Nancy Pelosi says impeaching Trump is too divisive and "just not worth it"


The Tea Party: called the far Rght because the Left is so very extreme Left and what they call the Center these days could include McGovern.


Another side of Ru! Nice.

Great C.S. Lewis reference.

An aspect of the American Alinsky left that you did not weave into that fine tapestry was finding pain and grievance, promising solutions, and putting up so called solutions that perpetuate the problems to enslave the voting blocks.


Subject: MacCarran Walter Act of 1952 (Immigration and Nationality Act 0f 1952)

It’s been law for over 60 years…….isn’t this interesting? Imagine somebody talking about precedent instead of just new laws.
It is amazing what we do not know and even more amazing that our government officials also do not know or are ignoring it in hopes no one notices.

Trump was severely criticized for suggesting that the U.S. should limit or temporarily suspend the immigration of certain ethnic groups, nationalities, and even people of certain religions (Muslims). The criticisms condemned such a suggestion as, among other things, being “Un-American,” dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous and racist. Congressmen and Senators swore that they would never allow such legislation, and the president called such a prohibition on immigration unconstitutional.

It seems that the selective immigration ban is already law and has been applied on several occasions. Known as the McCarran-Walter Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 allows for the "Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by the president. Whenever the president finds that the entry of aliens of any class into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such a period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

The act was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States, but he actually did more. He made all Iranian students already here check in, and then he deported many. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas. 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States in 1979.

It is of note that the act requires that an applicant for immigration must be of good moral character and "attached to the principles of the Constitution.”

Since the Quran forbids Muslims to swear allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, technically, all Muslims should be refused immigration. Can this same precedent be applied to people who willfully break the law by entering the country illegally and remain in the country on such status?

This Reference Can Be Authenticated at:


I am not intentionally trying to derail this thread, as I realize what I posted is a immigration topic, but the point I am trying to make here is all about the double standard practiced on both sides of the political party class, and so when speaking in the broader context of things like “impeachment”, it really is saying something when precedent by former administrations is not even discussed with merit, but simply that debate altogether is being shut down, and then that to me is a real problem!


Considering that too many (for whom there is nothing remaining of the old extreme Left that is extreme to them anymore) what constitutes “American” as subordinated to ever more Leftwing ideology it can easily seem that their unamerican is simply what used to be thought of as “American” …

… and that includes even insuring the survival of ours as a sovereign nation. …

It seems fair to say that the current DNC is / consist of the people HUAC was convened to fight against.


Spotted a SERIOUS typo: replaces the first “agreeable” with “dangerous”.

The last edit you do is one edit too few. – me