The top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts is threatening arrests for those who obstruct Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, calling recent interference in her state “disturbing.”
The warning from Leah Foley, the U.S. attorney for the District of Massachusetts, comes days after a tense video emerged of a crowd reacting to an ICE operation in Worcester.
“The interference with ICE operations around Massachusetts has been disturbing, to say the least. This conduct poses significant public and officer safety risks. It is conduct that should be vilified rather than glorified,” Foley said in a statement.
“I will not stand idly by if any public official, public safety officer, organization or private citizen acts in a manner that criminally obstructs or impedes ICE operations. The United States Attorney’s Office, along with our federal partners, will investigate any violations of federal law and pursue charges that are warranted by such activity,” she added.
A woman was seen being taken into custody in Worcester, Massachusetts, on May 8. (@iwontstealthemooniswear_ via Storyful)
Footage captured last week showed the ICE arrest in Worcester being disrupted by a crowd of about 25 people in what police said was a “chaotic incident.”
“District Councilor for the City of Worcester [Etel] Haxhiaj pulled a political stunt and incited chaos by trying to obstruct law enforcement. ICE officers and local police regained control of the situation and ICE arrested Ferreira de Oliveira,” said Tricia McLaughlin, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assistant secretary. “The previous administration’s open border policies allowed this criminal to illegally enter our country in August of 2022. Thanks to President Trump and Secretary Noem this criminal is off our streets.”
A crowd of people gathers around an SUV in Worcester, Massachusetts, during an ICE operation on May 8. (@iwontstealthemooniswear_ via Storyful)
DHS went on to describe Oliveira as a “violent criminal alien.” The agency said she was arrested by local police for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and assault and battery on a pregnant woman.
The video showed a group of residents chanting “Don’t take the mother!” and “No warrant!” after a woman was led into an SUV by uniformed ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. Before the vehicle can pull away, other women are seen placing their hands on the front hood of an SUV and screaming in protest.
At one point, a Customs and Border Protection agent and a female bystander start shoving each other as he tries to move her away from the SUV in Worcester, Massachusetts, on May 8 during an ICE operation. (@iwontstealthemooniswear_ via Storyful)
At one point, a CBP agent and a bystander started shoving each other as he tried to move her away from the SUV. The vehicle eventually left the area after the Worcester Police Department arrived and declared the scene an unlawful assembly, threatening arrests.
Fox News Digital’s Greg Wehner and Madeleine Rivera contributed to this report.
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey on Tuesday declared a state of emergency in the liberal state over a surge of migrants that she says has left social services overwhelmed, and she called for more funding and help from the federal government.
Healey, a Democrat, announced that a state of emergency exists “due to rapid and unabating increases in the number of families with children and pregnant people — many of them newly arriving migrants and refugees — living within the state but without the means to secure safe shelter in our communities.”
The state said there are nearly 5,600 families or more than 20,000 people in the state shelter system. Healey said there are numerous contributing factors, including “federal policies on immigration and work authorization” as well as a lack of affordable housing and the end of COVID-era programs.
Venezuelan migrants gather at the Vineyard Haven ferry terminal on Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts on Sept. 16, 2022. The group was moved to Joint Base Cape Cod in Buzzards Bay. (Boston Globe)
Massachusetts is the latest liberal jurisdiction to call for help from the federal government due to a surge of migrants, despite not being anywhere near the besieged southern border. New York City, Chicago and the state of New York have all made emergency declarations this year and called for help in response to a migrant wave.
While the numbers have been only a small percentage of the hundreds of thousands of migrants that hit the border each month, those areas have declared themselves overwhelmed and at capacity as migrants arrive. Healey said that in July there were 100 families a day seeking emergency shelter while the numbers leaving shelter has declined by two-thirds since 2019 — and costs are hitting $45 million a month on programs.
“Many of these families are migrants to Massachusetts, drawn here because we are and proudly have been a beacon to those in need,” she wrote in a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
She also blamed “a confusing tangle of immigration laws, an inability for migrants to obtain work authorization from the federal government, an increase in the number of people coming to Massachusetts, and the lack of an affordable housing supply in our state.”
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey delivers her inaugural address moments after being sworn into office during inauguration ceremonies, Jan. 5, 2023, in Boston. (AP Photo/Steven Senne, File)
Healey called for Mayorkas to press Congress and use executive action to remove barriers for work permits for migrants, “address our outdated and punitive immigration laws” and to provide additional financial assistance to the state.
Mayorkas has echoed many of these calls himself, with the administration as a whole repeatedly calling on Congress to provide additional funding as requested at the border. The administration has urged passage of an immigration reform bill that was introduced on President Biden’s first day in office. But such calls for funding and immigration reform have met with opposition from Republicans and others. Republicans have balked at the inclusion of a mass amnesty for millions of illegal migrants included in the 2021 proposal. Instead, they want to see asylum loopholes closed and more border security, with House Republicans introducing and passing sweeping legislation earlier this year.
Meanwhile, Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., said last week she was “livid” that New York City was receiving federal funding to deal with migrants instead of states at the border.
“What we’re experiencing here in Arizona is matched only by what folks are experiencing in southern Texas,” Sinema said. “Those are the two communities that are experiencing this crisis. The rest of the country is experiencing some elements of it, but we are experiencing the brunt.”
Adam Shaw is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital, primarily covering immigration and border security.
By now, most Americans have heard of Daniel Penny, the Marine Corps veteran being charged by Manhattan’s Democrat district attorney for defending his fellow citizens from an erratic Jordan Neely on the New York City subway. There’s also a good chance they’ve heard of Daniel Perry, the Army sergeant recently convicted in Austin, Texas, for protecting himself from an armed Black Lives Matter demonstrator.
On their own merits, both cases represent a seemingly growing trend of Democrat prosecutors allowing violent criminals to walk free while punishing law-abiding Americans for defending themselves from horrendous acts of violence. Case in point: Kevin Mackie, an Acton, Massachusetts, resident charged for allegedly protecting himself from a violent, anti-Republican attacker.
What Happened
On July 8, 2022, Mackie was among several individuals to participate in a demonstration outside of Acton’s Discovery Museum. The purported purpose of the gathering was to protest the facility’s role in giving Covid shots to children.
