U.S. Dems and RINOs Shoot Down Kate’s Law


John R. Houk

© October 21, 2015

Senate Democrats and two idiot Republicans prevented the Kate’s Law legislation (HR 3011) from getting to the sixty votes needed to enforce defunding of cities, counties and other locations that refuse to enforce Federal law on criminal illegal aliens.

MAP: 340 sanctuary cities, counties and states

Here is the text of HR 3011 shot down by Democrats committed to illegal aliens even if they are committing crimes beyond illegal immigration:

114th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3011

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase the penalties applicable to aliens who unlawfully reenter the United States after being removed.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 9, 2015

Mr. Salmon (for himself, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Zinke, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Mr. Bridenstine, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Clawson of Florida, Mr. Zeldin, Mr. Gosar, Mr. McClintock, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Marino, Mr. Ross, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Jody B. Hice of Georgia, Mr. Brat, Mr. Marchant, Mr. Blum, Mr. Brooks of Alabama, Mr. Babin, Mr. Palmer, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Yoho) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

A BILL

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase the penalties applicable to aliens who unlawfully reenter the United States after being removed.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Establishing Mandatory Minimums for Illegal Reentry Act of 2015” or as “Kate’s Law”.

SEC. 2. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR REENTRY OF REMOVED ALIENS.

Section 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1326) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a), in the matter following paragraph (2) by striking “fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both” and inserting “imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 6 years”; and

(2) in subsection (b)—

(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both” and inserting “imprisoned not less than 5 and not more than 10 years, and may, in addition, be fined under title 18, United States Code”;

(B) in paragraph (2), by striking “fined under such title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both” and inserting “imprisoned not less than 5 and not more than 20 years and may, in addition, be fined under such title”; and

(C) in paragraph (4), by striking “fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both” and inserting “imprisoned for not less than 5 and not more than 10 years and may, in addition, be fined under such title”. (H.R.3011 – Kate’s Law; Primary Sponsors – Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ); List of co-sponsors found HERE; Congress.gov; introduced 7/9/15)

This Senate vote should have been 100 for and zero against Kate’s Law. So YOU have to ask, “What in the devil is the reason ANY legislator would not support a law that protects AMERICAN CITIZENS from foreigners who illegally sneaked into the USA who commit crimes that if an American committed would be thrown in the slammer?

In the November 2016 election, why in the world would any registered AMERICAN voter vote for a Democrat that believes supporting the freedom of foreign criminals is more important than the safety and quality of life of an AMERICAN citizen or a LEGAL immigrant that entered our nation the correct way?

JRH 10/21/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************

See How Your Senators Voted on Sanctuary Cities

 

By Kelsey Harkness

October 20, 2015

The Daily Signal

Senate Democrats blocked legislation that would punish “sanctuary cities” in a 54-45 vote Monday afternoon.

The bill, called the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act, needed to overcome a 60-vote threshold. It would withhold certain federal funding from states or cities that refuse to comply with requests from federal immigration officials to turn over immigrants who are in the country illegally.

Kate’s Law Senate Yeas and Nays

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., introduced the legislation, which includes a provision known as Kate’s Law, named after 32-year-old Kate Steinle, who was fatally shot in San Francisco on July 1. The bill would impose a mandatory minimum jail sentence of five years for illegal immigrants who are convicted of re-entering the United States after being convicted of an aggravated felony or have three strikes for trying to enter the country illegally.

VIDEO: Vitter Urges Colleagues to Support Today’s Sanctuary Cities Vote

 

Published by Senator David Vitter

Published on Oct 20, 2015

Today, U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) spoke on the Senate floor urging his colleagues to support his legislation, the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act, which would withhold certain federal funding from sanctuary states or cities that fail to comply with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued detainer requests for illegal aliens. The bill would redirect these funds to states and localities that follow the law.

Vitter has been pushing to defund sanctuary cities since 2007, when he served as chairman of the Border Security Caucus.

Sanctuary policies vary from state to state, but they generally prevent local authorities from cooperating with federal immigration officers, allowing those localities to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation. There are currently 340 sanctuary cities in the United States, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.

The issue of sanctuary cities gained national attention when Steinle was killed this summer by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal immigrant who had seven prior felony convictions in the U.S. and had been deported to Mexico five separate times. He was released from a San Francisco jail in April under a city law barring the jail’s deputies from informing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of his release, despite the agency’s previous notification request.

Opponents of the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act question the taxpayer cost of implementing mandatory minimums at a time when Congress is working to reform the criminal justice system. Some, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., even mocked the legislation, calling it the “Donald Trump Act.”

“This Donald Trump Act was designed to demonize immigrants and spread the myth that they are criminals and threats to the public,” Reid said on Monday.

During his bid for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, Trump highlighted Steinle’s death as an example of why the country needs stricter immigration policies.

In July, the White House issued a veto threat on similar legislation that passed in the House, saying the measure “undermines current administration efforts to remove the most dangerous convicted criminals.”

Earlier this month, the Center for Immigration Studies, an organization that supports reduced immigration, identified the 340 cities, counties, and states that are considered sanctuary locations.

[Blog Editor: The Daily Signal inserted the CIS map on sanctuary locations at this point that I used above.]

A government report commissioned for Congress by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement found that sanctuary cities released more than 9,000 illegal immigrants whom federal authorities were seeking to deport between Jan. 1 and Sept. 30, 2014. As of last year, 69 percent of those were still at large in the United States.

Of those still at large, 1,377 had another criminal arrest that resulted in the detainer. Of the 6,460 criminal aliens who were still at large during the time period studied, 3,802 (58 percent) had prior felonies or violent misdemeanors.

______________________

U.S. Dems and RINOs Shoot Down Kate’s Law

John R. Houk

© October 21, 2015

___________________

See How Your Senators Voted on Sanctuary Cities

Kelsey Harkness is a news producer at The Daily Signal.Send an email to Kelsey.

About The Daily Signal

The Daily Signal delivers investigative and feature reporting and the most important political news and commentary. The team is committed to truth and unmatched in knowledge of Washington’s politics and policy debates. We tell these stories in formats that respect your time and intelligence.

VIDEO: What Is The Daily Signal?

 

READ THE REST

SENATOR PROBES OBAMA’S LAUNDER-GATE ‘COVER-UP’


HSBC money laundering toon by Cagle

According to the cursory reading I have done to date the bank HSBC is the world’s second largest bank. Admittedly economics and finance are areas I am insufficiently educated in; nonetheless when here’s of international banking problems with the world’s second largest bank I had to expand my curiosity.

 

HSBC Holdings plc is a British multinational banking and financial services company headquartered in London, United Kingdom. It is the world’s second largest bank. It was founded in London in 1991 by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation to act as a new group holding company.[3][4] The origins of the bank lie in Hong Kong and Shanghai, where branches were first opened in 1865.[1] The HSBC name is derived from the initials of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation.[5] As such, the company refers to both the United Kingdom and Hong Kong as its “home markets”.[6] (HSBC; Wikipedia; This page was last modified on 13 February 2015, at 03:38; Blog Editor: I only retained the Wikipedia links applicable specifically to info on HSBC)

 

Apparently I am on the WND press release list (I don’t recall signing up, but I am pleased that I am). The press release sent says to contact Jerome Corsi for more info, so I presumed the PR was by Mr. Corsi. The WND press release notifies that HSBC is directly involved in international scandalous money laundering of international criminals. If you are a Bank Conspiracy Theorist that probably isn’t surprising; however what I found disturbing is that President Barack Hussein Obama’s Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch was involved with earlier investigations of HSBC AND presumably set up billions of dollars of fines against HSBC. Now the fines sound like a good thing but what doesn’t sound good is the probable banking Officers that undoubtedly committed crimes worthy of prison WERE NOT PROSECUTED by Lynch. It is my humble opinion this should disqualify any consideration for Lynch’s confirmation to America’s highest justice Office.

 

Greater Scope of HSBC Corruption:

 

HSBC files: Swiss bank hid money for suspected criminals (Guardian – 2/12/15 13.21 EST)

 

Banking Giant HSBC Sheltered Murky Cash Linked to Dictators and Arms Dealers (ICIJ – 2/8/15 4:00 pm)

 

JRH 2/13/15

Please Support NCCR

****************************

SENATOR PROBES OBAMA’S LAUNDER-GATE ‘COVER-UP’

Threatens to block confirmation of Loretta Lynch

 

By Jerome Corsi

Sent: 2/12/2015 11:35 AM

Sent by WND

Sent as: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

WASHINGTON – What does the biggest banking scandal in world history have to do with the confirmation hearings for attorney general-nominee Loretta Lynch?

No one was prosecuted in the Justice Department’s case against HSBC, a global mega-bank that admitted its role in a massive money-laundering scheme involving drugs and illicit arms trading. Loretta Lynch was in charge of that investigation and imposed a $1.2 billion fine on HSBC – with no criminal prosecution and no jail time for anyone associated with the bank.

Now senators want to know how that happened.

New York Times bestselling author Dr. Jerome Corsi is available to speak to the media about the revelations regarding banking giant HSBC that he broke in 2012 and how Obama Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch may have worked to strike a sweetheart deal to protect the international firm.

When Corsi first reported on HSBC in 2012, the banking giant retaliated against WND: The bank filed a complaint Feb. 9, 2012, with a WND Internet service provider, EdgeCast Networks. Access to the article was blocked for a period of three hours, until the Internet provider concluded the complaint was unwarranted.

At the time, WND Editor and CEO Joseph Farah remarked, “I’ve been in journalism for 30 years and in Internet journalism for 15 years. In all that time, I have never seen such a blatant and temporarily effective effort at raw censorship by a powerful institution – in this case, one of the world’s largest banks.”

A member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has opened an investigation he believes could threaten the confirmation of Obama’s nominee to replace Eric Holder as attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

After his staff quizzed a whistleblower provided by WND, the office of Sen. David Vitter, R-La., announced it is investigating why Lynch, in her capacity as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, allowed banking giant HSBC to avoid criminal prosecution of bank officers and other employees. HSBC paid a hefty fine, instead, for laundering uncounted billions of dollars of illegal drug and terrorist money through its U.S. bank in the service of Mexican drug cartels and Middle Eastern terrorists.

Vitter’s staff examined allegations made since 2009 by John Cruz, a former HSBC manager armed with 1,000 pages of bank account records and recordings of employees and numerous state and federal law enforcement agents who labeled him as “crazy” rather than seriously look into his claims.

Vitter’s Washington staff spoke to Cruz in an hour-long teleconference that WND attended in the senator’s office.

The meeting left Vitter’s staff asking, “How can we allow Loretta Lynch to be the nation’s top federal law-enforcement officer when the HSBC money-laundering scandal raises questions about a cover-up that may be continuing even today?”

Cruz’s allegations were first reported in a series of WND stories that began with a February 2012 report. Cruz called the $1.92 billion fine the U.S. government imposed on HSBC “a joke” and filed a $10 million lawsuit for “retaliation and wrongful termination.” Whistleblowers in India and London joined Cruz in charging the HSBC settlement amounted to a massive cover-up.

In response to WND’s reporting of Cruz’s evidence, HSBC lodged a complaint that blocked Internet access to one of the WND stories, and senior reporter Jerome Corsi was fired by the New York City investment firm he had worked with for two years as a senior managing director, Gilford Securities.

WND also reported evidence Holder’s Justice Department did not investigate money-laundering charges in deference to bank clients of his Washington-based law firm, where he was a partner prior to joining the Obama administration. In addition, WND reported HSBC was engaged in a systematic scheme to defraud citizens of India who live abroad out of billions of dollars in investment accounts.

Formal investigation

At the conclusion of the meeting Wednesday, Vitter’s staff authorized WND to announce the senator has decided to open a formal investigation into Cruz’s allegations against HSBC.

Vitter’s staff explained that at the center of the investigation will be the question of whether Lynch, acting in her capacity as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, had engineered or knowingly participated in a government settlement in 2012 that allowed HSBC senior management to avoid criminal prosecution.

HSBC was allowed to admit only deficiencies in administrating anti-terrorism, money laundering statutes while bank employees down to the branch level who laundered billions of dollars in Mexican drug cartel and Middle Eastern terrorist money were let off the hook, with many remaining as employees of the bank even today.

A Department of Justice press release Dec. 11, 2012, named Lynch, representing the Justice Department, in its civil settlement with HSBC.

The bank agreed to pay a fine of $1.256 billion and an additional $665 million in civil penalties in exchange for “deferred prosecution.” The DOJ agreed not to pursue any criminal prosecutions of HSBC officers or employees after a probe in which DOJ criminal investigators were joined by investigators from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security, the New York County District Attorney’s Office and the U.S. Treasury.

The investigation found HSBC had violated numerous anti-money laundering statutes, processing billions of dollars of transactions for Mexican drug cartels and Middle East terrorist organizations.

