Obama Admits “Changing” Federal Law with Executive Actions

EXPOSES HIS OWN LIE ON ILLEGAL ALIEN ACTIONS

by Sharon Rondeau

(Nov. 26, 2014) — In an address to a Chicago audience on Tuesday, Oval Office occupant Barack Hussein Obama attempted to appease hecklers by reminding them of his executive actions, announced on Thursday, to allow up to 5,000,000 illegal aliens to remain in the country for at least an initial three-year period under certain conditions.

On Thursday evening, Obama insisted that his actions were within his authority as the head of the executive branch of the U.S. government.  However, in an apparent attempt to appease those in the audience who perceived he had not gone far enough, Obama admitted that “I just took an action to change the law.”

Before making his revealing statement, Obama, stuttering considerably, tried to assure hecklers that he had “heard them” and that “nobody is removing you” from the assembly at the Cooperative Community Center.  He received applause after making the statement, then assured the audience that “point number 2” of his plan was that “the way the change in the law works is that we will be prioritizing how we enforce our immigration laws generally so not everybody qualifies for being able to sign up and register, but the change in priorities applies to everybody.”

Last year, the regime released more than 36,000 criminal illegal aliens to American neighborhoods, ordering ICE agents to “stay silent,” according to Breitbart News.

On Tuesday, Obama was likely referring to a DHS document also issued on Thursday which set forth new “priorities” for deportations.  Illegal aliens convicted of DUIs and firearms violations are considered a second-level priority, and ICE agents are strongly encouraged to devote their resources to level one priorities.

“It doesn’t make much sense to yell at me right now,” Obama said, reminding the audience that “we’re making some changes.”

During his first presidential campaign, Obama had claimed that he would roll back what he said President George W. Bush had done while in office, which Obama characterized as “trying to bring more and more power into the Executive Branch and not go through Congress at all.”  “That’s what I intend to reverse when I’m President of the United States of America,” Obama promised.

Obama had previously said on 25 occasions that he did not have the authority to change immigration policies.

Obama has also released prisoners from the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba without Congress’s approval, which has been found to be a clear violation of law; declared “executive actions” on gun control without Congress following the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT on December 14, 2012; and chaired the United Nations Security Council on two occasions in possible violation of Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution.

On Twitter on Wednesday morning, Rep. Steve King tweeted Obama’s statement followed by one of his own:  “Only Congress can change the law.”

Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution delegates lawmaking authority only to Congress.

The Post & Email responded to King’s tweet by asking, “So what is Congress going to do?”

Rep. Michele Bachmann, who is retiring in January once her replacement is sworn in, has said that Republicans have no plan to stop Obama’s executive actions from taking effect.  “We are not going to engage,” Bachmann quoted Speaker of the House John Boehner to Breitbart News Executive Chairman Steven K. Bannon on a radio program last Saturday.  Bachmann said she views Obama’s executive actions as unconstitutional.

On December 3 at noon EST, Bachmann is holding a protest rally against Obama’s executive actions, urging members of the public to attend.

On Friday, the House of Representatives filed a lawsuit naming Obama as the defendant for unilaterally altering the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, also known as “Obamacare”).  Since the lawsuit was first initiated, videos of Obamacare “architect” Jonathan Gruber have surfaced in which Gruber expresses that deception and a lack of “transparency” were used against the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Congress and the American people to pass the legislation in March 2010.

On CBS’s Face the Nation hosted by Bob Schieffer, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX10) stated that Texas Governor-elect Greg Abbott will be filing a lawsuit against the immigration executive actions.  Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed a lawsuit within hours of Obama’s address on Thursday, and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach is currently composing a legal action.

McCaul indicated that “the courts” will decide whether or not Obama’s actions are constitutional.  In contradiction to a headline, McCaul did not say that “lawsuits against Obama are setting up impeachment.”  However, McCaul did say that he believes that Obama has “failed to executive the laws” of the nation, as the constitution requires of the president in Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution.

Just prior to Obama’s Thursday night address, McCaul and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte signed a letter to Obama asking him not to following through on his plan to “grant amnesty to millions of unlawful immigrants,” claiming that it posed “a threat to our democracy.”

In a November 6, 2014 essay published by The Heritage Foundation, Goodlatte wrote:

“The President must enforce all constitutionally valid Acts of Congress, regardless of the Administration’s view of their wisdom or policy. Without enforcement of the law, there cannot be accountability under law, which is essential to a functioning democracy. When the President fails to perform this duty, the Congress has appropriations and other powers over the President, but none of those powers can be exercised unless both houses of Congress work together. The most powerful means of solving this problem is the electoral process. Congress may also hold the President accountable by asking the courts to call the fouls when the lines of constitutional authority have been breached…

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This clause, known as the Take Care Clause, requires the President to enforce all constitutionally valid Acts of Congress, regardless of his own Administration’s view of their wisdom or policy. The clause imposes a duty on the President; it does not confer a discretionary power. The Take Care Clause is a limit on the Vesting Clause’s grant to the President of “the executive power…

Speaking of the Obamacare lawsuit against Obama, Goodlatte added:

The stakes for inaction are high. The lawsuit will challenge the President’s failure to enforce key provisions of the law that has come to bear his name in the popular mind and was largely drafted in the White House.

Unlike any other piece of major federal legislation enacted in at least 100 years—including the Federal Reserve Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Tax Reform Act, and all other major federal legislation over the last century—the Obamacare law did not garner significant bipartisan support. Indeed, and uniquely, it had none. There was no bipartisan political compromise.

What provisions of Obamacare have been enforced have not proved popular, and what provisions the President has refused to enforce have been delayed until at least after the next federal elections: How convenient for the President, yet how devastating to accountability in our Republic.

Imagine the future if this new, unconstitutional power of the President is left to stand. Presidents today and in the future would be able to treat the entire United States Code as mere guidelines and pick and choose among its provisions which to enforce and which to ignore. The current President has even created entirely new categories of businesses to which his unilaterally imposed exemptions would apply.

In August, Goodlatte said that impeachment of Obama “would be a mistake” “unless there was a groundswell of public support for it.”

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a republican form of government to the states, not a democracy, where each individual speaks for himself rather than through elected representatives.  Historically, democracies do not survive.

Schieffer was identified as the potential recipient of a phone call from then-DOJ press aide Tracy Schmaler, who wrote in an email in October 2011 that CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson was “out of control” in her reporting on Fast & Furious, the gunrunning operation which killed hundreds of Mexicans and at least one American, U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

On Friday, The Post & Email queried CBS News as to whether or not Schieffer had ever received Schmaler’s promised phone call but received no response.

No member of Congress has been willing to examine whether or not Obama violated Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution relating to his eligibility for the presidency as a “natural born Citizen.”  Claiming a foreign-citizen father and a birth in Hawaii to a U.S.-citizen mother after claiming to have been born in Kenya, Obama’s long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form have been found to be “computer-generated forgeries” by a criminal investigation spanning more than three years.

Lead criminal investigator Mike Zullo has stated publicly that the birth certificate forgery, which remains on the White House website, was created “with the intent to deceive.”

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has stated that he will release new information on not only Zullo’s investigational findings, but also of a separate investigation he launched as an outgrowth of the birth certificate investigation “when he is comfortable addressing any new information.”