In a March 2022 “update,” Museum CEO Neil Gordon announced the organization had partnered with the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services to “host six days of public COVID-19 vaccination clinics for kids ages 5 to 11.” According to Gordon, “[m]ore than 650 vaccine doses were administered,” with each jabbed child receiving “two free Museum admission passes as a sweetener.” Notably, the museum requires individuals seeking employment with the organization to show “proof of full COVID-19 vaccination.”
“We think that it’s just wrong for a museum to exchange services for vaccinations,” protestor Michelle Efendi told The Federalist. In addition to founding the Neighborhood Admins Resilience Network — a coalition of Facebook Groups supporting community preparedness and response — Efendi is a community organizer with experience in emergency management. It’s worth mentioning that Efendi does not describe herself as a Republican and has previously campaigned for Democrat presidential candidates such as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.
Upon arriving at the Discovery Museum, Efendi, Mackie, and their fellow demonstrators were confronted by several individuals — at least one of whom was a Discovery Museum faculty member — who wanted them to leave the area. Shortly after arriving, the protestors were confronted by local resident Frederick Smith, who, as documented in footage obtained by The Federalist, appears to assault Mackie and rip apart his protest sign. Mackie allegedly hit Smith with his megaphone “four times” in response.
Following this initial contact, videos reviewed by The Federalist show Smith pushing Mackie toward the ground into some nearby shrubs. After regaining his balance, Smith is documented grabbing the sign strapped over the front of Efendi’s shoulders, at which point Mackie discharged pepper spray into Smith’s face. Mackie sprayed Smith in the face again after the latter latched on to Efendi’s wrist and refused to let go.
Upon releasing Efendi, Smith proceeded towards Mackie’s broken sign, pulled out the sign’s four-foot-long PVC pipe, and used it to hit Mackie. Smith also swung at Efendi — barely missing her face — and another protestor before finally walking away. In pain from the pepper spray, Smith called 911 and was taken into police custody.
“I’ve never seen … or experienced anything like [that],” Efendi said. “It was actually really scary what he did.”
A deeper dive into Smith’s background reveals a history of animosity towards people with conservative viewpoints. Hours after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, for example, Smith claimed on Facebook there “are no good [R]epublicans” and that “[w]e should not attempt to ‘bridge’ any division [because Republicans] are a virus that this country needs to expel.”
“We will never convince [Republicans] that they are better served by progressive policies — they are wholly irredeemable,” Smith wrote. Several days later, on Jan. 10, Smith equated the GOP to “Nazis” while celebrating Amazon Web Services’ decision to remove Parler —a free speech social media platform predominately used by conservatives — from its web hosting service.
Other posts by Smith suggest he was a strict adherent of the federal government’s Covid-era policies and recommendations.
The Charges and Ongoing Litigation
After reviewing the available evidence and conducting interviews with various witnesses, the Acton Police Department requested Mackie be charged with trespassing, assault and battery, and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The department additionally recommended Efendi and two other protestors be charged with trespassing.
A complaint was also sought against Smith on numerous counts, including assault and battery, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and disorderly conduct.
While the trespassing charges considered for Efendi and the two other demonstrators were ultimately not pursued, Mackie is still facing prosecution from the office of Marian Ryan, the Democratic district attorney of Middlesex County. If convicted on the assault and battery charge alone, Mackie could face up to 10 years in state prison. Meanwhile, Smith cut a deal with Marian’s office to have all his charges dropped in exchange for several months of pretrial probation and participation in anger management classes. The judge presiding over the case approved the deal last February.
“When it comes to dissent or any kind of protesting that’s not for leftist causes, they will arrest you, and they will prosecute you no matter what,” Mackie’s lawyer, Ilya Feoktistov, told The Federalist. “There is a major … double standard of criminal justice when it comes to protesting in Massachusetts. If you protest for the wrong cause … there will be a case manufactured against you.”
While Feoktistov criticized all the charges against Mackie, he specifically noted how the trespassing charge falls flat, given that the location of the protest was on public grounds.
“There’s an easement that was signed in 2016 by the museum in [Acton] that allows the town to use the sidewalk outside their building,” Feoktistov said. A copy of the easement provided to The Federalist indicates that this is true.
Legal Shenanigans
In their attempt to prosecute Mackie, Ryan’s prosecutorial team has purportedly engaged in several legal shenanigans. Feoktistov claims Ryan’s office violated the pretrial conference report, which includes, for example, a list of witnesses both parties agree to ahead of trial. This is done to allow both parties time to prepare for cross-examination. Ryan’s office allegedly violated the pretrial agreement by “calling an additional witness to testify” after “consistently represent[ing] to the Court and Mr. Mackie that the Commonwealth’s only evidence at trial would be testimony from the cross-complaint defendant, who would be exercising his Fifth Amendment right not to testify.”
“The Commonwealth did not serve any witness list on Mr. Mackie. On January 23, 2023, however, the Commonwealth informed Mr. Mackie’s attorney that an eyewitness who had originally declined to testify for the Commonwealth will be testifying after all,” an emergency motion to continue trial filed by Mackie’s attorneys reads. “As a result, Attorney Feoktistov has not had sufficient time to investigate and prepare Mr. Mackie’s case to go forward on January 26, 2023.”
In a memo filed in opposition to Feoktistov’s motion to dismiss the charges against Mackie, Ryan’s office attempted to make it appear as if Mackie was the aggressor in the situation and not Smith. In their memo, the prosecutors claim Mackie was the one who “escalated the altercation by discharging his pepper spray directly into Mr. Smith’s face” and that the “level of aggression between [the] two parties differs drastically, which renders the claim that they are similarly situated Defendants invalid.”
Feoktistov’s motion to dismiss was denied seemingly without reason by the Concord District Court last month.
Ryan’s History of Prosecutorial Misconduct
Mackie’s case is hardly the only one where Ryan’s legal team has seemingly engaged in unethical behavior. In fact, the Middlesex DA’s office has a documented history of withholding exculpatory evidence in several notable cases.
The first of such instances involved Aisling Brady McCarthy, a nanny accused in 2013 of murdering the 1-year-old for whom she provided care. According to The Boston Globe, McCarthy was charged by Ryan’s office after Alice Newton, a prosecution medical expert, “concluded … the 1-year-old had suffered injuries, including severe bleeding in the back of the eyes, which indicated abusive head trauma, also known as shaken baby syndrome.” This resulted in McCarthy being placed in jail without bail.