“I was told in 2009 that HSBC had reserved $2 billion to pay government fines as a cost of doing business to avoid criminal prosecutions in the money-laundering case,” Cruz told WND.

“It’s a travesty of justice that no one at HSBC got prosecuted when HSBC laundered billions of dollars of drug for Mexican drug cartels and laundered billions more for Middle Eastern terrorists, in a massive bank fraud scheme I can prove HSBC bank officials knew was going on from the highest executives in the bank to branch managers and employees throughout the HSBC bank,” he said.

In 2012, Cruz turned over to WND some 1,000 pages of customer account records he pulled from the HSBC computer system before he was fired by HSBC senior management uninterested in investigating his claims. He also recorded hours of conversations with HSBC bank managers and compliance officers, and various law enforcement officers, none of whom took his allegations seriously.

“I tried for years, starting in 2009, to bring this to the attention of law enforcement agencies in New York State and the federal government, including the Department of Homeland Security and the IRS, that HSBC was engaged in a massive multi-billion dollar international scheme of laundering drug and terrorist money, and nobody was interested,” Cruz said.

“What I got for my efforts was bank officers, including bank compliance officers, told me to forget about it. And when I didn’t forget about it, HSBC fired me in February 2010, after give me a bad performance review,” he said.

Cruz began working at HSBC on Jan. 14, 2008, and was terminated for “poor job performance” on Feb. 17, 2010.

“When I heard about the DOJ settlement, I was shocked,” Cruz said. “I couldn’t believe the federal government settled with HSBC, with the federal government allowing all of the many HSBC employees I could prove were involved in perpetrating this massive illegal money-laundering to go free.

“I lost my job, and the criminals in HSBC laundering drug and terrorist money, while engaging in massive tax evasion defrauding the federal government out of billions in tax revenue, got to keep their jobs,” he said, and “many are still employed by the bank today.”

Bogus accounts

Cruz told WND that as a relationship manager for HSBC, it was his responsibility to look up various accounts in the computer system and go to visit the account holders in person and offer them additional products and services.

“I pulled these documents because I thought they were evidence of suspicious activity taking place,” Cruz affirmed when presented by WND with various HSBC computer ledgers of customer accounts. “These same documents I brought to bank security and my managers in the bank.”

To his surprise, HSBC management and bank security did not welcome his reports of suspicious activity.

“My managers told me I was crazy and I didn’t know what I was talking about,” he said. “They told me it was none of my business what goes on in transactions; but that’s my job.”

WND showed Cruz the HSBC account ledger for a business named “United Express.”

“It was supposed to be a shipping company that does over $2 million a year in transactions,” Cruz said, recognizing the HSBC computer-generated account ledger. “But the ledger shows millions and millions of dollars in transactions, but the transactions are all through PayPal and American Express.”

Cruz also described his visit to see the company in person.

“There were two employees on site that didn’t speak English,” he recalled. “The only evidence of any packaging being done was a couple of small boxes in the corner.”

Suspicious activity

Cruz showed WND a redacted HSBC account ledger for a company indicating more than $1.34 million in deposits and $1.23 million in withdrawals in a one-month period from July 21, 2009, to Aug. 20, 2009.

“The account does not say where the money comes from or where it is going to,” Cruz noted. “It’s just a transaction. But the money gets transferred out of the account. Where does it go? The bank won’t explain it, but they know exactly where it goes. If it goes from here down to Malaysia, Brazil, Columbia, Hong Kong – the bank knows exactly where it’s going, because the bank owns the branches in those countries.”

Money, he said, “comes in daily, thousands of dollars, always in even amounts.”

“You look at a statement and it says ‘transfer,’ but where did it go? There’s no account number or tracking number that documents where the transaction went,” he pointed out.

Cruz contends HSBC was running what amounted to a “shell game.”

“So many of these businesses are conducted out of a person’s home,” he said. “I would walk into these homes. There’s a couch, there’s a chair, a desk, but the house is empty – a couple of Mercedes sitting out front. But where is the business? It’s only online transactions of money in and money out.”

Identity theft

Cruz said his 1,000 pages of customer accounts show that to implement the money-laundering scheme, HSBC relied on identity theft. Social Security numbers were stolen to create the bogus retail and commercial bank accounts through which HSBC employees systematically deposited and withdrew hundreds of millions of dollars on a daily basis, apparently without the knowledge of the identity-theft victims.

