Is the House GOP leadership being blackmailed into voting for amnesty?

SpyingPeople are asking why, with a potentially successful midterm election coming, the GOP has decided to go forward with amnesty, even though (a) only 3% of Americans care about the issue and (b) the base is strongly opposed to the GOP’s plan.  On its face, this seems like an insane thing to do, since it can destroy the Republican party in two ways, first, by denying it success in the 2014 midterm and, second, by creating a permanent Democrat constituency.

I think that Glenn Reynolds might inadvertently have provided the answer by juxtaposing two posts:

GOP and amnesty

(Links to the two posts referenced are here and here.)

Has the GOP House leadership been threatened into sabotaging the 2014 midterms?  To answer that, consider that the NSA trolls indiscriminately for all cell phone and internet content.  The sheer volume of information means that it’s unlikely that the NSA can review it in real-time so as to prevent an imminent attack.  The best way to use that information is to pick a target and then, having isolated the target, to go back into the saved data and to fined content that damages the target.

Once the NSA has completed its targeting data troll, GOP politicians who have had affairs, used drugs, engaged in illegal transactions, etc., might find themselves facing a government official who says something along the lines of “Nice life ya’ got here.  Shame if something happened to it.  Kinda like the something that happened to Dinesh d’Souza, if you know what I mean.”

Yes, I know that sounds like paranoid wacko stuff.  But consider that just five years ago, we would have dismissed as paranoid wacko stuff all of the following:  IRS persecution of conservative political organizations; NSA spying indiscriminately on email and cell phone, as well as on the House of Representatives and media members; the Department of Justice engaged in gun-running; video makers getting imprisoned as Free Speech martyrs to hide an administration’s failure to prevent a terrorist attack; nuns being forced to pay for birth control and abortifacient pills; deals with Iran that effectively allow it to become a nuclear nation; and a president who uses executive orders, not to effectuate executive duties, but instead to nullify existing law or to create non-existent law out of whole cloth.

Given an administration that views the Constitution as a hindrance, why shouldn’t we believe that it’s engaging in the tried and true communist tactic of spying on opponents, getting dirt on them, and then using that dirt to force them to act against their interests?

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Danny Lemieux

    Exactly, Book.
    Which is why, though I support a strong intelligence-gathering operation like NSA in concept, the danger of its being misused is too great. This administration has very well highlighted the dangers thereof – so, now, we are given the choice between letting terrorist attacks (possibly) get through or surrendering ourselves to a fascist superstate.
    I prefer to take my chances with the terrorists.

    • SADIE

      What’s the difference? Both employ terroristic threats and tactics.

      • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

        Well, Sadie, the lEft likes to do Ruby Ridges and WACOs specifically targeting enemies of the State. Whereas Islamic Jihad just goes after a general population, Republican or Democrat.

  • Matt_SE

    This isn’t the first time that thought has occurred to me, either.
    Of course, bribery is just as likely.
    The only problem with that is the ability to maintain secrecy. For every individual you add to the list, the odds of exposure increase exponentially. Then, there’s the problem of Obama’s (and his crony’s) incompetence.
     
    …unless they are all secretly super-geniuses, and this is a double-bluff!!!11!!1!

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    https://copyright.att.net/home
     
    “Yes, I know that sounds like paranoid wacko stuff. ”
     
    It probably is crazy.
     
    <B> But consider that just five years ago, we would have dismissed as paranoid wacko stuff all of the following</b>
     
    Which is why I didn’t present a detailed account of things I suspected years ago.
     
    Btw, if you read the link above, the new agreement the MPAA and RIAA goons have produced is collaboration with ISP. (which strangely began around the time of the Obama regime’s installment) They used to send lawyered up DMCA letters out to individuals, relayed thorugh the ISP. Whether they could not find enough examples to be made in the music sharing business or if they just found more efficient usages of their money, their plan is to ensure the “lawful” distribution of their products. Lawful in so far as the Democrat party determines it is lawful. And lawful in so much as the Obama Regime considers wealth redistribution to be good.
     
    Your wealth will be redistributed. The MPAA and RIAA’s “content owners”, however, will get to keep their wealth. Do you see a glint of the future here? I’m already thinking of the next decade of operations by the Left. Meanwhile, for most people, it is easiest to pay attention to what the Left is doing now. But strategically, that’s a good way to get surprised and side swiped.
     
    Do not think for a single moment that the MPAA and RIAA’s online methodology cannot be easily bought and deployed by the IRS, FBI, or other federal organizations who wish to find out the identities of certain internet “dissidents”.
     
    The NSA spying is old school for me. I’ve already considered its strategic ramifications over the years. As in, 2008 onwards. 
     