In August 2013, Ryan’s office consulted with eye specialist Dr. Alex Levin on whether injuries to the baby’s eyes indicated some form of abuse. According to the Globe, Levin was “hesitant” to conclude the baby was abused, telling prosecutors he “found less severe retinal hemorrhaging, and repeatedly raised the possibility that the baby’s injuries might have been caused by something other than abuse.” Despite prosecutors’ obligation to share such information with McCarthy’s legal team, Ryan’s office sat on it for over a year, even after defense attorneys, “who learned of Levin’s work by happenstance, asked for it repeatedly.”
It wasn’t until the judge presiding over the case ordered Ryan’s office in January 2015 to turn over notes taken during their conversations with Levin was the information then disclosed to the defense. McCarthy, who had been in jail for over two years, had her sentence reduced and was released in May that same year. Charges were ultimately dropped on August 31, 2015.
A similar instance occurred in the case of Geoffrey Wilson, a father charged by Ryan’s office with shaking his infant son to death. While initially ruled a homicide, the case’s medical examiner reportedly told prosecutor Katharine Folger in a September 2013 email that he “wanted to change his homicide finding.” While the examiner would not officially do so until August 2014, he claimed Ryan’s office “attempted to pressure him into sticking with his original homicide finding.” The charges were eventually dropped after it was disclosed the baby died from natural causes.
It’s worth mentioning that Ryan’s office has been criticized by the U.S. Supreme Court for its reckless prosecutions, specifically by Justice Samuel Alito in the court’s 2016 Caetano v. Massachusetts decision.
Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
The Massachusetts State House in Boston, Massachusetts. | Wikipedia/Ajay Suresh licensed under CC BY 2.0
Massachusetts Republican Gov. Charlie Baker has signed into law a measure establishing abortion and “gender-affirming care” as constitutional rights, a move pro-life activists contend will turn the state into an “abortion sanctuary.”
Baker approved Bill H.4930, “an Act expanding protections for reproductive rights,” Friday. The bill’s approval follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 24 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, which reversed the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
The bill passed in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives on June 29. The House voted 136-17 to advance the legislation, with 119 Democrats, 16 Republicans and an independent supporting it, while six Democrats and 11 Republicans voted in opposition to the bill. The Senate approved H.4930 in a unanimous vote of 40-0 on July 25.
“Access to reproductive health care services and gender-affirming health care services is recognized and declared to be a right secured by the constitution or laws of the commonwealth,” the bill declares. “Interference with this right, whether or not under the color of law, is against the public policy of the commonwealth.”
The social conservative advocacy group Massachusetts Family Institute claims the legislation ensures the state will protect “abortionists who perform abortions out-of-state, even if they violate other states’ laws.” The group contends the bill will lower or eliminate “safety requirements for pharmacies to dispense abortion pills” and “force[s] state universities to provide the abortion pill to students.”
The group stresses that the bill will also force insurance companies to cover abortion “even if they have religious objections” and prohibits insurance companies “from charging deductibles or copays for abortions but allows them to do so for all other pregnancy-related services.”
“[The bill allows] late-term abortions when a doctor deems a baby ‘incompatible with sustained life’ outside of the womb, which decision is not subject to review by any medical board,” the group stated in a statement.
“This is also an ‘intersectional’ bill, as its legal protections for abortionists extend to organizations who distribute puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, even in states where they have been criminalized for use on children. You might not have realized that Planned Parenthood was also in the transgender hormone business, but they are… aggressively so.”
Baker signed an executive order on the day of the Dobbs decision proclaiming that the state government agencies may not assist other states seeking to impose civil or criminal liability against anyone who performs an abortion in Massachusetts. The governor cited concerns that other states would “impose civil or criminal liability or professional sanctions on health care professionals who provide and persons who seek and obtain reproductive health care services in the Commonwealth as permitted by the laws of the Commonwealth.” He maintained that “health care professionals lawfully providing and persons lawfully seeking and obtaining reproductive health services in the Commonwealth should be protected from legal liability premised on and professional sanctions issued under the laws of other States.”
“Massachusetts remains steadfast in its commitment to protect access to reproductive health care services, especially in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade,” Baker said in a statement.
“The Court’s decision has major consequences for women across the country who live in states with limited access to these services, and our administration took quick action in the hours following that decision by issuing an executive order to protect access here in the Commonwealth,” he added. “This new legislation signed today builds on that action by protecting patients and providers from legal interference from more restrictive laws in other states.”
H.4930 contains language stating that “no person shall be subject to discipline by the board, including the revocation, suspension or cancellation of the certificate of registration or reprimand, censure or monetary fine, for providing or assisting in the provision of reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services.”
The enactment of H.4930 occurred in the aftermath of failed efforts to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act in U.S. Congress. The bill would codify the right to abortion into federal law and limit the ability of states to implement pro-life laws. The Women’s Health Protection Act passed the Democrat-controlled House multiple times, most recently on July 15, three weeks after the Dobbs decision. However, the bill failed to gain traction in the evenly divided U.S. Senate, where most legislation requires 60 votes to pass. On May 11, 51 of 100 senators voted against invoking cloture, a procedural step that would enable debate to begin on the Women’s Health Protection Act. The Senate previously rejected the Women’s Health Protection Act in a 48-46 vote on Feb. 28.
Even before Baker signed Bill H.4930 into law, Massachusetts had some of the most permissive abortion laws in the U.S. In late 2020, the ROE Act became law over Baker’s veto. The law codifies the right to an abortion into state law, allows abortions to take place after 24 weeks gestation in the case of a fetal anomaly and permits minors between the ages of 16 and 17 to obtain an abortion without parental consent. The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has identified Massachusetts as one of 16 states with laws protecting the right to abortion.
Massachusetts’ establishment of a right to “gender-affirming health care” comes after a handful of states have passed laws restricting the ability of minors to obtain puberty blockers and gender transition surgeries. Alabama, Arizona and Arkansas have implemented such laws while the head of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Commissioner Jaime Masters has classified gender transition surgeries for minors as child abuse. The state’s Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an advisory opinion saying the same.
