Monday, September 28, 2015

BloggeRhythms

Some new lights being shed today, on why the POTUS keeps doing all he can to prevent the curtailment of illegal immigration.
 
Alan Gomez, @usatoday.com reports this morning that, according to a Pew Research Center report out today: “The percentage of people living in the USA who were born outside the country reached 13.7% in 2015 and is projected to hit a record 14.9% in 2025, the report said. The country's previous high of 14.8% was set in 1890, when waves of Irish, Italian, Polish and other immigrants were coming to the USA.”
 
The presidential candidates from both parties are debating the proper role of immigration in the country because the foreign-born population represents a growing share of the electorate that’s big enough to tip presidential elections. (The term "foreign-born" includes naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, visa holders and undocumented immigrants.)
 
On one hand, all the GOP candidates push for increased border security, while Democrats generally call for protections for undocumented immigrants living in the country and an immigration system that helps some groups of immigrants enter the country.
 
The clearest explanation for Democrats vision of immigrants value came from Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, a group that supports immigrant rights in the USA, who said the influx of foreigners proves the USA remains a beacon of hope across the world, and politicians should accept that role for the country. 
 
And then Mr. Noorani made the truly critical point, adding: “The pure politics of this is that candidates from whichever party should view these numbers as the next generation of voters. They should remember that what they say now will be taken into account by future generations of U.S. citizens." Something the POTUS has counted on from the very beginning of his term in office.
 
Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.
 
Sunday, on CNN, in regard to his wife’s email scandal, Bill Clinton said: ““I have never seen so much expended on so little. The other party doesn’t want to run against her. And if they do, they’d like her as mangled up as possible.”
 
Then today, Ken Cuccinelli, president of Senate Conservatives Fund and the former attorney general of Virginia published an article on the same subject @nypost.com, which he began by stating: “It’s also instructive to compare Clinton’s situation to arguably the most famous case of our time related to the improper handling of classified materials, namely, the case of Gen. David Petraeus.
 
“Instead of turning his journals — so-called “black books” — over to the Defense Department or CIA when he left either of those organizations, Petraeus kept them at his home — an unsecure location — and provided them to his paramour/biographer, Paula Broadwell, at another private residence. (None of the classified information in the black books was used in his biography.)”
 
Mr. Cuccinelli then went on to explain that: “According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: “(1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense.]”
 
Mr. Cuccinelli then notes: “The Petraeus case meets those conditions. Does Clinton’s?”
 
Answering his own question, Mr. Cuccinelli writes: “Clinton originally denied that any of her emails contained classified information, but soon abandoned that claim. So far, 150 emails containing classified information have been identified on her server, including two that included information determined to be Top Secret.” 
 
Therefore, in spite of Bill Clinton’s attempt to belittle the festering situation regarding his wife, the conclusion ultimately reached by Mr. Cuccinelli indicates a different scenario altogether, as follows: “Does this mean she’ll be charged? FBI Director James Comey has a long history of ignoring political pressure. So it’s likely that the FBI will recommend prosecution, and then it will be up to President Obama’s Justice Department to decide whether to proceed. Stay tuned.”
 
The facts also lead to the continuing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you reading this? 
 
That’s it for today folks.
 
Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment