This article was just published in the latest subscribers-only issue of the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor newsletter:

 

This writer has frequently noted the accuracy of John Adams’ summary and dangers of the Founders’ when he said that it “was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” It was designed, as Thomas Jefferson noted, to keep criminals like Barack Obama from taking control:

 

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

 

During the Constitutional convention there was little debate over the issue of immigration and so those chains were not forged with the result that the states, up until 1808, were to determine their own immigration policies, and afterwards to defer to the national government.

 

Consequently, when Obama asked his henchmen, Jeh Johnson and Eric Holder, to find ways he could implement the DREAM Act without having to wait for Congress to enact it, they succeeded, using the president’s discretion allowed by the Constitution under Article I, Section 4, that “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

One of the tools of a tyrant is using language to hide his true intents. For years Obama has disclaimed any such powers as he is now exercising. As a candidate back in March, 2008, he said:

 

 I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with [George Bush] 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.

 

In May of that same year he said:

 

We’ve got a government designed by the Founders so that there’d be checks and balances. You don’t want a president who’s too powerful or a Congress that’s too powerful or a court that’s too powerful…

 

Congress’ job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it or he can sign it…

 

I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States.

 

Specifically relating to immigration, Obama told his audience in July, 2010:

There are those in the immigrants’ rights community … [urging] that we should …ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws…

 

I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair … and could lead to a surge in more

 

No matter how decent [most of them are] … the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.

 

Had the president changed his mind? Had he had a change of heart? Didn’t his proclamation in November creating a new amnesty program by executive fiat and expanding an older one conflict with these statements?

 

No, of course not. Responded the immigrant-in-chief:

Actually, my position hasn’t changed. When I was talking to the advocates [of amnesty], their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress.

 

This blatant reversal earned Obama the rare “Upside-Down Pinocchio” award from the liberal mouthpiece Post, which called it “a major-league flip-flop.”

 

Following the issuing of the November decree, Republican House member Bob Goodlatte of Virginia said it was nothing short of a power-grab:

 

President Obama has just announced one of the biggest Constitutional power grabs ever by a president. He has declared – unilaterally, by his own estimation – almost 5 million unlawful immigrants will be free from the legal of their lawless actions.

 

Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) said:

 

He changed the law. Presidents cannot change the law. You can’t do so constitutionally, you cannot do so under Supreme Court precedent, and you can’t change the law to comport with his preferred public policy.

 

Obama’s nominee to replace Eric Holder as Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, was pressed hard on her position on the illegal actions announced by the president during her confirmation hearings. She side-stepped the question as adroitly as Richard Nixon allegedly did when he was asked how tall he was. Nixon responded: “180, but I’m on a diet”:

 

I did find it to be responsible that we prioritize removal [deportation], particularly those who are involved in violent [and] terrorism…

 

When asked about the impact on American workers seeking jobs in a down economy by a flood of illegals looking for work, Lynch declared:

 

I believe that the right and the obligation to work is one that is shared by everyone in this country, regardless of how they came here.

 

 

Certainly, if someone is [already] here, regardless of status [illegal or not], I would prefer that they be participating in the workplace, than not participating in the workplace.

 

In this astonishing statement Lynch said in essence that a working illegal can be forgiven prior lawless behavior just because they have a job and are paying taxes. When asked point blank if she was going to be “just another Holder,” she replied hotly: “Certainly not!”

 

The impact of Obama’s executive decree, now working its way through the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), is beginning to show up in predictable places. On February 10th, USCIS announced it is seeking a government contractor just to help them open the mail. According to the Washington Times:

 

The government expects so many applications for President Obama’s new deportation amnesty that it’s seeking a contractor just to open the new mail and enter the forms into their system…

 

[The contractor will] operate two shifts from 6 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. every workday to keep up with the anticipated workload.

 

Estimates vary but of the approximately 11 million illegals (this writer refuses to refer to them as the now politically correct “undocumented immigrants” because that phrase hides the truth), more than 4 million of them are expected to apply, with USCIS anticipating that 800,000 of them will apply in just the first two and a half months.

 

The agency is also seeking printing bids for more than 4 million work permits that will be granted to the flood applying for amnesty. Further, the agency has admitted that that flood will overload its ability to sort out the miscreants with extensive criminal records back home from those just wanting checks. Luke Bellocchi, a former deputy ombudsman for USCIS, admitted that “it’s going to be hard to tell how much there is” as the agency is likely to use “abbreviated” criminal records searches that won’t delve too deeply in an applicant’s background before being granted amnesty.

 

When the agency geared up last year to handle the thousands of applications under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program DACA), Bellocchi said that it accepted “pretty much any kind of documentation” to establish their identity and acceptance under the policy.