A student stands in the entranceway of a building at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 16, 2012. | (Photo: Reuters/Jessica Rinaldi)
The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, which is home to Harvard University, has officially recognized polyamory, making it the second city in the state to do so.
Last week, the Cambridge City Council approved an ordinance amending the city’s existing statute so that domestic partnerships are not limited to only two people. The city of Sommerville, Massachusetts, the community just north of Cambridge, implemented a similar change last summer.
A domestic partnership in the city that is home to Harvard University is now defined as “the entity formed by two or more persons” who are not related and “consider themselves to be a family.” They must file a registration stating that they are “in a relationship of mutual support, caring and commitment and intend to remain in such a relationship.” The revised policy removes the requirement that everyone in the partnership must live together and also scraps a section that makes domestic partners submit proof of their familial relationship to the city.
“Polygamy was foreseeable because the arguments in support of same-sex marriage always had broader implications,” said Joseph Backholm, a senior fellow at the Christian conservative activist organization Family Research Council, wrote in an email to The Christian Post Thursday.
“Those fighting to redefine marriage refused to discuss those implications because they were more concerned with getting what they wanted. Those who were concerned about the long-term implications of same-sex ‘marriage’ were called bigots and fear-mongers. Now, it turns out, they were simply correct.”
Tweeting on the Cambridge policy change last week, Andrew Walker, a professor of ethics at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, mused sarcastically that the polyamory ordinance was “no biggie though, because the revolution is happening with great amounts of winsomeness and $1,400 checks,”referring to the recently-dispersed stimulus funds from the federal government.
The recently formed Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition (PLAC), which gave input concerning the change in Cambridge, said in a statement that they hoped that it “will be a wave of legal recognition for polyamorous families and relationships in 2021.”
Among those in the new coalition who praised the move were members of the American Psychological Association’s Committee on Consensual Non-Monogamy.
As CP reported in July 2019, no date was given as to when this particular APA division was formed. But a Facebook page for the task force is dated April 2018. The work of this APA task force expressly aims to reduce “stigma” on practitioners of polyamory.
Other advocates backing the change likened the embrace of polyamory to other kinds of families.
“Non-nuclear families — such as single parents supported by relatives, step-families, open adoption families, multi-generational families, multi-parent families, and polyamorous families — have changed the landscape of American society, and yet, many of these diverse family structures are not protected or recognized by the law,” Alexander Chen of the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic said in a statement.
The policy change comes on the heels of other recent developments on family law. Last month, a California judge permitted all three members of a gay male “throuple”to be listed as the parents on two children’s birth certificates.
“It was really important to be recognized as the family that we are, and thankfully we live in California, which is a state that, after some teeth pulling and fighting, actually did then allow us to do that, so that was amazing,” one of the men said in an interview with an Australian talk show.
Pictures don’t lie but AOC does. She tried to portray the Straight Pride Parade as a bunch of white supremacists. But, if you look at the pictures of the march, you will see a lot of Black white supremacists. Either that or AOC just hates Blacks. Also, there were 12 speakers and five of them were black. Three of them Black women. So I guess AOC can’t stand strong women of color.
If gays can be proud to be gay, why can’t straight people be proud of being straight?
In response, Michael Leary — president of the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association — rebuked Pressley: “Your actions in support of these individuals serves only to encourage criminal and disruptive behaviors such as those suffered by my members this weekend.” He added that his officers “were screamed at, abused and fought by these so-called peaceful protesters.”
The Washington Examiner reported that 36 activists were arrested at the Boston parade, and nine of them were charged “with assault and battery on a police officer. Other charges included resisting arrest, disorderly conduct and assault by means of a dangerous weapon.”
“Four officers sustained non-life-threatening injuries as they attempted to prevent the antifa-fueled crowd of about 1,000 counter-protesters from mixing it up with an estimated 200 parade participants,” the Washington Times noted. “It was unclear how many of those arrested were affiliated with antifa, but photos posted online showed a black-clad antifa activist being carried off by police. Antifa protesters attempting to block a road scuffled with officers, as shown on video.”
A judge on Tuesday upheld many of the charges against the arrested protesters:
Assaulting someone over their hat is a crime, but bragging and seeking media attention for doing it while you’re in the country illegally seems particularly unwise.
Rosiane Santos was recently arrested for after assaulting a Trump supporter who was wearing a “MAGA” hat inside a Mexican restaurant in Falmouth, Massachusetts. Even employees of the restaurant confirmed that Bryton Turner had simply ordered food before he was accosted by Santos.
“Santos started yelling at him because of his hat, which bears the theme that President Donald Trump campaigned on,” Boston news station WFXT explained. “The woman is seen walking behind him and hitting his hat off his head.”
Even after being arrested, Santos claimed that simply being an immigrant allowed her to attack Turner.
“(B)eing discriminated for so many times in my life, I just had to stand up for myself,” she said in a phone interview with WFXT. “He’s not a victim. I am the victim. I have been bullied, OK?”
Going after someone because of a campaign hat and then drawing attention to herself on the news wasn’t a very wise choice. It turns out that Santos is from Brazil, and now the U.S. government says she was living in the United States illegally.
“The woman who was charged with confronting a man wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat inside a Falmouth Mexican restaurant is now in ICE custody,” WBZ-TV reported on Tuesday.
Her attention-seeking stunt definitely worked, but it will likely get her a one-way ticket out of the country.
“Deportation officers with ICE’s Fugitive Operations Team arrested Rosiane Santos, an unlawfully present citizen of Brazil, today near Falmouth, Massachusetts,” ICE spokesman John Mohan told the local CBS News affiliate.
“Santos is currently facing local charges for assault and other offenses. She is presently in ICE custody and has been entered into removal proceedings before the federal immigration courts.”
For his part, Turner told WBZ-TV that the entire incident could have been avoided if the woman had simply respected other people’s right to wear hats or hold opinions she might not agree with.
“It’s just a hat at the end of the day,” he said. “I don’t really understand why people can’t just express themselves anymore, everybody has to get mad.”
The real irony of this story is that Santos just proved Trump and his supporters’ point. The left insists that “undocumented immigrants”are all good people who only want to join the melting pot and have better lives.
Conservatives, of course, have pointed out that there’s a lot more going on. While many immigrants don’t cause problems once they cross the border, a solid number seem to have a mentality of entitlement, making demands while stirring up trouble.