“When an individual finds out they got a loan they never knew about, 5 percent of that loan went to the accounting firm that made up the phony tax returns and the other 95 percent of that loan went to the manager,” he charged.

“One manager was involved in the transaction, another manager was involved in notarizing the transaction, and senior management was involved where they signed off permission to give the loans even when the loans get rejected by underwriting.”

‘Criminal enterprise’

Cruz told WND he recorded hundreds of hours of meetings he conducted with HSBC management and bank security personnel, during which, he charged, various bank managers were engaging in criminal acts.

“I have hours of hours of recordings, ranging from bank tellers, to business representatives, to branch managers, to executives,” he said. “The whole system is designed to be a culture of fraud to make it look like it’s a legal system. But it’s not.”

Cruz explained that even when he let bank managers know he was taping the conversation, the managers were not interested in what he was saying.

“HSBC is a criminal organization,” he said. “It is a culture of crime.”

__________________________

For media wishing to interview Dr. Jerome Corsi, please contact media@wnd.com

 

This email was sent to you as a subscriber to the Press Release list from WND.com.

 

WND | 2020 Pennsylvania Ave NW, #351 | Washington, DC 20006
Copyright 1997-2015 WND.com Inc. All Rights Reserved

Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’


Senators Mile Lee - Ted Cruz AP Photo

Six U.S. Senators have placed outgoing (i.e. lame duck) – Majority Leader Senator Reid – on noticed that if President Barack Hussein Obama unilaterally forces an illegal alien amnesty edict, that audacious Presidential act will cause a constitutional crisis. It is the belief of the Senators (Original Intent) that immigration law is solely the purview of the Congress.

 

Since I agree with those six Senators, Obama illegal Alien Amnesty should be another nail to the coffin of impeachment. God knows many of those nails have already been hammered but political numbers, political correctness, and a cowardly GOP leadership have FAILED to move the coffin from the House to the Senate.

 

JRH 11/6/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’

 

By Terence P. Jeffrey

November 5, 2014 – 3:43 PM

CNSNews.com

 

Republican Senators Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, and David Vitter of Louisiana sent a letter to lame-duck Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada today saying that if President Obama takes unilateral action to grant amnesty to illegal aliens it “will create a constitutional crisis.”

 

The senators told Reid that they would assist him in enacting a measure to stop Obama from unilaterally granting an amnesty, but that if Reid lets Obama go forward with such an amnesty they “would use all procedural means necessary” to make the Senate focus on the constitutional crisis they say that this “lawless amnesty” would create.

 

On Dec. 11, the continuing resolution now funding the government will expire. Before that date, both Houses of Congress will need to approve a new continuing resolution to fund the government beyond that date.

 

If the CR does not permit the Executive Branch to spend money on some action, the Executive Branch cannot take that action.

 

“We write to express our alarm with President Obama’s announced intention to take unilateral executive action by the end of this year to lawlessly grant amnesty to immigrants who have entered the country illegally,” the senators wrote Reid.

 

“The Supreme Court has recognized that ‘over no conceivable subject is the power of Congress more complete’ than its power over immigration,” the senators said. “Therefore, President Obama will be exercising powers properly belonging to Congress if he makes good his threat.

 

“This will create a constitutional crisis that demands action by Congress to restore the separation of powers,” the senators told Reid.

 

“As majority leader of the Senate, you have the responsibility of not only representing the citizens of your state, but also of protecting the Constitution through vigilant exercise of the checks and balances provided under the Constitution,” wrote Cruz, Lee, Sessions, Roberts, Crapo and Vitter.

 

“Therefore, we write to offer our full assistance in ensuring expeditious Senate debate and passage for a measure that preserves the power of Congress by blocking any action the president may take to violate the Constitution and unilaterally grant amnesty,” the senators said.

 

“[H]owever,” they continued, “should you decline to defend the Senate and the Constitution from executive overreach, the undersigned senators will use all procedural means necessary to return the Senate’s focus during the lame duck session to resolving the constitutional crisis created by President Obama’s lawless amnesty.”

__________________________________

All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2014. Cybercast News Service.

 

About CNSNews.com

 

CNSNews.com was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

 

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes “news.”

 

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded CNSNews.com in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.

 

CNSNews.com endeavors to READ THE REST