 

USCIS has asked the contractor to hire 1,000 new government employees to help open the mail, enter the relevant data into the agency’s computers, with 250 of them to be trained to sort the wheat from the chaff. Kenneth Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, sees what’s coming:

 

How you could have proper adjudication this way is beyond my scope of reason. [USCIS wants] to cleric-alize the job. They’re really not concerned about whether the documents entered are fraudulent or not. They just want to push the papers along.

 

This, naturally and predictably, has resulted in criminals entering the US intent on mayhem and murder. In early February the FBI put Liban Haji Mohamed, a Somali-born naturalized citizen, on its “10 Most Wanted” list while three days later six immigrants living in the St. Louis area were arrested for sending money and military surplus supplies to ISIS. They were either naturalized citizens or were holding legal resident status. In the latter case federal investigators worked for two years putting together the case against them, providing further evidence of another cost of allowing criminals into the country all in the name of amnesty.

 

Those costs will mount enormously as the flood of illegals overwhelms the welfare programs that attract them. Robert Rector, a senior research follow in the Domestic Policy Studies Department at the Heritage Foundation, started counting those costs late last year:

 

The net cost – which is total benefits minus total benefits paid in – of the amnesty recipients I estimate will be around $2 trillion over the course of their lifetimes.

 

What [Obama] is doing is … putting these 4 million people – who on average have a 10th grade education – into the Social Security and Medicare programs.

 

And then there are the “anchor babies” who eventually will allow their illegal-immigrant parents also to apply for amnesty. As Warren Mass noted at The New American:

 

The president’s plan … uses executive action to grant protection from deportation to those who have been in the United States for more than five years, and to those who have children who are American citizens or legal residents.

 

The children of the latter group are … referred to as “anchor babies”, since children born in the United States to illegal immigrants are [automatically] granted citizenship.

 

Once those “anchor babies” reach age 21, they will be able to petition the USCIS to grant their parents Permanent Resident Cards, otherwise known as “green cards.” Another five years and they become eligible for all the welfare goodies provided by the government at taxpayer expense.

 

The math, according to Heritage, is devastating:

 

On average, [illegal immigrants] receive $46,582 in government benefits while paying only $11,469 in taxes. This generates an average fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $35,113.

 

This does not count, of course, the cost of schooling, the wear and tear on roads and other public facilities, or any of the other 80 federal welfare programs currently extant in the country.

 

It gets worse. Heritage’s numbers, according to the 2013 Rector-Richwine report, greatly underestimate the real cost burden of the incoming flood. Over their lifetimes that flood will receive an estimated $9.4 trillion in combined government benefits and services while only paying into the system $3.1 trillion, leaving a deficit to be funded by US taxpayers of a breathtaking $6.3 trillion. All by itself that burden will push the national debt to close to $25 trillion.

And then there’s something called the Earned Income Tax Credit, a refund granted by the IRS to taxpayers falling below a certain income level. On Tuesday, February 3, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen confirmed that those illegals granted amnesty and who filed tax returns while working here will be able to file for refunds of the EITC for the past three years. It amounts to billions and could be even more but, according to Koskinen, the law is unclear about just how far back the IRS is able to go in adding up those refunds, so the agency is limiting those refunds for the last three years, “just to be safe.” The IRS’ inspector general said that the agency paid out $4.2 billion to illegals just in the year 2010.

 

Corruption of the law extends even to those who don’t need a welfare check. Five different whistleblowers from the Department of Homeland Security related details to ABC News about how the “wealthy immigrant visa program” called EB-5 has been consistently and deliberately subverted to allow criminals, spies and terrorists access to permanent residency in the US without going through regular channels.

 

The EB-5 program, first begun in 1990 as a way to invite wealthy foreigners to invest in the United States and then receive permanent resident status, has been used for years by politicians to reward themselves and their friends. Those rewards included political donations, jobs for friends, skimming off outrageous fees to run the program, and visas for undesirables who wouldn’t otherwise be allowed on American soil.

 

Senate Minority Leader provided a text-book case of how the USCIS was manipulated into granting approval to foreign criminals, all in the name of jobs for Las Vegans. Two dozen wealthy Asian foreigners wanting to obtain permanent residency in the US by “investing” in the renovation of the old Sahara Casino had had their I-526 (Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur) applications turned down flat by the USCIS in December, 2012. The agency stated that, based upon its investigation of the project and the “wealthy foreigners”’ backgrounds, “there is no appeal or reconsideration of this decision.”

 

Enter Harry Reid. He called USCIS Legislative Affairs official Mike Rodriguez about the “irrevocable” decision and when Rodriguez informed the Senator that there was nothing he could do about the decision, a shouting match between Reid and Rodriguez ensued. So outraged was Rodriguez over the Senator’s insistence that the decision be reversed that he complained to his bosses at Homeland Security:

 

This one is going to be a major headache for us all because Senator Reid’s office/staff is pushing hard … I just had a long yelling match on the phone….

