considered a “flawed legal premise”...which it was not...and thus he ruled that the Trump administration must “maintain the DACA program on a nationwide basis” no matter that it was the very program that Congress had explicitly and repeatedly rejected as a “usurpation of legislative authority.” 
And if the letter of the law is to be followed...if the Constitution is followed...Trump's wanted phase out leading to repeal was and is anything but “flawed,” and should in the end have legal standing as it was Obama's executive ordered in DACA program that was illegal to begin with. So the question is why can't Trump executive order DACA out...logic and the law says he should be able to repeal something that is in and of itself illegal.

But first, why exactly is DACA illegal and why is the judge's ruling itself a “flawed legal premise”... because under our Constitution Congress has “plenary authority” over immigration...meaning Congress alone has complete and absolute power to take action on a particular issue with no limitations, in this case immigration. The president, on the other hand, only has the authority delegated to him by Congress and Congress never gave then-President Obama the power to provide what is called “pseudo-amnesty” and government benefits to illegals...which is exactly what his DACA program did.

And Obama knew that he lacked the constitutional and the legal authority to implement said DACA program and yet he still went ahead and did it. In fact, Obama admitted back in 2011, when he first brought up the idea of DACA, that DACA was actually unconstitutional. Saying that he really could not legally "just bypass Congress and change the (immigration) law myself... That's not how a democracy works," remember that in Obama's mind democracy and the Constitution be damned.

And so in 2012, Obama went ahead and put DACA in place via executive order, thus unconstitutionality providing the above stated “pseudo-legal status” for illegal minors brought to our country by their knowingly law breaking illegal parents. Promising them they would not be deported as well as providing them with work authorization and access to Social Security and other government benefits like welfare and Medicaid...promises he had no legal right to make...Obama willfully and with malice ignored all previous immigration laws passed by Congress...laws that did not give this president nor any president the ability to do so. In fact, Congress has rejected other bills to provide illegals just such benefits.

But why do I say with malice...because by Obama's implementing DACA he knowingly and willingly took jobs away from hundreds of thousands of legal Americans by his now allowing those same jobs to go to illegals.

And then to make matters even more grievous and snub his nose at our Constitution yet again, in 2014, again via executive order, Obama sent in motion what he called DAPA (the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program). And this program would also provide those DACA parents who have lived in the U.S. since 2010, with what was now being referred to as an “administrative amnesty,” while also giving them renewable three-year work authorizations and access to many other government benefits...benefits similar to those received by illegals now already covered under his constitutionally illegal DACA program.

But thankfully in the case of DAPA, numerous states filed lawsuits regarding what they considered the unconstitutionality of Obama's actions leading to a 2015 temporary injunction blocking DAPA from going into effect while the states lawsuits worked their way through the courts. And thankfully, in June 2016, the Supreme Court split in a 4–4 decision thus leaving the block in place allowing for now President Trump to finally rescind DAPA on June 1, 2017.

In other words, one constitutional battle won leaving one constitutional battle to go.

But know that DACA suffers from exactly the same constitutional “challenges” as DAPA did and as such, I believe, as do many others, that President Trump has every legal right afforded him under the Constitution to this particular case to phase unconstitutional executive order put in place by a president who willfully did not honor the very document he swore his allegiance to.

So how do we constitutionally solve the conundrum of DACA when blue states want DACA kept in place so those recipients continue to receive benefits in return for their voting the Democrat party line... never forget it's all about votes...we solve it in the way the illegal issue should have always been dealt with...we debate it in the very halls of Congress and institute a constitutionally sound legislative “fix”...a "fix" not involving the White House where it never had any business being in the first place.

But by not allowing...actually by not forcing...Congress to fully negate Obama's unilateral and so unconstitutional overreach...two dangerous precedents would be set...first would be a precedent that weakens our constitutionally mandated balance of powers and second would be a precedent that would actually jeopardize our constitutional republic itself. And we all know President Trump rightfully would never allow that.

So in the end, and only time will tell, I do believe that the DACA issue will be resolved in President Trump's favor by the Supreme Court (if not before by Congress itself) as the 9th Circuit Court rarely reverses its decisions. And Trump also knows well that the justices sending it back to the lower court was nothing but a “procedural ruling” that follows the law as laid out in the Constitution...something our Democrat friends are more than willing to ignore.

And something else the Democrats ignore...most willingly I assure that 'We the People's' Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is something that will not go away. They can whine and scream all they want but the facts are that the NRA kills no one...guns do not kill people, people kill people...and its he or she who pulls a trigger that is the guilty party alone in any deaths that may occur. The sooner Democrats and some bleeding hearts supposedly on our side accept these facts the safer we will all be.