That’s exactly what this woman did on camera while continuing to play the victim. She and others like her wail about “MAGA” hats and angry Trump supporters, but it was her own unhinged behavior and illegal actions that got her arrested.
Benjamin Arie is an independent journalist and writer. He has personally covered everything ranging from local crime to the U.S. president as a reporter in Michigan, before focusing on national politics. Ben frequently travels to Latin America and has spent years living in Mexico. Follow Benjamin on Facebook
“That means that the law [in Massachusetts] protects his right to be in that bathroom – and as the police say, per this new article in the New Boston Post, on ‘October 16th we responded to a call of suspicious activity at the Woburn Target, we identified and spoke with all identified parties, an investigation was initiated, the information currently available to us indicates that there may have been no crime committed,'” Beckwith points out. “Again, [this] article identifies the man in that women’s bathroom as an adult biological male who identifies as a woman.”
It is here that Beckwith says he sees problems.
“First, he’s in there to begin with and who knows what he’s doing,” Beckwith explains. “At a minimum he has terrified this 10-year-old girl – and fortunately she is safe – but now the police can’t really do anything about it. Their hands are tied because of this law [because] it gives him a right to be in there as long as he claims to identify as a woman.”
If the parents had complained to store management – and had management prevented the man from going into the women’s restroom in order to protect the privacy and safety of all its customers, Beckwith says Target would be susceptible for up to a $50,000 fine.
Beckwith adds that if this was his daughter and he tried to stop the man from entering the bathroom, he could go to jail for up to a year,according to the law that’s up for repeal next Tuesday.
“I don’t think it mattered to that 10-year-old girl how that man may or may not have identified,” Beckwith concludes. “She was terrified – and this law allows him to be in there.”
The ACLU and Human Rights Campaign-backed Freedom for All Massachusetts says the law is about inclusivity and preventing discrimination of the transgender community. But Keep MA Safe argues that sexual predators can and will take advantage of the law, putting women and children at risk.
“We haven’t exactly gotten a fair shake when it comes to mainstream media,”says Keep MA Safe spokeswoman Yvette Ollada. “They are now editorializing and making things up as they go, or calling [us] to ‘get the other side.’ But really they just do it as a gesture and don’t even represent anything that our side says.”
Blog posts, press releases, and news clips have been launched from both sides of the debate in their efforts to raise more funds for their respective campaigns.
If the people of Massachusetts care about their state and their nation, then Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai should coast to victory and replace his opponent, Elizabeth Warren, as Senator from the Bay State.
Sadly, Massachusetts is as blue as they come and while Dr. Ayyadurai is a brilliant candidate and would do a wonderful job, he’s got a tough road ahead.
However, Republicans shouldn’t abandon the cause because thus far Ayyadurai is running an excellent campaign and Warren is not the popular figure she once was in her home state. A poll from January had her at just 51% approval and some 46% of voters in Massachusetts were ready for a change.
At Saturday’s “free speech rally”in Boston Dr. Ayyadurai continued his strong campaign by giving a powerful speech and delivering a similar message to the one Democrats say Republicans don’t ever give.
In his comments Ayyadurai called for peace, love, and unity between all people’s, of all “races.” In response to his comments the crowd roared their approval and chanted for “love.” Afterward, Dr. Ayyadurai sarcastically told his Twitter followers that this was the rally the mediawas calling “hate-filled” and “white supremacist.” (Dr. Ayyadurai was born in India but immigrated to America at the age of 7 with his family. As such, he is NOT white, and yet… the conservative ralliers in Boston loved him.)
This was the “hate” filled “Nazi” speech which the Establishment did NOT want you to hear or see. THEY want Race War to divide us.
Here is Dr. Ayyadurai’s speech in Boston:
I want everyone to say with me: LOVE, LOVE, LOVE.
You are my brothers and sisters. We are one people, and we cannot let the power of darkness or Power, Privilege, and Control — destroy the Light. I want to you to see the light and unite now with other Americans or all races and background in order to take on the Establishment.
Be the light. Know the truth. God bless you.
Part of Ayyadurai’s speech was directed at educating the media about the racist roots of the Democrat Party and their current leaders.
If you can lend support to Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai’s campaign for the Senate, please do. He’s not as conservative as we’d like the GOP to be, but he’s as solidly conservative as we could hope for a Massachusetts Republican to be. He’s got a real chance at winning this race, but he needs our help to do it.
He didn’t think about the cameras first, he just did it. It’s nice to have a good news story to report for a change. Someone snapped a pic of this young guy in the mall, helping an old guy who was having some trouble.
Alonzo Johnson stopped and decided to help a frightened elderly man down an escalator in a Massachusetts shopping mall last week. But the 23-year-old could never have predicted that his simple, random act of kindness would win him the praise of thousands of people online. Johnson said he didn’t know anyone was watching him when he asked the 83-year-old man if he needed any help at the Holyoke Mall at Ingleside last Thursday.
We could use 10,000 more like him. It would go a long way to putting aside those petty differences Obama helped magnify over the last 8 years.
Hampshire College of Amherst, Massachusetts, has decided, in the face of the oh-so-scary victory by President-elect Donald Trump, to keep the American flag from flying on its campus, according to USA Today.
Hate-based violence accusations are sky-high, so college officials decided to fly the flag at half-staff. The flag was then burned by (presumably) a student. The community was understandably furious, so the same officials decided to remove the flag so no one became further upset.
The Facebook post by Hampshire College President Johnathan Lash said it all.
“Some months ago, the Hampshire College Board of Trustees adopted a policy of periodically flying the flag at half-staff to mourn deaths from violence around the world,”he wrote on Monday. “Last week, in the current environment of escalating hate-based violence, we made the decision to fly Hampshire’s U.S. flag at half-staff for a time while the community delved deeper into the meaning of the flag and its presence on our campus.”
“This was meant as an expression of grief over the violent deaths being suffered in this country and globally, including the many U.S. service members who have lost their lives,” he explained.
A cynic might speculate that Lash added the bit about the fallen service members to appease the community that was so outraged about the flag’s lowering.
“Our intention was to create the space for meaningful and respectful dialogue across the many perspectives represented in our community,”he wrote. “Unfortunately, our efforts to inclusively convey respect and sorrow have had the opposite effect.”