 

Allegedly the new foreign capital that Reid was counting on would generate thousands of jobs in Las Vegas. The “official” version came from Michael Vannozzi who at the time was one of Reid’s top aides:

 

As you can imagine, this project is pretty important to Southern Nevada. It will probably be the only “new” property opening up on the Strip for some time, and if their $300 million senior lending facility from JP Morgan Chase expires because these [I-526] visas are processed expeditiously, it will be a huge setback for the project and the 8,600 jobs associated with it.

 

Missing from Reid’s official explanation of the importance of the project was the more than $127,000 the two main companies involved in the renovation were planning to make to various Democrat causes in the state.

 

Another impact of Obamnesty is the culture change as aliens swarm into the country. Prior to 1965, immigration policy limited immigration based on a “national origins” formula for people outside Western Europe. The civil rights movement, however, changed that formula, replacing ethnic quotas with “per-country” quotas. In 1970 there were an estimated 9.6 million first-generation immigrants living in the US. By 2010 that number quadrupled to about 38 million. In 1970 60 percent of immigrants came from Europe. By the year 2000, that percentage dropped to 15 percent, the difference largely having been made up by immigration from Latin America. In 1900 (when the US population was 76 million), there were an estimated 500,000 Hispanics living here. The Census Bureau predicts that by 2050, one-quarter of Americans will be of Hispanic descent.

 

Some of those coming to America celebrate Islam, and some of those are intent in replacing the Constitution with Shariah law. Writing in The New American, Walter Williams asked if the West will be able to defend itself against this rising tide:

 

Several European countries have what are called “no-go zones.” No-go zones function as microstates governed by Shariah. The host countries’ authorities have lost control over these areas. In some cases, they are unable to provide even police, firefighting and ambulance services.

 

These zones are essentially sovereign states inside those countries and there are pressures to expand them to virtually take over those sovereign countries. Explains Williams:

In France, no-go zones are officially called Zones Urbaines Sensibles, or Sensitive Urban Zones. According to some reports, there is hardly a city in France that does not have at least one ZUS. There are estimated to be more than 750 such zones in France…

The Gatestone Institute reports that an Islamist group called Muslims Against Crusades has launched an ambitious campaign to turn 12 British cities into independent Islamic states, including Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester and what the group calls “Londonistan.” The so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Shariah and operate entirely outside British jurisprudence.

 

Are there “no-go” zones in the US? Not yet, but they’re inevitable, says Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch:

 

They’re coming as the Muslim population grows. We already see areas such as Dearborn, Michigan: it isn’t a no-go zone – police don’t fear to enter there and non-Muslins aren’t menaced for non-adherence to Shariah norms – but police did their bidding of the Muslim community a couple of years ago and arrested some Christian missionaries solely for the crime of preaching [Christ] to Muslims. [That’s a] Shariah crime, not a crime according to any U.S. law.

There’s another cost to Obamnesty: national sovereignty. Plans for the (NAU) have been well under way for years and as borders are erased between Canada, Mexico and the US, the NAU – described as the for North America – can see the day when it will be an accomplished fact. It’s been part of the elites’ plan for American since at least 1971 when David Rockefeller founded the Trilateral Commission. Some don’t remember that it was designed to “foster closer cooperation among North America, Western Europe, and Japan.” As Japanese influence has faded the third leg of the stool is now referred to simply as Asia.

 

Obamnesty helps accomplish a goal set out by insiders decades ago and first revealed publicly by G. Edward Griffin, author of the expose of the Federal Reserve, called The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. In 1982 Griffin interviewed Norman Dodd, director of research for the Reese Committee that was tasked in the 1950s to investigate the influence of huge private foundations like those of Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie. Dodd called on Rowan Gaither, the head of the Ford Foundation and learned of the plan. Gaither told Dodd:

 

Mr. Dodd, we are here to operate in response to directives [emanating from the White House], the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so as to alter life in the United States so that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union…

 

[Our task is to] covertly lower the standard of living, the whole social structure, of America so that it can be merged with all other nations.

 

Obamnesty, then, is the perfect tool for criminals inside an out-of-control executive, along with a compliant legislative, to complete the transformation of the US into the world’s most expensive and dependent socialist welfare state. Once that transformation is complete, it will be but a simple step to a one-world welfare state.

 

Opt In Image
Soak Up More Light from the Right
with a free copy of Bob's most popular eBook!

Sign up to to receive Bob's explosive articles in your inbox every week, and as a thank you we'll send a copy of his most popular eBook - completely free of charge!

How can you help stop the Democrat's latest gun grab? How is the Federal Reserve deceiving America today? What is the latest Obama administration scandal coverup? Sign up for the Light from the Right email newsletter and help stop the progressives' takeover of America!