No products in the cart.

News

Obama Nomination of Qureshi to DC Court to Test Senate Republicans

 

p011610ps-0259
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy” (Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966.) [Photo: The White House]
“President Obama nominated Abid Riaz Qureshi to serve on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,” the White House announced Tuesday.

“I am pleased to nominate Mr. Qureshi to serve on the United States District Court bench,” Obama declared. “I am confident he will serve the American people with integrity and a steadfast commitment to justice.”

Does anyone doubt a long term “progressive” goal is an “inclusive” Supreme Court?

“Muslim-American groups are applauding President Barack Obama’s nomination of a Washington lawyer to serve in U.S. District Court — a move that could make him the first ever Muslim-American federal judge, according to advocates,” NBC News reported on the development. The story included approving statements from the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Muslim Advocates.

Some will no doubt express concern over the Pakistani-born lawyer’s religion, and that’s not to say it’s not a factor that shouldn’t be vetted. It’s certainly not something to ignore out of pressured political correctness.  To those who say what a nominee strongly believes shouldn’t matter, such attitudes typically come from secular viewpoints, or from those who haven’t thought things through completely and with consistency.  Or from those with an agenda.

Case in point, a nominee with strong religious convictions against the death penalty would be hard-pressed to fairly decide on capital cases, and ascertaining whether that would create a conflict would be warranted. And if you really believe religion has no bearing on qualifications (or desirability), do you also think someone lunatic enough to identify as a Satanist has the judgment to be trusted with power over the lives and freedoms of others?

CAIR had previously proclaimed “No Religious Test” is needed for the Presidency, that Includes Islam.” In the interests of establishing consistency, will they also agree with that statement if the word “Satanism” is substituted?

Still, they do have a point, and it’s a reality those who have pledged an oath to the Constitution cannot just disregard.  I’m referring to the First Amendment Establishment Clause, and the Article VI prohibition on religious tests. And while some contend Islam is not a religion but a doctrine of totalitarianism, that argument is unlikely to get any traction in the political arena or in the courts.

We’re left with a for-the-most-part-gutless Republican Senate — no doubt feeling pressure to publicly demonstrate its “inclusiveness” and “tolerance” as a way to defray criticism for the stalled SCOTUS nomination of Merrick Garland. As GOP leadership has already gone on record agreeing with CAIR on Muslims being in power, effort would better be spent in determining where Qureshi stands on the Founders’ view of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Naturally, those concerned with the right to keep and bear arms will want to know if Qureshi believes the Second Amendment articulates an individual right, if cases coming before him should be considered under strict scrutiny, and if the legal concept “in common use at the time,” at a minimum, applies to weaponry carried by infantry soldiers for battlefield use, in addition to those commonly used for self-defense and sport.

Don’t expect answers on those questions to be forthcoming. Don’t even expect them to be asked by politicians gun owners and conservatives helped put in power.

What’s left? How else can we figure out where an (intentional) enigma stands on issues affecting future legal protections of liberty? Especially when noting that, thanks to Democrat maneuverings and Republican complicity, a “progressive” majority now exists in 70%of U.S. appeals court appointments.

What you can make book on — Obama is not going to nominate anyone he doesn’t think is going to advance his agenda. And he’s relying on Republicans afraid of bigotry charges being cowed (in addition to the ones he knows he can count on) to get his way.

So what do we know about Qureshi? He’s a partner in Latham & Watkins, a DC-based insider/globalist law firm. What do we know about them? In 2012, 71% of their political contributions went to Democrats. They do pro bono work for Syrian refugees and they proudly display awards for LGBT inclusiveness. Assessing the culture as “progressive,” with all that implies for “conservative” sympathies, is hardly a stretch.

It’s also interesting to note how many appointments to key administration posts Obama seems to have made from Latham & Watkins (and that’s something I intend to follow up on, because it may prove key). One of special interest is White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler. She was the administration lawyer who blocked the House Oversight and Senate Judiciary Committees from interviewing former National Security Council Director of North American Affairs Kevin O’Reilly, a story with a recent development I talked about here.

Small world. Or as George Carlin observed [NSFW] “It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.”

But Qureshi is. And that makes his professional and personal relationships and loyalties another factor to be thoroughly vetted, just as they should be for every nominee.

The question is: Will Senate Republicans do a thorough job?