Only someone who has become completely surrounded by liberalism would be surprised by this consequence. Seriously — what were they thinking?
Here’s what they learned:
“We have heard from many on our campus as well as from neighbors in the region that, by flying the flag at half-staff, we were actually causing hurt, distress and insult,” he wrote. “Our decision has been seen as disrespectful of the traditional expression of national mourning, and has been especially painful to our Hampshire campus colleagues who are veterans or families of veterans.”
After hearing that some community members believed that lowering the flag was a commentary on the election, Lash expressly denied it. However, what Lash claimed removing the flag was all about was pretty telling.
“We hope (taking the flag down) will enable us in the near term to instead focus our efforts on addressing racist, misogynistic, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic and anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and behaviors.”
Across the country states have been passing laws meant to defend the First Amendment from government overreach, and simultaneously liberals and the media have been decrying these protections as “homophobic” and “bigoted.” These same liberals have argued that conservatives are being paranoid and that no protection is needed… Sadly, Massachusetts has just proved every conservative fear accurate.
On October 1st the most draconian “non-discrimination”laws in the nation will go into effect in the Bay State. According to the new guidelines released by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD), even churches must abide by the new, anti-Christian laws.
This effectively means churches must acknowledge transgender ideology or practice their doctrine on human sexuality in secret — putting Christianity in the closet.
The guidance specifically mentions churches as falling under the “public accommodation” restrictions against “discrimination” on the basis of gender identity: “Even a church could be seen as a place of public accommodation if it holds a secular event, such as a spaghetti supper, that is open to the general public,” the MCAD explained.
The restrictions are massive. Any “public accommodation” must allow patrons to use men’s or women’s restrooms — and locker rooms and changing rooms— “consistent with their gender identity.” Such places must also “use names, pronouns, and gender-related terms appropriate to employee’s stated gender identity in communications with employee and with others.”
These are not small tasks for churches, Christian schools, and other organizations which operate on Christian principles.
This is exactly why legislatures and voters in dozens of states have been working so hard to pass the defense of religious liberty laws, and exactly why the liberals in those states have fought so hard to kill them. While the liberals have been telling us that there is no reason to worry, Massachusetts has a very different story to tell us. We cannot trust these liberals who attempt to assuage our feelings with soft words, because they most certainly will be stabbing us in the back the first chance they get…
On Monday and into Tuesday, more than two dozen governors moved to block Syrian refugees from entering their states. (Photo: Kelsey Lucas/Visualsey)
In the aftermath of Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris, governors across the United States are attempting to shut their doors on Syrian refugees looking to find a safe haven in the country. As of Monday evening, more than two dozen governors announced opposition to policies that would permit Syrian refugees to enter their states amid concerns they could have ties to terrorists.
KentuckyGov.-elect Matt Bevin, who will take officeDec. 8, also said he opposes resettlement efforts.
The movement, which was overwhelmingly spearheaded by Republican governors, came after French prosecutors discovered aSyrian passporton one of the suspected Islamic State suicide bombers in Paris. That finding raised concerns that terrorists are embedding with refugees to enter Europe and other nations.
The series of attacks in Paris on Friday night left more than 130 dead and hundreds others injured. French President François Hollande called the attacks an “act of war” and launched airstrikes against ISIS.
President Barack Obama sharply pushed back against the growing number of states attempting to undermine his policies surrounding Syrian refugees, saying Monday at a press conference in Antalya, Turkey, that it would be “shameful” and “not American” to close America’s doors on Syrian refugees.
“When some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution, that’s shameful,”he said. “That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”
In September, Obamavowed to accept10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States next year.
Those issuing executive orders to block refugees pushed back on the president’s narrative while announcing their decision.
“Michigan is a welcoming state, and we are proud of our rich history of immigration,”said Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. “But our first priority is protecting the safety of our residents.”
In a letter addressed to the president, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “Neither you nor any federal official can guarantee that Syrian refugees will not be part of any terroristic activity. As such, opening our door to them irresponsibly exposes our fellow Americans to unacceptable peril.”
While their responses send a clear message to the president, John Malcolm, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said the practical implications blocking refugees are limited.
“Governors can certainly order state agencies to stop doing anything to assist federal authorities with their resettlement efforts, but they cannot stop federal authorities from continuing those efforts, nor can they stop immigrants who are lawfully admitted to this country from moving to and settling in those states,”Malcolm said. “They can, however, ask state law enforcement authorities to keep an eye on the refugees who settle in their states, so long as those authorities do so within the bounds of the Constitution.”
“It’s abhorrent for the federal government not to consult with and consider the interests of the states,”added Jim Carafano, a foreign policy expert at The Heritage Foundation. “Particularly the views of governors, as it impacts the welfare and public safety of their citizens.”
Florida Gov. Rick Scott addressed those concernsin a lettersent to House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. In that letter, dated Nov. 16, Scott wrote:
[I]t is our understanding that the state does not have the authority to prevent the federal government from funding the relocation of these Syrian refugees to Florida even without state support. Therefore, we are asking the United States Congress to take immediate and aggressive action to prevent President Obama and his administration from using any federal tax dollars to fund the relocation of up to 425 Syrian refugees (the total possible number of refugees pending for state relocation support at this time) to Florida, or anywhere in the United States, without an extensive evaluation of the risk these individuals may post to our national security.
In response, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced legislation on Monday afternoon that would suspend issuance of visas to refugees from countries with a high risk of terrorism until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security meets certain standards. Those standards include fingerprinting and screening all refugees, implement a tracking system “to catch attempted overstays,”and enhancing security measures that are already in place.
“The time has come to stop terrorists from walking in our front door. The Boston Marathon bombers were refugees, and numerous refugees from Iraq, including some living in my hometown, have attempted to commit terrorist attacks,”Paul said in a press release.
Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, also called to suspend the refugee program.
“The Syrian refugee program should be suspended until the American people are satisfied that they know exactly who the president is admitting into the country via this program,” Burr said. “There is simply too much at stake, and the security of the American people should be our top priority.”
This article and its accompanying map has been updated to reflect the growing number of governors who do not wish to permit Syrian refugees into their state.
A group of protesters at Amherst College in Massachusetts has released a set of demands that include punishing students who produced a poster celebrating free speech by subjecting them to re-educationfor the sake of “racial and cultural competency.”
In response to ongoing protests at the University of Missouri, which saw an attack on journalists Monday trying to cover the event, some students at Amherst this week put up small posters on campus. The posters read “In memoriam of the true victim of the Missouri protests: Free Speech (1776-2015),” and included a short “eulogy” which reads as follows:
Who is constrained by the invisible barriers of our generation’s safe spaces.
Censored for the open forum of non-conflicting opinions.
Trod upon to build a community of comfort.
And violently persecuted for a safer, less vitriolic world.
Let us honor the life of the first amendment, and the heroes that it protected:
Journalists, Educators, Philosophers, and Free Thinkers everywhere.
The poster never mentions race, and ends with a short quip “If you want to protest this sign, feel free. Because that’s why the First Amendment exists.”
But Amherst activists want to do far more than proest. They want the people responsible for the poster punished, along with those responsible for producing signs which said “All Lives Matter.” A coalition of more than 50 campus groups held a “sit-in” Thursday night, which led to them producing a lengthy list of demands that includes punishing anybody who made the signs:
“President [Biddy] Martin must issue a statement to the Amherst College community at large that states we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the ‘All Lives Matter’ posters, and the ‘Free Speech’ posters,” the list of demands says. “Also let the student body know that it was racially insensitive to the students of color on our college campus and beyond who are victim to racial harassment and death threats; alert them that Student Affairs may require them to go through the Disciplinary Process if a formal complaint is filed, and that they will be required to attend extensive training for racial and cultural competency.”
Let that sink in: A poster celebrating the First Amendment was “racially insensitive” and requires “extensive training for racial and cultural competency.”
Students demanda great deal more as well. They request that Amherst’s honor code be updated to include “reflect a zero-tolerance policy for racial insensitivity and hate speech,”meaning students could be punished and perhaps expelled for racial insensitivity, which apparently includes defending free speech. They also demand that the school suppress its unofficial sports mascot Lord Jeff, whom they say has an “inherent racist nature.”
The demands are endorsed by students from more than 50 Amherst student groups, including the Black Students Union, Amherst United Left, and Amherst Christian Fellowship.
Amherst has been given until Nov. 18 to respond to the student protesters. If the school considers any punishment of faculty, staff, or administrators who support them, they warn it will “result in an escalation of our response.”
While the videos have focused on the Planned Parenthood abortion business, the biotech firm StemExpress, which buys and resells aborted baby body parts from the abortion giant, has filed a lawsuit seeking to block some information the Center for Medical Progress obtained in its three year undercover operation. Just a short time after a judge issued a ruling that the biotech firm StemExpress can’t block the Center for Medical Progress from releasing videos, it put together a preview of its latest installment.
StemExpress is a for-profit biotech supply company that has been partnered with Planned Parenthood clinics across the country to purchase human fetal parts since its founding in 2010. StemExpress’ Medical Director, Dr. Ronald Berman, is an abortion doctor for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte in California.
“Oh yeah, if you have intact cases — which we’ve done a lot — we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,” she says.
“Tell the lab its coming,”she laughs about the intact unborn babies. “You know, open the box and go ‘Oh my God,’”Dyer adds.
The eighth video in the ongoing controversy over Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted fetal body parts shows the CEO of StemExpress, a major buyer of fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood, admitting the company gets “a lot” of intact fetuses, suggesting “another 50 livers a week” would not be enough, and agreeing abortion clinics should profit from the sale.
In the video, actors posing as another human biologics company meet with StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer, plus Vice President of Corporate Development and Legal Affairs Kevin Cooksy, and Procurement Manager Megan Barr. StemExpress and the actors are discussing a potential partnership to supply extra fetal body parts to each other.
“So many physicians are like, ‘Oh I can totally procure tissue,’ and they can’t,”expresses Dyer, seeming to indicate that abortion doctors must do the procedure in a special way to obtain useable fetal parts. Federal law requires that no alteration in the timing or method of abortion be done for the purposes of fetal tissue collection (42 U.S.C. 289g-1).
“What about intact specimens?”asks one of the actors. “Oh yeah, I mean if you have intact cases, which we’ve done a lot, we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,”replies Dyer. “Case” is the clinical term for an abortion procedure. An “intact case” refers to an intact abortion with a whole fetus. “The entire case?” asks an actor. “Yeah, yeah,” says Dyer. “The procurement for us, I mean it can go really sideways, depending on the facility, and then our samples are destroyed,”she explains past botched fetal dissections, “so we started bringing them back even to manage it from a procurement expert standpoint.”
Feticidal chemicals like digoxin cannot be used to kill the fetus in a tissue procurement case, so a fetus delivered intact for organ harvesting is likely to be a born-alive infant.
“What would make your lab happy?” asks one of the actors. “Another 50 livers a week,”says Dyer. “We’re working with almost like triple digit number clinics,”Dyer explains, “and we still need more.”She later notes, “Planned Parenthood has volume, because they are a volume institution.”
Dyer also agrees that payments to abortion clinics for fetal body parts should be financially beneficial to them.
“Do you feel like there are clinics out there that have been burned, that feel like they’re doing all this work for research and it hasn’t been profitable for them?”she asks. “I haven’t seen that.” StemExpress publishes a flyer for Planned Parenthood clinics that promises “Financial Profits” and “fiscal rewards” for clinics that supply aborted fetal tissue. It is endorsed by Planned Parenthood Mar Monte Chief Medical Officer Dr. Dorothy Furgerson.
The sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2). The Sacramento Business Journal reported in June that StemExpress has an annual revenue of $4.5 million.
David Daleiden, the head of CMP, commented on the newest video in a statement to LifeNews.
“StemExpress is the ‘weakest link’ that unravels Planned Parenthood’s baby parts chain–they readily admit the profit-motive that Planned Parenthood and their proxies have in supplying aborted baby parts,” he said. “Congress and law enforcement should immediately seize all fetal tissue files from StemExpress and all communications and contracts with Planned Parenthood. The evidence that Planned Parenthood profits from the sale of aborted baby parts is now overwhelming, and not one more dime of taxpayer money should go to their corrupt and fraudulent criminal enterprise.”
