To read the article visit http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/07/29/can-the-president-raise-the-debt-limit-unilaterally-hell-no/ Tweet
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
US Says Iran Has "Secret Deal" With Al Qaeda And Treasury Department Sanctions Iran For Supporting Al Qaeda
TweetThe Treasury Department slapped sanctions on six individuals operating in a network that they said “serves as the core pipeline through which al Qaeda moves money, facilitators and operatives from across the Middle East to South Asia, including to Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a key al Qaeda leader based in Pakistan, also designated today.”
“Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world today. By exposing Iran’s secret deal with al Qaeda allowing it to funnel funds and operatives through its territory, we are illuminating yet another aspect of Iran’s unmatched support for terrorism,” Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen said in a statement announcing the sanctions…
Among the individuals sanctioned today is Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil, described by the Treasury Department as “an Iran-based senior al Qaeda facilitator currently living and operating in Iran under an agreement between al Qaeda and the Iranian government.”…
“As al Qaeda’s representative in Iran, Khalil works with the Iranian government to arrange releases of al Qaeda personnel from Iranian prisons. When al Qaeda operatives are released, the Iranian government transfers them to Khalil, who then facilitates their travel to Pakistan,” the Treasury Department said.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Menacham Zivotofsky Case: Question Of Birth In Jerusalem Becomes One Of President’s Power Under The Constitution To Be Decided By Supreme Court
Tweet
Menachem Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem. But was he born in Israel?
Congress says yes. In 2002, it directed the State Department to “record the place of birth as Israel” in passports of American children born in Jerusalem if their parents ask.
President George W. Bush signed that bill about three weeks before Menachem was born. But Mr. Bush also said he would not obey it.
(Remember the controversy over Mr. Bush’s flurry of signing statements, in which he expressed reservations and disagreements with acts of Congress even as he signed them into law? This was an example of one.)
The 2002 law, Mr. Bush said, “impermissibly interferes with the president’s constitutional authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs and to supervise the unitary executive branch.”
The status of Jerusalem has long divided not only Israelis and Arabs but also Congress and presidents of both parties. Over Congressional objections, the United States maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv. In his 2002 signing statement, Mr. Bush said, “U.S. policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed.”
This fall, not long after Menachem turns 9, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in his case, which seeks to force the executive branch to follow the 2002 law. The case weaves together generations of conflict in the Middle East, the dueling roles of Congress and the president in the conduct of foreign affairs and the combustible topic of presidential signing statements.
Nathan Lewin, a lawyer for Menachem and his parents, said the point pressed in the lawsuit was a modest one shared by many people. “This client is representative of a large group of American citizens born in Jerusalem who are proud of the fact that they were born in Israel,” he said, “and they want their passports to reflect that fact.”
A federal appeals court in Washington ruled against Menachem, saying the conflict between the branches was the sort of political question not fit for judicial resolution. Judge Harry T. Edwards, in a statement issued when the full appeals court refused to rehear the case, said the ruling “calls into question the role of a federal court in our system of justice.”
Judge Edwards said he would have reached and resolved the conflict between the branches rather than ducking it. He went on to say that he would have ruled for the executive branch.
The Obama administration urged the Supreme Court not to hear an appeal. The ruling below was correct, it said, and the dispute among the appeals court judges did not affect the outcome.
The justices instead not only agreed to hear the case, M.B.Z. v. Clinton, No. 10-699, but also directed the two sides to address the broad question of whether the law “impermissibly infringes the president’s power to recognize foreign sovereigns.”
That power is rooted in the constitutional text, but not in an especially obvious way. The courts have said the president’s authority to “receive ambassadors and other public ministers” implies the power to recognize foreign governments.
A recent article in the University of Richmond Law Review argued that the original understanding of the clause concerning ambassadors did not support that leap. “The Constitution, by its terms, does not give the president the power to recognize foreign states or governments,” wrote Robert J. Reinstein, a law professor at Temple University
Mr. Lewin, too, said the courts had placed too much weight on the business about receiving ambassadors, which he said was not a presidential power but only a duty.
In its brief to the court, the administration warned about the consequences of a ruling against executive authority over this area.
Ever since the Truman administration, the brief said, “the United States’ consistent policy has been to recognize no state as having sovereignty over Jerusalem, leaving the issue to be decided by negotiation between the parties to the Arab-Israeli dispute.”
Allowing Congress to interfere, the brief went on, “would critically compromise the United States’ ability to help further the Middle East peace process.”
Mr. Lewin said both the Bush and Obama administrations had blown matters out of proportion.
“The government has been exaggerating the significance of this particular issue,” he said. “This is really a tempest in a teapot created by the State Department.”
In any event, he went on, “whether or not a passport says Jerusalem or alternatively Israel, I think, makes no difference whatsoever.”
Mr. Lewin was particularly critical of Mr. Bush’s announcement that he would sign a law but not comply with part of it.
“You can’t do by signing statement what you can’t do by veto,” he said.
On this point, Mr. Lewin was supported by Representative Anthony D. Weiner, the New York Democrat who resigned last month after lewd Twitter messages came to light. In December, Mr. Weiner filed a supporting brief urging the Supreme Court to use the case to hold unconstitutional the use of “presidential signing statements as a backdoor veto.”
“The court should seize the opportunity to address this constitutional issue — so important, yet otherwise so unlikely to receive judicial scrutiny,” Mr. Weiner’s brief said. “The opportunity may never recur.”
Texas Lawmaker Calls For Congressional Probe Into Ban Of Christian Prayers At Military Funerals
A Texas lawmaker is calling for a congressional investigation of the Houston National Cemetery after he went undercover and determined that cemetery officials are still preventing Christian prayers at the funerals of military veterans.Tweet
“The Obama administration continues to try to prevent the word ‘God’ from being used at the funerals of our heroes,” said. Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas).
“It’s unacceptable and I’m going to put a stop to it as fast as humanly possible,” Culberson told Fox News Radio. He attended a burial service at the cemetery undercover on July 8, when he says he witnessed volunteer members of the honor guard from the Veterans of Foreign Wars being prohibited from using any references to God.
“The Obama administration had told the nation and me they were not interfering with the prayer said over the graves of veterans,” he said. “And I went undercover to personally verify that claim.” VA officials have strongly denied they’ve banned any religious speech – and have offered support for Arleen Ocasio, the cemetery’s director.
“The idea that invoking the name of God or Jesus is banned at VA national cemeteries is blatantly false,” said VA Press Secretary Josh Taylor in a written statement to Fox News Radio. “The truth is, VA’s policy protects veterans’ families’ rights to pray however they choose at our national cemeteries.”
Taylor declined to comment on the pending lawsuit or other ongoing legal proceedings, but did say, “No one should make judgments before all the facts are known.” Culberson said the commander of the honor guard was told by cemetery officials to approach a grieving widow to reconfirm that she wanted the word God mentioned at her husband’s graveside service.
“He quite correctly said as a Texan and a man of honor and integrity, ‘I’m not bothering that poor woman at this most terrible time of her life. We’re going to do the ritual,’” Culberson said. “Right in front of me, the VA directly and deliberately attempted to prevent the VFW from doing their magnificent, spiritual ritual over the grave of this fallen hero."
The cemetery is already the focus of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the VFW, an American Legion post and Houston’s National Memorial Ladies. They claim the VA banned members of the organizations from using the words “God” or “Jesus” at burial services.
They also allege they were banned from reciting prayers or using religious language during services unless families approved the text in advance. Culberson, who oversees the sub-committee responsible for funding the cemetery, said that he wants the cemetery director fired – and he’s willing to do whatever possible to make sure that happens.
“The cemetery director has to leave,” he said. “I will zero out her salary. If she attempts to work for the VA anywhere in the state of Texas her salary will be zero.”
“It makes my skin crawl that liberals are attempting to drive prayer out of a funeral ceremony for our heroes,” Culberson said. “We’re going to fix this so that no Obama liberal bureaucrat will interfere with the funeral of a hero.”
But Taylor said the rules set in place at the cemetery are meant to protect the grieving families.
“Put simply, VA policy puts the wishes of the veteran’s family above all else on the day it matters most – the day they pay their final respects to their loved ones,” Taylor said. "Out of respect for the families, VA’s policy exists to prevent anyone from disrespecting or interfering with a veteran’s private committal service.”
Controversy first surfaced nationally at the cemetery during a Memorial Day event when a Houston pastor was ordered by the VA to remove the name of Jesus from his prayer.
Culberson said he hopes to hold hearings on the cemetery in the fall.
“They will bury 10 to 20 American heroes today and the Obama administration is preventing prayers from being said over their gravesites – today, ” Culberson said.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Mark Levin On Thomas Friedman: "You Stupid Piece Of Crap!"
Here is the link to listen to Mark Levin talking as an "American, conservative, and a Jew": http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/06/30/mark_levin_to_tom_friedman_you_piece_of_.html Tweet
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)