Bottom line, Obama’s going to put a key player in a key position on a key court, and unless someone can come up with a politically non-toxic reason why Qureshi should not be confirmed (and don’t look to the cheerleader media to actually investigate), he’ll breeze through.

Update: KrisAnne Hall shares some important thoughts for our consideration.

 

9/11 Update: Here’s my follow-up article. For those who want to block this, Qureshi’s insider connections may hold the key for something the Senate has the belly for.

—–

Also see:Fundamental Court Transformation Removes Choices for Gun Owners except Obey or Not.”

0

DavidC

David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (WarOnGuns.com), and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.

Oath Keepers Merchandise

30 comments

  1. Let me guess. He will be confirmed with 51 votes. And (what a coincidence) the Republicans that vote to confirm will not be up for reelection until 2020.
    The only question that remains is; will he take his oath on a Bible or a Quran?

  2. First of all Islam is a cult and no foreign religion, cult or tribe is protected under our constitution period. Second by law no Muslim can be in this country. Period. As an American citizen of many generations I demand their deportations.

    1. Az native……well said and a dead on bulls eye. This Islamo- Marxist, Soetoro Sobarkah, wants to appoint this Muslim guy to a Federal Court, The DHS Director (Johnson) is a Muslim, the DHS from top to bottom are ex or current Muslim Brotherhood members, the CIA Director (Brennan) is Muslim, the Attorney General is a Muslim, his top assistant (Jarrett) is a committed anti American Muslim and the endless list goes on. No outrage or backlash from the Congress or Senate as he systematically dismantles our Sovereign Republic. “Importing” Muslim refugees from Syria, Somalia and all over the Middle East, the Southern Borders open for illegals to enter and now, with UN “boots” on our American soil (Strong Cities network), which is a direct Sovereignty and Constitutional violation, it is obvious he is very close to implementing the remainder of his agenda. Look at it from any angle and you can see that there is absolutely no way that an altercation can be avoided. The “wagons are being circled”, he is gaining strength, and he is doing it without any resistance. Look at Britain, Scandinavia and all of Europe to see the Islamic carnage that is going on. Look up the following: Jonrapport.worldpress.com then click on “Who is Obamas Boss and Why it Matters” to fully understand the “Trilateral Commission” agenda and who is involved. Prepare and stand ready….it’s coming.

      1. I like Jon Rappaport a lot, but when I read his article the other day, (unless I missed something in it), I did not find any mention about Patrick Wood, who is the undisputed expert on the TriLateral Commission and their drive to re-introduce Technocracy. I’d like to point readers here to our article on Patrick Wood’s appearance on John B. Wells’ “Caravan To Midnight” show from summer of 2015. If one does not view the lengthy video, one should at least read the synopsis I’ve written under that video.

        https://oathkeepers.org/technocracy-rising-patrick-wood-on-caravan-to-midnight/

        Salute!
        Elias Alias, editor

        1. Elias….I saw the video and read your synopsis as well. Excellent. An absolute reality is this from a paragraph I read in the article. “America’s so called war on terror has now turned inward on the American people ourselves”. Anyway you wish to add, subtract or divide it, analyze it, or reword it, the facts are crystal clear that they, the Trilateral / Global Elite with their chosen one, Soetoro Sobarkah presently in the “cat bird seat” issuing Executive Orders, printing pallet loads of currency and now having UN personnel in many American cities infiltrating local police departments, the only logical conclusion and suggestion is to prepare and stand ready…..it’s coming !

          1. Thank you for reading/viewing, Vinny.
            I agree — something seems to be coming, or, rather, something is already here and is growing. Your words are true –
            “Prepare and stand ready…”

            Salute!
            Elias Alias, editor

  3. Islam, by law, is prohibited from US immigration

    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/off-topic/53275-islam-law-prohibited-us-immigration.html

    The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today. Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.” This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House.

    Excerpt more:

    Islamic immigration to the US would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government. Now the political correct crowd would say that Islamists cannot be prohibited from entering the US because Islam is a religion. Whether it is a religion is immaterial because the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with any “organization” that advocates the overthrow of our government are prohibited. It also prohibits those who distribute literature that advocates the overthrow of our country, which would include the Koran.

