Breitbart: “Legacy: 10 Ways Barack Obama Broke The American System”

The list: 1-Stimulus, 2-Fast-&-Furious, 3-Betraying allies, 4-Obamacare, 5-Debt ceiling, 6-Benghazi, 7-IRS scandal, 8-AP scandal, 9-Iran deal, 10-Immigration

But there’s an even worse act Obama committed during his 8 years…

We would argue the most damning legacy Obama left the American people will be his casual flaunting of the Rule of Law…the bedrock of our form of government.

Brought into sharp relief by his Dept of ‘Justice’ stonewalling investigations of Hillary Clinton (and his) actions over this last year, such elitism left the electorate angry.

Witness the November election results.

We don’t know why Breitbart’s list inexplicably overlooked that lawlessness…

…but are very grateful the American electorate didn’t.

(UPDATE) Within that same context, encouraging the ill-founded Black-Lives-Matter crowd to extremes, Obama has contributed to increased violence in major cities.

But, what would you expect for someone with just a community agitator resume?

After yet another heart-tugging article on how Trump should deal with Obama’s Dream Act children, we feel it necessary to point out the flaw in their logic…

…and the same argument applies to anchor-babies some claim are citizens.

Nowhere in settled law does it say stolen goods may be legally kept.

Receivers of stolen goods have no right to ownership of those goods.

Lest we forget, American citizenship is a valuable commodity.

If parents stole an art collection, then gave it to their children, not knowing it was stolen doesn’t give the kids ownership privileges of that illegally acquired collection.

And, little sympathy is spared for the (often) long and expensive legal hassles to clear their name, so they themselves don’t go to jail as receivers of stolen property.

How is it any different from taking back stolen citizenship? Emotional as it may be, ‘Dreamers’ and ‘Anchor-Babies’ are receivers of stolen goods; i.e. citizenship.

How to deal with them is a separate issue, but they are not American citizens. The fallback method should be deportation with the illegal parents or family members.

In a situation where their circumstance precludes deportation, it might be possible to issue a humane ‘territorial-citizenship’ status similar to resident Puerto Ricans.

Puerto Ricans living in the U.S. who maintain island residence status can’t vote in general elections. A designated ‘territory-at-large’ status would be very similar.

Bottom-line…our American citizenship status should not be cheaply treated.

(And the hidden benefit of a territory-at-large citizenship concept? If they can’t vote in general elections, Democrats will stop using them as a wedge issue.)

Lost in the confusion of Left-wailing, is one irrefutable fact:

…If Hillary hadn’t set up a personal server to hide Clinton Foundation $$-sucking…

…she wouldn’t have had those email/FBI/hacking pre-election problems.

American blacks have one of the highest per-capita black income averages in the world, and have become “…increasingly affluent, educated, and diverse“.

(Which might explain why we don’t see an exodus back to ancestral homelands.)

In an era where leaders should express pride in the efforts our black population has made (by global comparison), the Obamas are relentless, determined victim-crats.

It’s sad that so many are willing to allow this, without fighting back.

Stoking a victim mentality may get Democrats more votes, but at what expense?

Are votes worth more than encouraging self-reliance and merit-based achievement?

We can see how Democrat politicians (and media lapdogs) answer that question, but it’s baffling why Republicans don’t challenge this mentality head-on.

In messaging, optimism feeds hope…pessimism feeds despair.

We hope that President Trump can set an optimistic tone for our black community.

God knows, after 8 years of Obama pessimism, it will be a welcome change.

Blaming everything from Russian hacks to angry white men, the Left melts down.

Face it, people…Hillary lost because of Hillary.

If recent articles are true, impeachments can’t be presidentially pardoned.

The House should introduce Articles of Impeachment against Hillary Clinton for her felonious use of a private email server, and illegal Clinton Foundation involvement, while Secretary of State…as well as her obstruction of justice since.

Congress has a public confidence rating in the teens.

Yeah…we feel so good now that they’re looking into this idiocy.

John Podesta keeps screaming about the FBI and CIA not doing enough to investigate the hacking of his emails during the recent Clinton campaign…

…evidently hoping wails of outrage will veil his inept security lapses.

Iran’s talking to the UN about the possibility of building nuclear-powered ships…which, if we’re not mistaken, requires enriched grades of materials…

…beyond current allowed levels of enrichment.

Weapon-grade levels.

Does anyone else see what’s going on here?

Actually, there are several problems with pardoning Hillary…

1. As a public official, she violated federal laws to avoid public oversight;
2. her national security lapses exposed America to serious harm;
3. emails regarding Benghazi personnel may have contributed to their deaths;
4. thousands of her emails are still unaccounted for, which means we still don’t know the true extent, or potential consequences, of her felonious acts;
5. her aides and co-workers are also guilty of violating those federal laws;
6. she illegally acquired millions of pay-to-play dollars – domestic AND foreign.

No greater crime can be committed by a public official than to violate public trust.

When such a violation may have directly contributed to the deaths of Americans (Benghazi), the thought of dismissing such acts through a pardon is obscene.

And before anyone cries there’s no proof her crimes caused American deaths, we remind them her illegal email system detailed mission and movements during that period – the burden is on Hillary Clinton to prove her emails didn’t contribute.

Doherty, Stevens, Woods, and Smith deserve to be remembered anytime some political pundit casually bandies about the ‘of course she should be pardoned’ idea.

To those who decry persecuting political opponents, remember, America supported such acts in Iraq against Saddam Hussein, and Libya, against Muammar Gadaffi… and lest we forget… they were executed for crimes against their people.

Maintain a perspective, people. Are American lives any less important?

There was only one reason for Clinton to set up an illegal private email system, and that was to avoid public oversight while sucking up millions for her private benefit.

Rule of Law dictates that deaths occurring during an illegal act make the guilty just as liable as the killers, especially if such acts contributed directly to those deaths.

She’s been uncooperative, deceptive, and unrepentant since her activities were exposed; we still don’t know what further harm may have been caused by her acts.

Pardon Hillary Clinton? Why?

Who among us supports a theory that pardons deadly money-grubbers?