Secretary Jeh Johnson, DAPA, and The Case For Impeachment…

Something is missing amid all of the punditry opinion regarding the recent 5th CCA ruling upholding the injunction against Obama’s implementation of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program (“DAPA”) FULL BACKSTORY HERE.  Something missing which is more serious than the injunction itself.

What is fundamentally missing is several levels of seriousness.

Obama ConstitutionFirst the underlying 26 state lawsuit has never been argued.  When the states went to federal court to sue the White House (executive action) they asked for an immediate injunction blocking implementation.  The states argued two points:

#1) That if DAPA was allowed to move forward with his executive amnesty there would be irreversible harm to the states.  Granting a new legal status to illegal aliens, including work authorization, would be financially harmful and also a bell impossible to un-ring/reverse if the underlying lawsuit was settled in their favor.

#2) If DAPA was allowed to be implemented those who were charged with executing the Executive Order would be violating law and thereby subject to a condition of punitive action against them for refusing to break the law.

Two very distinct issues, both of which Judge Andrew Hanen accepted as factual in his decision to issue the injunction.   He actually did so brilliantly.

It was the “injunction” blocking the administration which was appealed to the 5th CCA the first time.  The White House lost the first appeal, and had two options:  1.) ask the Supreme Court Justice who oversees the circuit to override the decision – that judge is Anton Scalia, they knew they stood no chance.  2.) The DOJ could ask the full CCA to hear their argument, based on “standing”, – that was the route they chose.

The DOJ appealed Hanen’s injunction the second time claiming Hanen held no standing to block their executive action.  The DOJ lost that second appeal yesterday, as the 5th CCA affirmed that Hanen did indeed have authority to issue the injunction.

Here’s where people get lost.  The DOJ can appeal their appellate court loss to the Supreme Court, however they only lost the appeal to remove the injunction – THE UNDERLYING CASE HAS NEVER BEEN HEARD.

The White House today said they would indeed take their appeal of the injunction to the Supreme Court.  That is ridiculous.  It is doubtful the Supreme Court would take up a case twice affirmed by courts of appeal solely on the issue of does a federal judge have standing to block an executive action.

This is really important, because this shows something we have continued to state since the original case began to be argued.

In our opinion the White House never intended to win the underlying case.  The executive action was clearly unconstitutional as it created an entirely new status of personage:  “An Illegal but lawful resident”, complete with employment eligibility.

If President Obama believed he was just using prosecutorial discretion in non-deportation he could do nothing.  He doesn’t deport them, and 5+ million (who qualify under DAPA) stay put without change.

Taking no executive action is the same thing as not deporting; but that’s not what he did – he created an executive action to make those illegal aliens “lawful residents”.  Again, doing nothing is prosecutorial discretion, taking executive action is something further than discretion.

♦ So why would Obama NOT plan to win a case, yet continue its implementation?

Think about this carefully.

Obama knows if he was able to grant the new status, and create the new category of lawful residency and employment status for 5+ million people, it would be a bell impossible to un-ring.  You cannot put that amnesty toothpaste back into the tube.

Obama never planned to win the case; he planned to lose the case but in the interim have carried out the action that is irreversible.  It would be impossible to make 5 million people unlawful once their new lawful status was achieved.   This was/is the goal all along.

It was the “injunction” that immediately became a bigger issue, because the injunction stopped them from carrying out the unconstitutional Executive Action.  Therefore it was the “injunction” that had to be removed if they were to be successful in the original goal.

Ergo the two appeals and now a proclamation they intend to appeal again to SCOTUS.

Image: Barack Obama, Jeh Johnson

DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson was the former legal counsel of the Defense Department and as such he was part of President Obama’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), prior to becoming Secretary of Homeland Security.  Arguably, he was given the cabinet position as a quid-pro-quo for keeping his mouth closed after he told Obama the extended Libyan military engagement was unlawful under the War Powers Act.

Secretary Johnson knows DAPA puts ICE and immigration officials in a precarious position of following an unconstitutional executive action.   This is the second part of the harm outlined in the initial injunction, and included in the Hanen ruling using President Obama’s own words;  a legal argument affirmed by the 5th CCA who upheld Hanen’s injunction twice, once on “merit” the second time on ‘standing”.

With both President Obama and DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson fully aware the construct of DAPA is unconstitutional overreach (they don’t even try to argue the merit), and yet still attempting to unlawfully force immigration officials to implement DAPA, they have crossed a legal threshold and impeachment proceedings are most certainly warranted.

However, that would take a congress willing to put Jeh Johnson into administrative proceedings that draw out the unlawful action and his contribution therein.  Obviously congress is unwilling to do so.

…And that’s the salt in the wound.  It does not go unnoticed that congress has done nothing, nada, zippo, zylch, to block DAPA in any manner method or form.  Why? Because congress is fully aligned with President Obama when it comes to illegal immigation, and as a consequence this congress has abdicated their oversight to one judge in Texas.

One judge in Texas, Andrew Hanen, who single-handily stands against this unconstitutional regime like a flea holding back the flames from a furnace !!

bundy ranch 3.1

This entry was posted in Conspiracy ?, Illegal Aliens, media bias, Mexico, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Secretary Jeh Johnson, DAPA, and The Case For Impeachment…

  1. Bill says:

    Impeachment is too good for that slimy snake, but making a case for it is awesome!

    Liked by 3 people

  2. freepetta says:

    It’s incredible to me, that the trash in the Whitehouse is still there.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. charliewalksonwater says:

    God Bless and protect Judge Andrew Hanen

    Liked by 20 people

  4. ScruffyLeon says:

    Why would anyone other than a crook or a traitor ever trust a politician. Rhetorical question.
    Go Trump, our answer to politics.

    Liked by 6 people

  5. Doodahdaze says:

    Here and there, a handful of actual Americans make a difference. Holding back the transnational progressive hoard that is attacking the good ole U.S.A. until a counter revolution can be launched. Hip, Hip, Hooray! For Judge Hanen. Yee Haw!

    Liked by 10 people

  6. Libertas says:

    Great article, they are in cahoots. The truth goes much deeper than just wanting votes or labor for many including Boehner, Ryan, Pelosi, et al and that truth was standing in the HOR giving the American people orders inappropriately about a month ago. John F Kennedy warned and pledged his alligiance to the United States first; that is no longer the requirement of the rest of these charlatans willing to trample on the Constitution and the laws of the land. The worse enemy is he enemy from within.

    Liked by 6 people

  7. justfactsplz says:

    This is just one more nail in the coffin of our dead beat congress. When they come up for re-election we need to oust them from office, each and every sorry one. They have buried them own selves in the deep doodoo they have spread expecting us to think it smells like roses. There is only a handful of them that might redeem themselves but only a few.

    Liked by 5 people

    • peachteachr says:

      Reading your comment made me think. Where is Sen. Tom Cotton? He appears to have gone dark as of late. I was so excited by his blunt speech. Is he not talking, is the media ignoring him there by snuffing out his flame, or has he been absorbed by Washington, DC?
      On Veteran’s Day I tip my hat to him.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. hocuspocus13 says:

    So far…they will not be getting 5 million new Democrats 👪 👫

    Liked by 1 person

  9. tz says:

    But will the states shoot feds whomare implementing unconstitutional orders?


  10. Justice_099 says:

    Do we think perhaps part of the reasoning for allowing Obama to continue wrecking the country is to anger the people enough to blindly vote Republican? The more damage Obama does, the more people are going to turn out to vote republican. It would seem in their selfish interest to keep letting him do it. It would also seem in their interest to allow Obama to set precedents of unconstitutional power grabs because it would give the Repubs even more power themselves. Uniparty passing the torch and all that.

    I have no doubt that both parties fully, 100% support immigration (or else Jeb wouldn’t have been their golden boy) but I wonder if the above points also play an important part.


