BloggeRhythms

It's always been crystally clear that the POTUS’s only objective in open borders, and unbridled entry to the U.S. for illegal aliens, is to increase the number of Democrat voters. 

And now, just yesterday, Chuck Ross, Reporter @dailycaller.com, proved the point perfectly in his column titled: “Obama Admin Funds Blitz To Naturalize Anti-Trump Voters.” The analysis is quite long, but explains the objective in interlocking detail, which should make interesting reading for those caring about how collusion in politics works.

Mr. Ross writes: “The Obama administration is supporting several non-profit groups — with federal funding through a major White House initiative — that are part of an organized effort aimed at converting green-card holders into U.S. citizens in order to vote against Donald Trump, a Daily Caller investigation reveals. 

“Through an initiative called Networks for Integrating New Americans initiative, which the White House formed in April 2014, the administration has partnered with the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA), an immigration rights umbrella organization that has denounced Trump’s “hateful rhetoric.” 

On Facebook, NPNA asserted that green-card holders “have the potential to change America’s electorate” by gaining citizenship. The group and executive director are also affiliated with one of the leftist groups that helped shut down a Trump rally in Chicago earlier this month. 

Additionally, “[T]hrough U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Obama administration has provided hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to groups that have cited Trump as one reason that green-card holders should obtain citizenship before the general election in November. 

“As part of the task force, NPNA operates under the direction of World Education, Inc., a Boston-based social and economic development group. The initiative is being funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education. 

Further overstepping normal boundaries: “ICIRR is part of NPNA’s network, and the two groups have worked together on the citizenship application push. Part of their effort involves guiding green-card holders through the naturalization process. And in some cases, they help applicants apply for waivers to avoid having to pay the $680 naturalization application fee.” 

While these findings raise questions as to whether groups receiving federal funds should be allowed to openly target specific presidential candidates, they also bolster what many conservative critics of immigration reform have long asserted: “that one of the goals of activist citizenship groups is to create a new batch of Democratic voters.” 

Trump’s particularly become a target for Latino and immigrant rights groups for his comments about illegal aliens and promises to build a “big, beautiful wall” along the southern border. With his actions recently dubbed as the “Trump Effect,” CNN has reported that the number of naturalization applications increased 14.5 percent in June-December 2015 compared to the same period in 2014.” 

Aside from the federal government, numerous anti-Trump entities, including the Mexican government and billionaire George Soros, have funded community activist groups pushing permanent legal residents to obtain citizenship so that they can vote against him. 

“Earlier this month Bloomberg Politics reported that the Mexican government is hosting citizenship drives at its consulates in several major U.S. cities. One presumptive goal of the effort is to put permanent residents on the path to citizenship in order to vote against Trump. And Soros, through his Open Society Foundations network, is funding numerous organizations that oppose Trump and support amnesty and other pro-immigrant reforms. 

Several of those groups were involved in protests that led to the cancellation of a Trump rally in Chicago earlier this month. One of those is the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR), a Chicago-based outfit that is closely affiliated with National Partnership for New Americans, the group involved in the Obama White House’s citizenship enrollment task force. 

The Obama administration is also backing anti-Trump groups through a $10 million U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) citizenship and integration grant program. 

And in this case, it should be no surprise that: “The [Chicago-based] Instituto del Progresso Latino and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, which is based in Los Angeles, both received $250,000 in fiscal year 2015 as part of the program, which aims to help permanent residents apply for and obtain citizenship. 

“Earlier this month, the Chicago branch of Asian Americans Advancing Justice hosted an event “to denounce the hateful rhetoric against Muslims, immigrants, and others by Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.” 

Nonetheless, despite the significant amounts of money and effort expended by those opposed to Trump, much of the negativity against him is fostered by himself. 

This morning, FoxNews.com reported that: “Donald Trump said Tuesday that he would no longer honor his pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee for president, while fellow candidates Ted Cruz and John Kasich refused to say whether they would back the party's pick.” 

“When he was asked if he would keep the pledge he signed last September, Trump responded "No, I won’t." He explained he was taking back the pledge because, "I have been treated very unfairly", and listed the Republican National Committee, the Republican Party and party establishment among those he believes have wronged him.” 

However, his recanting of his promise should not be surprising to anyone. Because, most opportunists say and do whatever’s best for them at the moment, always putting themselves first, regardless. And, therefore, his waffling doesn’t make him look childish, wimpy or whiny, only his supporters fit those categories.   

Which leads right into today’s quote from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: “Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill  Clinton’s wife. 

Josh Gerstein @politico.com, writes about further tightening in the ongoing email situation, as follows: “Citing indications of wrongdoing and bad faith, a federal judge has overruled government objections by declaring that a conservative group is entitled to more details about how Hillary Clinton's private email account was integrated into the State Department record-keeping system and why it was not searched in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.” 

“U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order Tuesday agreeing that Judicial Watch can pursue legal discovery — which often includes depositions of relevant individuals — as the group pursues legal claims that State did not respond completely to a FOIA request filed in May 2014 seeking records about talking points then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice used for TV appearances discussing the deadly attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi in September 2012. 

What’s quite pertinent here is that “Lamberth is the second federal judge handling a Clinton email-related case to agree to discovery, which is unusual in FOIA litigation. Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan gave Judicial Watch the go-ahead to pursue depositions of Clinton aides in a lawsuit for records about former Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin.” 

While the new order “underscores the metastasizing potential of the email-related litigation” there are now “dozens of lawsuits brought by Clinton's political opponents as well as news organizations.” 

Lamberth wrote in his three-page order: "Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.” 

The judge noted that “State argues it had no legal duty to search Clinton's emails when Judicial Watch's request arrived because her emails were not in the agency's possession and control at that time.” Nonetheless, in response to that claim, Lamberth said: “The government argues that this does not show a lack of good faith, but that is what remains to be seen, and the factual record must be developed appropriately for the Court to make that determination" 

At the same time: “The judge also referred to "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials." 

Judge Lambert’s commentary reveals that he, and others like him, are well aware of both Bill’s wife and the government’s evasive actions, and are planning to do something judicially about it. Which raises the continuing question once more: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this? 

That’s it for today folks.   

Adios