    In fact, there are many verses in the Koran that command Islamists to kill those who do not submit to allah and the prophet. If Congress so desired to hold the White House accountable to the current immigration of refugees (which also must comply with the law), it has the Immigration and Nationality Act to cite. The Administration is breaking that law. The question is “does Congress have the political will to do something about it?” Or shall we be a nation like that in Isaiah 59:14 where, “justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.” I think you know the answer, at least for now. But there are a handful of Congressmen who are studying this. Pray.

    1. Since God says to “love one another,” and Allah commands that all who don’t belong to the cult of Islam be killed by the most atrocious means imaginable, there should be no confusion of the two entities. One is God; the other is Satan – guess which is which.

  4. The first question from the Senate Judiciary Cmte. should be: Do you believe that the principles of Sharia Law supersede Constitutional and western Common Law legal principles?

  5. I highly recommend (once again) that you watch this regarding immigration. Consent Principal. I do not think you will be bored, and maybe have a better idea of what is, and isn’t allowed regarding “immigration”. Is this 100% correct? I believe so, but maybe someone else can show me different?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iya0eNlu9D0

    1. I agree that the congress, in general, does not do its job. I am of the opinion that a good part of the problem is the legal profession in general, and the education that leads to a law degree. I’ve had enough arguments with lawyers to walk away asking the questions what the heck are these people being taught, or how did they derive their opinions?
      Here is where I differ from a number of people in thought and experience. I have worked with Muslims, broken bread with them, and even attended their family functions. I’ve read parts of the Koran, but know others who have read it in its entirety. Unless you have a reading comprehension level of a third grade child, you’re going to find some very disturbing facts.
      Those I know are peaceful people. However, Islam is what Muhammad said it is, and that is what we are to be concerned about. I’ve been told that the Koran should supersede the Constitution so I’ve heard it from the “horses mouth” so to speak.
      While we should not be concerned with someones religion we butt up against some glaring issues. As KrisAnne states, there is a war against Christians. We have elected representative that neither uphold the law, nor do they care to enforce or abide the words of the Constitution. If we put this all together with the fact that in the minds of those in Islam who continue with the war to convert the entire world, as was the intent of Muhammad, we must be very wary.
      History, and actions taking place now in Europe are a concern. I don’t view things myopically, nor am I unwilling to use the word conspiracy. There are clues in every aspect of actions, and history that tell a story. I would be very wary of appointing a Muslim judge at this point because of what I see taking place today. However, if we had a congress that did its job, and an electorate that voted for the rule of law rather than their stomachs and other selfish agenda I might be comfortable, but since neither is the case we should question just about anything and everything.

    1. True enough, but do say — where in the Constitution is the federal government granted rights to manage marriage, or relationships, or health-care, or many other matters of cultural preference?
      I would suggest that we do not need to use the force of government for most of what government is involved in these days. If it ain’t in Article 1, Section 8, I say we should get the government out of it, and let freedom ring across our land.

      Salute!
      Elias Alias, editor

  6. The lying, corrupt, cowardly scum that compose the Republican leadership have already rubber-stamped hundreds of radical leftist judges nominated by Obama. They are already in the process of ruling their ideological preferences to be law (just overturned NC law requiring ID to vote). Mitch McConnell has already allowed the courts to be politicized to such a degree that another lunatic judge won’t make much difference. These lowlifes in the Senate (claiming to be conservative) are the real problem — without their collusion Obama couldn’t have packed the courts with leftist political hacks.

  7. There was a very good reason we did not support any republican senator for the presidency. And here’s another very good reason not to re-elect any of them either.

  8. No muslim can be taken at his word when he swears or affirms to enforce United States law, because islam does not allow allegiance to anything other than to allah.

  9. If one reads the history of islam what you discover is that muslims use many forms of warfare to invade and dominate nations , over 1400 years of committing the same crimes against humanity. It is a fact that muslims will invade nations under the pretense of being peaceful , once they have manged to slither into a nation they begin to use the host nations political system against the host nation. Nothing has changed , the muslims are now in the process of invading with the final goal being to dominate. islam is a problem and the people who bow to it are a problem.

  10. today the parties ARE exactly alike, proponents of the new world order. they seek a totalitarian regime with citizens as subjects of the whims of despotic rulers. our founders fought a war costing fortunes and lives to throw off the shackles of a tyrant exactly like what we are experiencing in government today. are we going to buckle under to tyranny or throw off tyranny?

Comments are closed.