  11. emet says:

    I have 28 years in Federal law enforcement, and am fortunate to have been involved in a number of significant cases, and to have worked with many top notch people. But the deterioration of the DHS agencies is both astounding, and pitiful. I told my wife that if Trump wins, I’ll keep going as long as I can contribute, but if he loses I’ll take retirement. There would be no reason to stay. Probably just take in some foster kids, help with church activities, post more on this blog.

    Liked by 9 people

  12. Nanny G says:

    When I look at certain votes in the House and the Senate, like today’s 91-to-3 vote to prevent Obama from closing Gitmo, I think an impeachment might be possible.
    But then I look at how well Obama stonewalls, drags his feet and stalls.
    If needed he gets an assist from Dems in the House.
    It makes me wonder if we have the time to impeach.
    Only, what?, 14 months.
    He can dither and golf at the same time for that long.

    I really appreciated the clarity of expressing those two major issues in the case.
    That moving forward with his executive amnesty there would be irreversible harm to the states I had realized.
    BUT, that if DAPA was allowed to be implemented those who were charged with executing the Executive Order would be violating law, was a new and novel idea to me when it comes to these Executive Orders.
    Wouldn’t the principle apply to Sanctuary City ”laws” as well?

    Liked by 1 person

  13. archer52 says:

    Didn’t I read DOJ filed with Supreme Court? That is four votes for DAPA immediately and Kennedy “I make the laws” the swing. Regardless of the law and the separation of powers.

    Not confident this will turn out well. There is no rule of law in this PC driven country.


  14. flawesttexas says:

    As Sundance mentions in the end…GOP led Congress won’t do anything to Obama over DAPA…because the GOP supports, and, agrees with Obama, on Illegal Alien Amnesty


  15. Janie M. says:

    The below statement from Rodenbush (which I consider a blatant lie) is from the Washington Free Beacon article (linked below). The DHS has had the “worst offenders” in prison and been setting them free on a massive scale since at least 2013 (probably years before that). Prison is a revolving door for them, it’s a catch and release program. Those illegals criminals have been released upon an unsuspecting US citizenry and inflicting death, great bodily harm and mayhem on them! What priority? Ramping up the dem voting roles, not ensuring the safety and welfare of bonafide citizens.

    “The Department of Justice remains committed to taking steps that will resolve the immigration litigation as quickly as possible in order to allow DHS to bring greater accountability to our immigration system by prioritizing the removal of the worst offenders, not people who have long ties to the United States and who are raising American children,” Justice Department spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said Tuesday, according to the New York Times.


    • Nightcrawler says:

      …..raising American children

      This, too, is a canard. If the parent(s) are in this (or any other) country by way of illegal entry, their children, born prior to – or born subsequent to – trespass, have no basis to assert legal citizenship! There is no illegal act by which a legal result can be codified.

      The 14th Amendment is an extension of, an amplification of and an affirmation of the inalienable right to equal status UNDER THE LAW as delineated in the Constitution itself and as pertains to lawful status of citizenship.


  16. Fred Zarguna says:

    “Again, doing nothing is prosecutorial discretion.”

    The rest of your argument is fine, but this statement is FALSE, and it can’t be said often enough that it is FALSE.

    Prosecutorial discretion is the good faith refusal to pursue a particular action which may or may not have merit, but which a prosecutor deems for procedural or evidential reasons The People cannot win. It can ONLY be applied on a case basis. A prosecutor DOES NOT have any discretion to refuse to prosecute a case because he disagrees with the law. A prosecutor DOES NOT have any discretion to refuse to prosecute a broad class of offenders under a law he “partially” agrees with. If prosecutors indeed possessed such “discretion” the entire understanding of “law” would be an entirely capricious exercise of raw power and nothing more.

    The folly of claiming this executive order was “prosecutorial discretion” was long ago abandoned because the administration knows full well that no judge would allow a prosecutor to turn his back on the enforcement of a law involving a broad class of people. The rest of your reasoning obtains: they sought another — perhaps less flimsy — justification, knowing that even were it set aside, there would be no way to reverse its consequences.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. davidfarrar says:

    There may, indeed, be no way to remove five million illegal aliens from this country, but this point would be irrelevant if “amnesty” was granted in return to supporting measures that would end birthright citizenship for the offspring born here of illegal aliens. The first goal of any responsible immigration reform is to institute changes in our immigration laws that would prevent yet another massive buildup of illegal aliens crossing our borders ten years down the road.

