AG Ensures Illegals Will Vote in Coming Elections; Spate of Violent Immigrant Crimes Ignored

• Obama and crew work to make sure no ID is required to vote

By Keith Johnson

In what is bound to spark the beginning of another epic showdown between the states and the federal government, Attorney General Eric Holder recently announced that he will essentially take an end-run around the Constitution and the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in order to ensure that illegals and other non-citizens are allowed to cast their votes in upcoming elections.

Late last June, SCOTUS struck down a provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) that required more than a dozen states with “a history of racial discrimination” to seek permission from the federal government before making any changes to their voting policies, such as redistricting and voter-ID requirements. Fortunately, SCOTUS ruled that the formula for determining which states must comply was “unconstitutional” since it relied on voter registration and turnout data that is now more than 40-years-old.

After the ruling, Holder appeared before the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the National Urban League (NUL) to condemn the SCOTUS decision and pledge that he and his “colleagues” were “determined to use every tool at [their] disposal to stand against discrimination whenever it is found.”

In separate speeches, Holder called the VRA a “cornerstone of modern civil rights law” and said that states like Texas, whom he charged as having a “history of pervasive voting-related discrimination against racial minorities,” should still be required to go through a “preclearance process” before changing any of its voting laws and practices.

As a means to their nefarious end, Holder and company plan to exploit other provisions of the VRA that were not affected in the SCOTUS ruling. Among those is Section 3, which allows the federal government to intervene in election laws on a case-by-case basis, but only if they can prove that a state or jurisdiction has recently—not historically—engaged in deliberate discrimination practices.

Using Section 3 as a primer, Holder has set his sights first on Texas, capitalizing on a controversial redistricting plan and Voter ID law that opponents say will disenfranchise minorities and dilute their voting power. North Carolina is likely to be targeted next in response to their plans to implement aggressive voter-ID requirements, reduce early voting and eliminate same-day voter registration.

After Holder mapped out his plan before the NUL, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) responded by saying:

“This decision has nothing to do with protecting voting rights and everything to do with advancing a partisan political agenda.”

Although Cornyn may be a dyed-in-the-wool establishment politician with his own partisan agenda, he does have a point. As The Oklahoman recently pointed out:

“Greater racial disparities in current voting participation rates are found in Massachusetts than in many states with a Confederate history. But Massachusetts is a blue state. It gets a free pass.”

Socialist liberals like Holder claim that the VRA is still a necessary tool to combat racial prejudice at the voting booth, despite the fact that things have radically changed since it was enacted in 1965. According to a recent U.S. Census Bureau report, black voters not only outpaced whites by a margin of 2% in 2012, but they also voted in greater numbers in southeastern U.S. jurisdictions that were previously regulated by the VRA.

“Blacks have been voting at higher rates, and the Hispanic and Asian populations are growing rapidly, yielding a more diverse electorate,” said census sociologist Thom File, author of the voting report. “Over the last five presidential elections, the share of voters who were racial or ethnic minorities rose from just over 1 in 6 in 1996 to more than 1 in 4 in 2012.”

Obama and his henchmen are no doubt cognizant of this new reality. They’re not afraid of black voter suppression. What they truly fear are Voter ID requirements that could prevent illegal aliens and other fraudsters from participating in upcoming elections. Interestingly enough, in the last presidential race, Obama lost in every state that requires a photo ID before voting. Is it any wonder why they are fighting so hard against it?

Although it can be argued that Voter ID laws have as many flaws as they do benefits, most patriotic Americans would agree that the federal government should have no say in the matter. As the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution clearly states:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Merlin Miller, the 2012 presidential candidate for the American Third Position Party, is one who certainly believes that the feds have once again overstepped their authority. When asked by this AMERICAN FREE PRESS reporter what his opinion was of the current fight against the states, Miller replied:

“Holder and much of his gang should be removed, as they are clearly betraying their offices and the interests of the legitimate American people. The states should be able to qualify their voters and verify citizenship status as they reasonably see fit. In my opinion, it is an essential to prevent illegals and others, who are not qualified, from voting. State Voter ID laws are certainly much more reasonable and protective of American interests than the many federal requirements and assaults on our own citizen’s rights. Likewise, the Supreme Court is increasingly making decisions which promote socialist government growth and tyranny rather than protecting individual and state sovereignty rights.”

Donate to us

Keith Johnson in an investigative journalist and creator of the Revolt of the Plebs.


Spate of Particularly Violent Immigrant Crimes Ignored

By John Friend

Several recent incidents involving illegal immigrants have many Americans questioning their nation’s immigration policies, in particular the push for amnesty for millions of “undocumented workers” – an Orwellian term for illegal aliens.

Late last week, a 19-year-old illegal Mexican immigrant named Sergio Martinez-Perez violently assaulted and raped a 93-year-old white woman after breaking into her home in Omaha, Nebraska.  Louise Sollowin died of her injuries three days later, leaving her family and residents of Omaha devastated and outraged.

“She loved her family and her family loved her,” the victim’s granddaughter, Teresa Hartzell, told local reporters in Omaha. “She was all about family.”

In Buffalo, New York, Border Patrol agents took an illegal Mexican immigrant into custody after he was arrested by officers of the Buffalo Police Department, and discovered the man had 37 criminal convictions, including “narcotics violations, assault on a federal officer, burglary and robbery,” according to a press release from the United States Customs and Border Patrol. The man is only now being scheduled for deportation to Mexico, leaving many Americans dumbfounded as to why it took so long to finally deport this violent criminal illegally residing in the U.S., especially considering his numerous past criminal convictions.

Last month, Daniel Mendoza, an illegal immigrant living in Tulsa, Oklahoma, was arrested and charged with repeatedly raping a 9-year-old girl he was babysitting.

The recent spate of brutal criminal violence and sexual assault committed by illegal immigrants comes as the Latino-Jewish Congressional Caucus released a statement last week in support of immigration “reform,” which includes a provision that would grant a “path to U.S. citizenship” to the millions of undocumented workers currently illegally residing in the U.S.  The Latino-Jewish Congressional caucus has argued that “a path to citizenship for undocumented workers should underpin immigration reform,” according to it’s statement.

Many Congressional Republicans have remained skeptical of the immigration overhaul legislation, and argue any immigration bill should focus primarily on protecting the border and enforcing existing immigration laws, rather than granting amnesty to illegal aliens.

That hasn’t stopped the Democratic Party, the organized Jewish and Hispanic communities, and liberal activist groups from pushing for amnesty.

In light of the extremely violent criminal acts recently committed by illegal aliens residing in the U.S., it’s time for Americans to reconsider their immigration policies and the elites who have pushed them on this country, says Dr. David Duke, a prominent writer, lecturer, and activist who has written extensively about U.S. immigration policies and the forces behind them.

“The most fundamental duty of a government is to control and regulate its borders. Any government that fails to do so fails its citizens and is responsible for any loss, harm or death to the American people,” Dr. Duke told this reporter.

Dr. Duke went on to say that the elites controlling America have “purposefully failed to enforce our immigration laws,” which has resulted in horrific crimes being committed against innocent Americans, in addition to a destruction of our national sovereignty and working class.

“That constitutes a crime against the American people,” Dr. Duke concluded.

Donate to us

John Friend is a writer who lives in California.