And while the Democrats are always trying to disarm we law abiding citizens, it always seems to reach a crescendo right after a mass shooting occurs, especially when said shooting involves children as the victims. But they would be wise to know that the Second Amendment is something we Republicans (minus the RINO's of course), we Conservatives, and we Constitutionalists will protect with our lives if need be.

The Constitution is sacred to us...after all it's the law of our land...and it's what protects us from a chance that our government will run amok for it protects us against the type of government our Founders and Framers rebelled against in order to create this country...this republic. And it's the Second Amendment that gives us both a physical and tangible way to protect ourselves and our loved ones from those wishing to us harm.

Simply put...we need more good guys with guns, beyond just the police, to protect us from bad guys with guns...and at times that includes protecting ourselves from government officials who know that by we citizens merely being in possession of guns is what helps keep our government in check. But unfortunately, as we are now seeing in the weeks after the February 14th Parkland, Florida school shooting, sometimes that does not keep our politicians in check...obviously the gun control spewing Democrat politicians but sadly now including Republican politicians supposedly but no longer on the Constitution's side.

And it so pains me to say this but one of those Republican politicians is my own Florida Governor Rick Scott...a man who should indeed know better especially after his having to face that 17 innocents lay dead on his watch. And why do I say's because Governor Scott recently said on FOX News Sunday that he will not support President Trump's plan to arm specially trained teachers with in he will not support a common sense solution of teachers being able to level the playing field by being able to fight back against those wishing to them and their students harm.

So what is my governor's solution to keeping Florida's students and teachers's a six-step band-aid plan that first, increases funding to protect schools...second, puts the focus in Florida on strengthening law enforcement... third, tightens gun restrictions on those with mental health issues...fourth, raises the legal age to buy any gun to 21...fifth, bans the sale of bump stocks (the added on device that allows a gun to fire like an automatic)...and lastly, Scott's plan includes what he calls a “red flag law” which would allow families or authorities to go to court and request guns be taken away from someone they think is a threat because of mental illness or threatening statements they’ve made.

In other words what Gov. Rick Scott wants is a Republican version of the Democrat's calling card known as 'gun control.'

And while Gov. Scott freely admitted that there are some states where teachers already are armed, he still misguidedly wants the main focus in Florida to be strengthening law enforcement. Saying that, "I have $500 million expectations out of my legislature. I've been talking to them all weekend. I'm going to focus every day on making sure we get that money and we get the law enforcement and we get the mental health counselors. We're going to do the right things in our state," what Gov. Scott forgets is that mental health councilors mean not a thing when it's the mentally ill who most easily slip through the bureaucratic cracks just like Parkland's Marjorie Stoneman Douglas shooter Nikolas Cruz did.

You can read all about those bureaucratic cracks and the need for mental health records being a mandatory part of background checks in my article More Guns Not Less Guns that was published on February 23rd.

Continuing to spout his band-aid fix, Gov. Rick Scott said that, "I believe we ought to make sure we have law enforcement presence, we make sure they're trained”..."I want to make sure that all our budgets go through our sheriff's departments to make sure that they know how the money is going to be spent, because they're responsible for our law enforcement." Oh really, honestly I don't care how the monies are spent for the only thing that will give parents a true sense of security is knowing that teachers have a chance to protect their precious children by fighting back, because in the time it takes for the police to be called and then to arrive could see it being their child who is shot dead.

And know that President Trump is right in defending his on-the-table proposal to arm specially trained teachers saying he believes "retribution" is the only way to prevent more school shootings. And he's one hundred percent correct with that because the shooter would now be aware that there's a good chance of his being the one shot dead, and that will be a possible deterrent to school shootings happening again. But notice I did not say from never happening again because mental stability for some, no matter the mental help gotten or the anti-psychotic drugs taken, is tenuous and fleeting at best. And dare we forget the bureaucratic cracks...always present...always ready to be slipped through whether it be through incompetency or simple unintentional paperwork mistakes.

And while Gov. Scott, who by the way is an NRA member and who now wants to be Florida's next senator, does understand that we must make sure that guns...that firearms of any kind...must be kept out of the hands of the mentally ill...nothing in Rick Scott's proposals are strong enough to do so. And so the man who recently said that, “I’m a dad, I’m a granddad, and I’m a governor. I want my state to be safe. I want every child to be in a safe environment,” might see his heart being in the right place, he sadly still misses the point that the only way America's children will be relatively safe while in school is to have guns put into the hands of teachers, otherwise all our children will remain sitting ducks.

DACA and guns...two contentious issues...two issues that can be successfully resolved if only our politicians on both sides of the aisle would look passed their party's and their personal agendas...after all that's exactly what they were elected to do.

Copyright @ 2018 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.


Today, Friday, March 2nd from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss the two hot-button issues of DACA and guns; another aspect of the Parkland school shooting; and important news of the day.