    Mr. Trumps is correct when he states removing the incentive of birthright citizenship will be a major step in that direction, perhaps the biggest step.


    • Janie M. says:

      This should also put a halt to the Chinese maternity tourists. The pregnant women fly into our country a few months before their due date and live in houses set up for this specific mission until delivery of their babies. The child is born here and American citizenship is conferred upon them. Unlike the illegals, mother and baby then return to China. I suspect this is a larger outrageous scam than we realize.


  18. John Galt says:

    Hanen knocked Obozo out with an opening left jab. Hanen has lots more in reserve.


  19. if it’s an impeachable offense then why can’t the people at least make a public demand? just cuz congress won’t go along with it now — is that any reason we don’t demand it?

    we blame congress for not standing up to Obama even if they know they will lose by a majority, we want them at least to make a stand.

    i’m not familiar with impeachment but it would seem to me it could originate with the people and if Obama did make an impeachable act why aren’t we the people demanding it? even if we would lose, we should at least make a stand.

    i want that man removed from office. and if what i’m hearing is right, that Obama did make an impeachable act i say let’s do this, where do i sign up?

    Liked by 2 people

  20. TexasRanger says:

    How Obama Secretly Bypassed Congress For Illegals….

    Leaked DHS Memo Shows Obama Looking To Circumvent DAPA Injunction.!

    Full Story:

    Infowars Video Nov-2015

    Texas Judge Andrew Hanen Illegal Immigration Alien Executive Order Injunction CCA Ruling.
    Obama’s DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, DAPA, and The Case For Impeachment…


    • nimrodman says:

      Well, regarding the Western Journalism article, I can’t really think very highly of “journalism” that would write this sentence:

      “Bottom line: The memo foreshadows more tactical offensives in a giant administrative amnesty for all 12 million illegal aliens who’ve broken our immigration laws…that will emerge before the next inaugural in January 2016,” writes Smith.


  21. triper57 says:

    ” It does not go unnoticed that congress has done nothing, nada, zippo, zylch, to block DAPA in any manner method or form. Why? Because congress is fully aligned with President Obama when it comes to illegal immigation, ”

    Have read l lot of articles, none expresses this concept well. As far as unnoticed, it seems it has, due to the lack of propaganda about it. The question still remains as to how to prevent the wholesale purchase of an entire Congress and Executive by corporate interests (Chamber of Commerce).


  22. WSB says:

    From Godfather Politics:

    Jonathan Strong with confirmed Vaughan’s report: “Unnoticed until now, a draft solicitation for bids issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Oct. 6 says potential vendors must be capable of handling a ‘surge’ scenario of 9 million id cards in one year ‘to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements.’ … The guaranteed minimum for each ordering period is 4,000,000 cards. The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards.”

    Can anyone shed some light on this and how to stop it? This needs to be exposed. And just who are the bidders?


  23. Piper says:

    Someone handed me a pamphlet last month and it has been sitting in a drawer until I read this article.
    This website provides a lot of info on impeachment:


  24. Josh says:

    Off topic perhaps but check out the “hand shake” above between Johnson & Hussein.
    It’s a hand hold, not a hand shake.
    Ewww AND gross!


  25. Josh says:

    “…congress is fully aligned with President Obama when it comes to illegal immigration…”

    More accurately: Congress is fully aligned with President Obama. Period. End of sentence. Whatever Obama wants, Obama gets.

    That is why we need more like Judge Hanen. Please keep an eye on him and his, G-d.


  26. stringy theory says:

    The states need to simply begin stopping barry’s unconstitution amnesty by whatever action necessary and tell him to do something about it. If he can give the finger to the law, I see no reason the states need to heed anything he “commands.” Screw this thin-skinned, half-white, un-American, left-wing, mom-jeans-wearng, prissy pants affirmative-action-made petty tyrant. And screw the GOPe that enables him.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s