    “Given an administration that views the Constitution as a hindrance, why shouldn’t we believe that it’s engaging in the tried and true communist tactic of spying on opponents, getting dirt on them, and then using that dirt to force them to act against their interests?”
     
    This isn’t new. It’s new technology, but old methods. FDR used domestic intel on political opponents, and half of Nixon’s paranoia was justified because most of his audio was being tapped. Many Republicans, including MLK, were being spied on by the FBI for a number of reasons, some having to do with COINTELPRO, others having to do with informing Democrats and giving them an edge.
     
    People are way way behind the times, if they think the NSA’s data gathering methods are new. What’s surprising is that the NSA data banks were not wholly given over to the Obama Regime. I suppose national security was still their primary interest. Most of Obama’s leaked secrets hurting his opponents came from various domestic Leftist operations. Although once the Obama Regime was fully installed, it was hard to say that Roberts and Petraeus’ secrets could have been discovered via old school Leftist trash digging.
     
    In 1999, Mitch Glazier, a Congressional staff attorney, inserted, without public notice or comment, substantive language into the final markup of a “technical corrections” section of copyright legislation, classifying many music recordings as “works made for hire“, thereby stripping artists of their copyright interests and transferring those interests to their record labels.[49][50] Shortly afterwards, Glazier was hired as Senior Vice President of Government Relations and Legislative Counsel for the RIAA, which vigorously defended the change when it came to light.[51] The battle over the disputed provision led to the formation of the Recording Artists’ Coalition, which successfully lobbied for repeal of the change.
     
    The MPAA and RIAA are essentially thug like organizations like public and private unions in the US. The money doesn’t go towards paying the workers. There’s a reason for that. Who do you think is the Chairman of the MPAA?
     
    Chris Dodd. You remember that guy? ALL of their profits are either going into the pockets of corrupt Democrats or Democrat politicians (and their campaigns). ALL. This is the money laundering people aren’t allowed to pay attention to.
     
    Wealth redistribution is fine, so long as Demoncrats get the money. Power distribution is a problem. And distribution of their “money” to other people… well, that’s what lawsuits are for.

  • Libby

    Are they being blackmailed? It wouldn’t surprise me at all.
    Or maybe they’re just being “nudged” by being given the option of either passing immigration reform and then transition into a comfy lobbyist type position OR facing broad attack on them and/or family and their political supporters (IRS, DOJ, ect.). Just look at Christie, McDonnell and D’Souza.
     
     

    • Bettijo

      What about Chief Justice Roberts?
       

  • lee

    Hey, I am the one who claims John Roberts was blackmailed into his decision. I also think they tried to blackmail Petraus.

    • bizcor

      An article I read suggested Justice Roberts’ adopted children are Irish and Ireland doesn’t allow such things.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    The moment Americans started telling me X person was blackmailed by the Democrats , I knew a fundamental shift had happened. They were no longer sleeping with their head in the sand pretending the Tsunami will pass them by. People were beginning to see Democrats and the Left as… enemies.
     
    That is a crucial turning point. That is a critical difference from how people reacted to things in 2008.

  • Danny Lemieux

    Let’s not forget that the Obama regime has experience with this: Obama won his Senate seat by illegally unsealing court documents pertaining to the divorce proceedings of his Republican opponent, Jack Ryan.
     
    It’s the Chicago Way. It is who they are…! Which is why they should never have been entrusted with organizations such as the CIA, NSA, FBI and other intelligence-gathering agencies, because, to them, their enemies are internal, not external. 
     

  • Jose

    Is the House GOP leadership being blackmailed into voting for amnesty?
     
    It’s been said “Never attribute to conspiracy anything which can be explained by incompetence.”
     
    I sincerely believe in Republic incompetence.

    • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

      So you’re going to obey a sentence said by someone you don’t know and can’t name, to judge things in life?
       
      How is this different from “I was just following orders and doing my job” excuse?

  • jj

    I agree with Jose: stupidity doesn’t get nearly enough credit inn human affairs.  Our tendency is to keep looking under rocks, behind trees, in the closet, under the bed – all unnecessary: they’re just stupid.  They think the job hasn’t changed, and that it’s still a catering service to the perceived largest number (job #1, after all, is to get reelected) of potential voters, and they completely fail to see the winds of change about to flatten them out.  There’s no need to, conspiracy in mind, go looking for reasons for this: they’re just dopes.  Haven’t they sufficiently established that in your mind?  (WTF – what does it take?)  No need for deep dark secrets when everyday random lunacy has it covered. 

    • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

      No need for deep dark secrets when everyday random lunacy has it covered. 
       
      That’s what people often said about Democrats and their policies. They never provided reasons, and neither have any new ones shown up here. Yet people think the end result will be different.

  • Pingback: Is the House GOP Leadership Being Blackmailed Into Voting for Amnesty? | askmarion()