Sam High

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

🧵 1/ What Are Letters Of Marque And Reprisal And How Could They Be Used To Weaken Drug Cartels? 🚨

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

20. Please share and follow if you’d like to see more posts like this one.

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

@ElonMNews Pains me to say it … we need to be more like Europe … geez … that made me choke

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

@NolteNC Beautiful 😂😂😂

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

Congressional Democrats insist that the SAVE Act—which requires proof of citizenship to establish eligibility to vote in federal elections—is unnecessary because federal law (18 USC § 611) already prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections.

Those making this argument ignore a glaring problem: the government officials who register voters and conduct federal elections aren’t allowed to require proof of citizenship.

It’s therefore shockingly easy for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, leaving our elections dangerously vulnerable to foreign interference.

Anyone—even an illegal alien or other non-citizen—can register to vote in federal elections, just by checking a box and signing a form.

This is all on the honor system. No proof of citizenship is required.

It’s not just that state officials—who are responsible for federal voter registration and elections in our country—*don’t* verify citizenship in this context; it’s that the Supreme Court has told them that they’re not allowed to do so.

In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, 570 U.S. 1 (2013), the Court held that the National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA,” known as the “Motor Voter” law) prohibits states from requiring proof of citizenship when processing federal voter-registration forms.

The SAVE Act would fix this gaping loophole by requiring anyone registering to vote in federal elections to provide proof of citizenship.

It would also require states to review existing federal voter-registration files and remove all non-citizens.

Remember: every state except South Carolina issues driver’s licenses to non-citizens, and 19 states issue them to illegal aliens.

This, coupled with the Motor Voter law and the Supreme Court’s ruling, makes it shockingly easy for aliens—legal and illegal—to vote in federal elections, even though they’re prohibited from doing so.

Considering that there are now nearly 30 million non-citizens in the U.S., including about 12 million who have entered illegally since the last presidential election, we desperately need the SAVE Act.

While Democrats are already mocking the SAVE Act, they don’t dispute that non-citizens shouldn’t vote in federal elections.

Rather, they insist that there’s no need for the bill because non-citizens—being prohibited by law from voting in federal elections—categorically *do not* vote in such elections.

That argument fails for one simple reason: it implausibly assumes universal compliance with a law that has become breathtakingly easy (and correspondingly tempting) to violate.

Some say that non-citizens wouldn’t dare register to vote in federal elections, as doing so is illegal and could adversely affect their present or future immigration status.

Even if this assumption were correct with regard to many (or even most) non-citizens in the U.S., that still wouldn’t disprove the need for the SAVE Act.

If even a tiny percentage of America’s 30 million non-citizens were to vote, they could change the outcome of a close federal election.

And, as noted by the @iaproject, it’s odd for the left to insist so vehemently that illegal aliens don’t vote, given that congressional Democrats have inserted language “to waive inadmissibility for illegal voting in all [their] amnesty bills.”

Democrats can’t have it both ways; they can’t (1) credibly say that illegal aliens don’t vote in federal elections, and then (2) expect us to forget their own proposals, which assume the opposite is true.

In any event, and regardless of how many (or few) non-citizens may have voted in the past, why not take steps to prevent it from happening in the future?

The sanctity of your vote is at stake.

Now more than ever, we need to make sure that our elections are fair, lawfully conducted, and free of foreign influence.

To do that, it’s imperative that Congress pass the SAVE Act.

If you agree, please like and share this post—and ask your members of Congress to cosponsor the SAVE Act today!

https://t.co/kUoXDgnzRN

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

@NolteNC Just finished reading! Wonderful novel … you spin a wonderful tale, sir!

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

Earlier today, a reporter standing outside the Senate chamber told me that, after four months of secrecy, The Firm™️ plans to release the text of the $106 billion supplemental aid / border-security package—possibly as soon as tomorrow.

Wasting no time, she then asked, “if you get the bill by tomorrow, will you be ready to vote on it by Tuesday?”

The words “hell no” escaped my mouth before I could stop them. Those are strong words where I come from. (Sorry, Mom).

The reporter immediately understood that my frustration was not directed at her.

Rather, it was directed at the Law Firm of Schumer & McConnell (“The Firm™️”), which is perpetually trying to normalize a corrupt approach to legislating—in which The Firm™️

(1) spends months drafting legislation in complete secrecy,

(2) aggressively markets that legislation based not on its details and practical implications (good and bad), but only on its broadest, least-controversial objectives,

(3) lets members see bill text for the first time only a few days (sometimes a few hours) before an arbitrary deadline imposed by The Firm™️ itself, always with a contrived sense of urgency, and then

(4) forces a vote on the legislation on or before that deadline, denying senators any real opportunity to read, digest, and debate the measure on its merits, much less introduce, consider, and vote on amendments to fix any perceived problems with the bill or otherwise improve it.

Whenever The Firm™️ engages in this practice, it largely excludes nearly every senator from the constitutionally prescribed process in which all senators are supposed to participate.

By so doing, The Firm™️ effectively disenfranchises hundreds of millions of Americans—at least for purposes relevant to the legislation at hand—and that’s tragic.

It’s also unAmerican, uncivil, uncollegial, and really uncool.

So why does The Firm™️ do it?

Every time The Firm™️ utilizes this approach and the bill passes—and it nearly always does—The Firm™️ becomes more powerful.

The high success rate is largely attributable to the fact that The Firm™️ has become very adept at (a) enlisting the help of the (freakishly cooperative) news media, (b) exerting peer pressure in a way that makes what you experienced in middle school look mild by comparison, and (c) rewarding those who consistently vote with The Firm™️ with various privileges that The Firm™️ is uniquely capable of offering (committee assignments, help with campaign fundraising, and a whole host of other widely coveted things that The Firm™️ is free to distribute in any manner it pleases).

It’s through this process that The Firm™️ passes most major spending legislation.

It’s through this process that The Firm™️ likely intends to pass the still-secret, $106 billion supplemental aid / border-security package, which The Firm™️ has spent four months negotiating, with the luxury of obsessing over every sentence, word, period, and comma.

I still don’t know exactly what’s in this bill, although I have serious concerns with it based on the few details The Firm™️ has been willing to share.

But under no circumstances should this bill — which would fund military operations in three distant parts of the world and make massive, permanent changes to immigration law — be passed next week.

Nor should it be passed until we have had adequate time to read the bill, discuss it with constituents, debate it, offer amendments, and vote on those amendments.

There’s no universe in which those things will happen by next week.

Depending on how long it is and the complexity of its provisions, the minimum period of time we should devote to this bill after it’s released should be measured in weeks or months, not days or hours.

Please share this if you agree.

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

@marklevinshow Maybe since you run a business you should have a backup … like the rest of America?

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

@jazzijack2 @dagenmcdowell That’s funny

[Homecare Homebase @HCHBInfo]

https://t.co/YNPgkKxag8

Don't miss out on this great whitepaper!

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

Kicking off the year and looking forward to a great 2018 ... https://t.co/QwFMVatrmr

[HEARST @Hearst]

Hearst President & CEO Steven Swartz sends annual letter to employees on #Hearst's 2017 performance. #HearstAnnual2017 https://t.co/HI9dZYSjd8

[MCG @MCG_Health]

Dr. Greg Dorn, President of @HearstHealth, discusses how MCG (and our sister companies @FDB_US & @HCHB_Connect) are working to better interdigitate w/ each other & #EMR platforms: https://t.co/MWfLXyPmTi

[Bent Tree @btbible]

Jesus: “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” (John 3:3) #GoodLife begins by getting LIFE!

[History Photographed @HistoryInPics]

The Isolator. A helmet invented in 1925 that encourages focus and concentration.

[HEARST @Hearst]

.@HearstUK's Darren Goldsby discusses the intersection of #content & #tech with @fippworld https://t.co/Vgmm6vHcYR

[Bloomberg @business]

4 rare whiskies to get in 2016 ...as delicious as they are hard to find https://t.co/kpavsqNNGU

[Frank Turek @DrFrankTurek]

Can An Understanding of Eternal Life Change the Way We See Evil? https://t.co/lcXQWC1jVE #faith

[HEARST @Hearst]

A new #look. We've unveiled a new branding campaign & have a surprise coming soon.… https://t.co/A1mKymF2q0

[Sam High @samuelhigh]

Future of the workplace heavy on work, light on place: analysts https://t.co/9sf1uJY5C8