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform wants to know if the Obama administration, via the Department of Health and Human Services, provided any federal grants to Planned Parenthood that ultimately went to pay for the sales of aborted baby body parts and if they were used by Planned Parenthood to “support transactions involving fetal tissue.”
The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all eight:
In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a 35-foot protest-free zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts.
The justices were unanimous in ruling that extending a buffer zone 35 feet from clinic entrances violates the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Chief Justice John Roberts said authorities have less intrusive ways to deal with problems outside the clinics and noted that most of the problems reported by police and the clinics occurred outside the Planned Parenthood facility in Boston, and only on Saturdays when the largest crowds typically gather.
“For a problem shown to arise only once a week in one city at one clinic, creating 35-foot buffer zones at every clinic across the Commonwealth is hardly a narrowly tailored solution,”Roberts said.
While the court was unanimous in the outcome, Roberts joined with the four liberal justices to strike down the buffer zone on narrow grounds. In a separate opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized Roberts’ opinion for carrying forward “this court’s practice of giving abortion-rights advocates a pass when it comes to suppressing the free-speech rights of their opponents.”
The case began when Boston-area grandmother Eleanor McCullen and other abortion opponents sued over the limits on their activities at Planned Parenthood health centers in Boston, Springfield and Worcester. At the latter two sites, the protesters say they have little chance of reaching patients arriving by car because they must stay 35 feet from the entrance to those buildings’ parking lots.
Planned Parenthood provides health exams for women, cancer screenings, tests for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control and abortions at its clinics.
The organization said that the buffer zone has significantly reduced the harassment of patients and clinic employees. Before the 35-foot zone went into effect in 2007, protesters could stand next to the entrances and force patients to squeeze by, Planned Parenthood said.
Before 2007, a floating buffer zone kept protesters from approaching unwilling listeners any closer than 6 feet if they were within 18 feet of the clinic. The floating zone was modeled after a Colorado law that the Supreme Court upheld. That decision was not called into question in Thursday’s ruling.
Clinic officials said they are most concerned about safety because of past incidents of violence. In 1994, a gunman killed two receptionists and wounded five employees and volunteers at a Planned Parenthood facility and another abortion clinic in nearby Brookline. The most recent killing was in 2009, when Dr. George Tiller, who performed abortions, was shot in a church in Wichita, Kansas.
Abortion protesters said that other state and federal laws already protect health center workers and patients, as well as access to clinics.
Mark Rienzi, who represented the protesters at the Supreme Court, said, “The government cannot reserve its public sidewalks for Planned Parenthood, as if their message is the only one women should be allowed to hear. Today’s decision confirms that the First Amendment is for everyone, and that the government cannot silence peaceful speakers. That result is good news for Eleanor McCullen, and it is great news for the women she helps.”
“AND IN THE UNITED STATES WHENEVER A CHRISTIAN EXPRESSES RIGHTEOUS OBJECTIONS TO WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR SOCIETY. The Left claims to fight for “Free Speech” Rights. However, THE ONLY FREE SPEECH THEY FIGHT FOR IS SPEECH THAT PAROTS EVERYTING THEY SAY AND MEAN. That’s TRANNY.” JB
I believe this to be true. But I also contend that this strategy may have dire consequences beyond just the illegal immigrant flood.
Already these illegals are being shipped all over the country to take up residence at military bases – Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, California, and even Massachusetts. And these are the ones that we know about. No doubt the list of states will grow as more and more enter.
With the border wide open, anyone can cross. Now is the perfect time for terrorists to arrive and set up cells across the country.
WSB news in Atlanta claims that at least 300 Somali terrorists from the al-Qaeda affiliate al-Shabaab are already here, but their location is unknown. However, it is a fact that they are here.
As an aside: if a terrorist or group of terrorists crosses the border, will they get hassled or threatened by the drug cartels or traffickers. I wonder how that works. Does an Islamic leader from overseas call a Mexican drug lord and alert him that Mohammed al-Mustafa al-Bakiri al-Mohammed is heading your way and to steer clear or assist his passage? Maybe the Imam from an Islamic mosque in this country puts the word out. Maybe the Muslim Brotherhood, like UPS, loves logistics.
The next logical question to ask is; does the Obama administration know that this must be happening – that with the flood of “innocent children” there will be Islamists, bent on our destruction?
But, you may ask, “They’re only children, what could they do?”
The direct answer is nothing, but let’s not be naïve and assume the adults are being turned away.
So is Obama stupid enough to think that only “innocents” are crossing, or does he just not care?
And now for a little conspiracy fun.
Is Obama purposely allowing terror cells to form in the United States? Could it be that the destruction of capitalism and reformation into a state-controlled society is just not happening fast enough? Are they encouraging domestic strikes as a better/quicker way to facilitate a government takeover?
Is the ultimate goal martial law, temporary government control of everything and everyone? Of course, it would be temporary just long enough for most citizens to get used to the “new normal,” and then some form would become permanent.
Okay, I’ve completely lost my mind, and I’m partly kidding – partly – but just 10 years ago, would you believe we’d have a president who fancies himself a dictator – one who gets away with picking and choosing which laws to follow, or making up his own?
Would you believe that in America, what is currently happening at the border could actually occur?
As Obama continues to push the dictatorial envelope, maybe we should stop discounting anything as being beyond the pale
About The Common Constitutionalist
Brent, aka The Common Constitutionalist, is a Constitutional Conservative, and advocates for first principles, founders original intent and enemy of progressives. As well as publisher of the Common Constitutional blog, he also is a contributing writer for Political Outcast, Godfather Politics, Minute Men News (Liberty Alliance) and Free Republic
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
Across the country states have been 
gender identity in communications with employee and with others.”
This is exactly why legislatures and voters in dozens of states have been working so hard to pass the defense of religious liberty laws, and exactly why the liberals in those states have fought so hard to kill them. While the liberals have been telling us that there is no reason to worry, Massachusetts has a very different story to tell us. We cannot trust these liberals who attempt to assuage our feelings with soft words, because they most certainly will be stabbing us in the back the first chance they get…
In response, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced legislation on Monday afternoon that would suspend issuance of visas to refugees from countries with a high risk of terrorism until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security meets certain standards. Those standards include fingerprinting and screening all refugees, implement a tracking system “to catch attempted overstays,” and enhancing security measures that are already in place.
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.