theodore M I R A L D I mpa ... editor, publisher, writer

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Threat: Schumer predicts civil unrest if amnesty is not passed

   Schumer would rather threaten Citizens with his hysterical threats then do what is right for this nation. Anyone who doesn't understand this kind of hyperbole only need to be an outsider in a community filled with illegal immigrants.
   What Schumer might consider is rioting by citizens fixing what our government is too weak to do!
theodore miraldi

Schumer's foot soldiers

Dave Gibson

On Sunday, Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the Democrat sponsor of the illegal alien amnesty bill currently making its way through the U.S. Senate, said their would be mass riots in our streets if the Republican majority blocks the bill when it comes to the House.
Schumer made the following, veiled threats on CNN's State of the Union:
"This has the potential of becoming the next major civil rights movement. I could envision in the late summer or early fall if Boehner tries to bottle the bill up or put something in without a path to citizenship — if there’s no path to citizenship, there’s not a bill — but if he tries to bottle it up or do things like that, I could see a million people on the Mall in Washington."
He did not say specifically, who the rioters would be, but one could presume he wasn't talking about Senatorial staffers.
No, Schumer was referring to the millions of illegal aliens, many of whom have violent criminal histories in this country, but who would still be eligible for amnesty, and now even U.S. citizenship under the Schumer/Rubio proposal.
While it may be outrageous for one body of Congress to threaten another with civil unrest over passage of a particular piece of legislation, it would not be the first time this has occurred, in recent history.
In 2008, Congress approved the $850 billion bailout of Wall Street, but not before the public overwhelmingly objected, which prompted the House of Representatives to initially reject the bill.
Despite our objections, many Congressmen who only days earlier were adamantly opposed to any such measure, returned and voted to approve the bailout and even added $150 billion to the original bill. Why would lawmakers only a month away from an election make such a vastly unpopular move?
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) seems to have answered this question, though the press largely ignored the stunning information he divulged.
Congressman Sherman on the House floor told his colleagues:
"Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day, another couple thousand points the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no."
It is obvious to all but the most ardent of Obama worshipers, ours is no longer a nation of laws, but one of men...We have now sunken to the level of a banana republic, complete with a Marxist dictator and his spendthrift wife.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment