Thread: Nancy Pelosi - information

Find anything inportant on Pelosi, please put it here.
Easy access to the information in the future.
.........................

I'm taking this article with a grain of salt as it/he uses "unnamed sources" as a habit. It also doesn't have exact/verified information but could contain nuggets of truth that can be used.

This article comes from

Tom Flocco.com
http://tomflocco.com/


House Leader Joins Bush To Assist Illegal Aliens

Date: Tuesday, March 02 @ 17:15:04 EST
Topic: Illegal Immigration

Flashback:

House Leader Joins Bush To Assist Illegal Aliens

[March 3, 2004 -- As Mexican President Vicente Fox visits President Bush at his Crawford, Texas ranch on Friday, issues of open U.S. borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants (now referred to as "undocumented workers") will dominate the talks. The flashback story below reveals that Republicans and Democrats at the very highest levels of governent promulgate the same agendas regarding illegal lawbreakers who cross our half-protected borders each day. Personal presidential favors, vineyard investments and family insider links aside, the issue of taxpayer-funded benefits for Mexican illegals providing cheap labor for wine industry investors is just one more indication that government officials continue to fleece their American constituents.]

by Tom Flocco

PHILADELPHIA -- January 26, 2003 -- (TomFlocco.com) -- While receiving wide media coverage and criticism because she pressed for U.S. acceptance of the Mexican government’s “Matriculas Consulares” identification cards [issued to illegal immigrants] to permit illegals to enter the San Francisco Federal Building which houses her district office, a number of legal, ethical, and constitutional questions remain unanswered regarding House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s curious actions and investments. This, as her multi-million dollar wine industry investments are linked directly to the First Family, while her grape vineyards also stand to benefit from the cheap labor afforded by illegals from Mexico.

“The reason she [Pelosi] did this was that it would help her [illegal] constituents access [taxpayer-funded] services there,” her press spokeswoman, Cindy Jimenez, told us during a phone interview, “and this includes our office,” she added. Jimenez could not explain to us why Rep. Pelosi considered persons illegally entering the country [and her district] her “constituents.”


The San Francisco congresswoman’s strong stance on assistance for illegals facilitates the establishment of their financial credibility, essentially acting as a de facto “stealth amnesty” for illegal aliens. But Pelosi’s press advocates failed to mention that the legislator’s soft enforcement position regarding federal laws also happens to provide a cheap source of labor for building contractors, truckers, and farming industries, including the wine and raisin industry in California where Pelosi and her husband own vineyards.



According to Pelosi’s 2001 Annual U.S. House Financial Disclosure form [the most recent], filed on May 15, 2002, the Minority Leader owns two vineyards. [Zinfandel Lane Vineyard in St. Helena, CA worth between $5,000,001 and $25 million with annual income between $100,001 and $1 million / and Skellenger Lane Vineyard in Napa, CA worth between $1,000,001 and $5 million with annual income between $100,001 and $1 million] Pelosi's financial statement also reported that her husband currently owns $15-$50,000 stock in the Chalone Wine Group, Ltd., and recently sold his $15-$50,000 stock position in California’s Ravenswood Winery.

“Businesses are making money on the spending, banking and labor of illegal immigrants, while regular taxpayers pay for [illegal] immigrants’ health care, education and other needs; then they watch their own wages being depressed by the influx of cheap workers,” said Frosty Wooldridge, a Louisville author and advocate for slowing legal immigration. (1-10-2003, Boulder, Colorado Daily Camera)

DAYS OF WINE AND RAISINS

An Associated Press (AP) report found that “Despite agriculture’s more relaxed labor standards, it was on farms that the AP most often found illegal child labor, including the most extreme cases: the youngest workers toiling the longest hours for the least pay,” according to AP’s David Foster and Farrell Kramer. “Reporters saw 104 children working illegally in agriculture in the last five months....and underage children’s grape-cutting knives flashed in the sunny vineyards of California,” they added.

While AP found countrywide incidences of forged documents, paycheck fraud, and outright lying to federal investigators regarding child labor, there is as yet no information as to whether Pelosi’s vineyards employ either illegal immigrants or child labor.

However, according to AP and other media, numerous examples of illegal child labor and illegal immigrant labor clearly exist in the California wine and raisin industries which contribute to Pelosi’s congressional campaigns. And much of the problem rests with open borders and the congresswoman’s soft and compliant advocacy for lawbreaking illegals.

We were able to contact a knowledgeable source who lives in the wine country of California’s Napa Valley. Our source talked to another individual who knows the manager handling a number of the local vineyards -- including those owned jointly by Nancy Pelosi and her husband.

The source told us that “this farm manager is notorious for telling people who apply for work that he will pay them ‘so much per hour’ which is competitive with other vineyards; but two weeks later when they get their checks, the amount received is far less that what was verbally negotiated -- but never below the minimum wage. Disgruntled, they just quit and he hires more.”

The Napa Valley source also said that “the grape pickers who quit have recounted their experiences with this manager to others who have hired them and paid appropriate and higher level wages,” further corroborating the information.

According to the source, however, it was not established whether the owners, the farm manager, or both benefited from cheap labor maneuverings surrounding the vineyard properties; moreover, in fairness, we were told that this manager does quality work for the Pelosis, so laborers may have come to him because of his reputation, without knowing that “he pays below the industry average wage.” But financial shenanigans exist, we were told.

According to our Napa Valley source, more often than not, however, when it comes to harvest season, Napa county finds itself with many entry level harvest laborers fresh from Mexico, who lack knowledge of the habits of some less principled farm managers.

Knowledgeable about Napa’s wine country machinations, our source told us “It sounds like the Pelosis to be running with who they run with,” adding that “those who own and operate their own farm properties appreciate their laborers and pay them well.”

“Those who own vineyards because it’s a ‘thing to do’ and are clueless about farming perpetuate this labor exploitation problem that otherwise wouldn’t exist. True farmers are land stewards and protectors of their work-hands,” the Napa Valley resident told us.

CLEANING MONEY WITH THE WRATH OF GRAPES

Unfamiliar with the workings of the California wine industry, we raised our eyebrows when our Napa Valley source said someone should find out the exact amount of money the Pelosis actually earned from their vineyards, given their very small acreage of planted grapes and the large income claimed during a time of distressed prices and poor quality.

According to the May, 2001 issue of Napa Valley Online and opensecrets.org, the woman in line to become the next Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (should the chamber change hands in 2004) owns two vineyards -- Zinfandel Lane with 18.6 acres and rental “residences,” and Skellenger Lane with 8 acres and a “homesite” -- totaling 24.6 acres. However, only 9 total acres within the two vineyards are planted with grapes.

The congresswoman’s financial statement claims income of between $200,002 and $2 million dollars for the two properties. This means that the couple earned a minimum of $200,002 -- but possibly $400,000, $750,000, $1 million, $1.5 million -- or as much as $2 million income from the two vineyard properties. The point is, without a tax return, the exact answer is unavailable. However, enlightening information can be gleaned from available statistics regarding income derived from her 9 acres of planted grapes.

Our knowledgeable Napa Valley source reports that “a valuable, top-quality cabernet sauvignon wine vineyard normally receives about $3,000 per ton for the cabernet in an ‘up’ and ‘high demand’ market, which did not exist in 2001 or 2002.” [When Pelosi filed her most recent financial statement] “It is far less now, as California is confronted with a glut of premium quality grapes due to significant planting, and literally over-planting during the last ten years,” we were told.

“And this is the high side for income per ton and yield on the most expensive and desirable variety, cabernet sauvignon,“ our source stated, adding that “quality vineyards produce on average 4.5 tons per acre (as crops are thinned to improve fruit quality). The ‘return per acre’ as a gross income paid by the winery/wineries is thus $13,500 for highest quality.”

The congresswoman’s total planted grape acreage equals 9 acres x $13,500 income per acre of highest quality grapes = $121,500 total gross grape income for the two properties.

More curiously however, our California wine country source revealed that “the AVERAGE cabernet price, however, is only $1,850 per ton x 4.5 acres x 9 acres = $75,000 total gross income for the Pelosi grapes from average quality fruit. So as you can see, the congresswoman may have some explaining to do about who buys their grapes and why they may be getting such an extraordinary price for them.”

We were also told that “her vineyards are ’postage stamp’ sized and basically ‘irrelevant’ to the industry -- small, nuisance-sized parcels that at best are difficult to contract with any winery, and are in areas not known to produce quality fruit within the Oakville district. It is marginal land, which is why it was not planted historically.”

The Napa source told us that “the biggest grape grower on Skellenger Lane [where one of the Pelosi vineyards is located] is Andy Beckstoffer -- and he likes to price his grapes to sell in a $10 per bottle of wine, for goodness sake. This is hardly an indication of extraordinary grape quality!” [suggesting that Pelosi’s Skellenger fruit is average at best.]

[Pelosi’s actual approximate “wine-grape income” is between $75,000 for average fruit and $121,500 for top-line fruit, given their reported planted acreage, and provided their fruit is of average quality -- if less than average quality, then income is even lower, suggesting that there is need of an explanation unless they show significant rental income from the vineyard properties. If Pelosi's tax return shows more that $200,002 income for the two vineyards, then there may be a significant problem.]



Cryptically, our source added that “Many Napa Valley residents find it less than amusing that politicians, judges, attorneys, and certain unsavory types seem to reap outrageously high prices for their crops, regardless of their quality.”

This is particularly disconcerting, in view of an instructive quote from the March 6, 1996 Napa Valley Register: “Napa County is very attractive to the illegitimate investor, thus making it attractive to money laundering,” adding that “Drug financiers, and wholesale and distributor level traffickers often invest in Napa County real estate markets, business or industry [i.e. wineries], the agency contends.”

Thus, according to the Napa Register, the use of vineyards to launder money from other illegal sources is likely to be an issue of interest in such areas as Napa and St. Helena, California. But the real question is whether the big golden state newspapers will report the story.

“Who buys the Pelosi grape crops?” said our source, “and what wineries, and what varieties do they grow, and how much are they paid per ton of each?” said the Napa Valley resident.

The Pelosi financial claims become problematic, our source claims, “if the amounts reported by Representative Pelosi represent ‘net income’ after all expenses of farming operations, debt payment, taxes, and management costs.”

For this would suggest they literally own hundreds of acres of vines to return such a substantial net income, especially if their potential or actual income from any “residence” rental on the vineyard property does not equal the difference in reported income.” Only a tax return would substantiate claims which on the surface do not seem to add up.

Minority Leader Pelosi claims income between $200,002 and $2 million for the two properties, so there may be a discrepancy with which to be reckoned. Our source tells us that “Pelosi spends a great deal of time at her Zinfandel Lane property with a tiny vineyard on a slight slope and while her other vineyard “residences” were not observed, the issue of rental income for a property regularly used by the owners would likely be the only source of additional income.”

“There are vineyards on her Skellenger Lane property but they are not marked or named. Vineyards are laid out in blocks, often about 4.5 acres in size, and it is often impossible to tell where one begins and ends except by differing trellis systems, for example,” we were told. And our source added that the Skellenger property would likely be considered a vineyard and future home-site, as Pelosi reported -- for there were no residences for rental.

“These are times when even long-term premium growers are receiving distress prices and finding it difficult to place their crops with a buyer. How is it that the Pelosis are receiving such extraordinary income from their grapes,” said our source. “And why isn’t the congresswoman suffering the same fate as the other growers?”

These are questions that should be asked by the California media for stories in that state’s newspapers. However, they don’t seem to be following the money; but we would bet there are other Americans who are having difficulty with issues like cheap labor, loss of jobs, and subsidizing illegals with taxpayer funds -- let alone possible money-laundering.

FRIENDS IN "HIGH" PLACES

And in case anyone is wondering if there are Bush Administration links to Nancy Pelosi, the wine industry, and its California vineyard machinations -- there are some really curious ones. Moreover, the ties travel right to the White House, since George W. Bush’s 42 year old sister Dorothy “Doro” Bush-Koch is married to Washington, DC wine industry lobbyist Bobby Petri Koch -- George W.’s brother-in-law -- a match made in wine heaven. (Pictured on far left is Nancy Pelosi)

In July, 2003, Bobby Koch is set to become president and CEO of the Wine Institute, a trade organization of about 550 California wineries and affiliated businesses, according to WineSpectatorOnline (6-28-2002). Koch (pronounced “Cook”) has a past that includes stints as a staff director for past Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, and working at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for former Rep. Tony Coelho, both Democrats.

And according to the March, 2001 issue of Business Forward, interestingly, Koch played an active role in Bush’s presidential campaign, and the Democrat is even known to have Republican George W.’s ear.

However, Bush’s brother-in-law refuses to discuss his relationship with the President, says Business Forward, adding that “If I have something to say to the president, I’ll say it in private and in confidence, and I know that he can do the same with me.” So Democratic House Leader Pelosi and her fellow California grape growers and investors have a “close friend in the Republican family.”

But that’s not all. Nancy Pelosi’s 32 year-old daughter, Alexandra, a former NBC Dateline producer, had “an all access view [for eighteen months] from the back-of-the-plane of the guy who would become Bush 43” -- President George W. -- while he was running for president during the primaries, according to the Austin Chronicle. (1-3-2002)

How the younger Pelosi was picked for such a plum job as a 31 year-old was unexplained, but we will leave that to the imagination of the readers of this piece. Alexandra Pelosi, making her first film, followed George W. for a year-and-a-half on the road as an NBC producer, later editing hundreds of hours of footage into a 75 minute film called “Journeys With George.”

Of her ultimate press junket, the younger Pelosi told the Chronicle “I made this film simply to show what it was like to be a reporter sitting on the bus during a presidential campaign.” But we’re still not sure how or why a Democratic House Minority Whip’s (at the time) daughter gets eighteen months of unrestricted “access” to the Republican presidential nominee. Oh, that’s right. It was just a coincidence. So Republicans shouldn’t “wine” about the curious entree. ( Alexandra Pelosi, in a quiet moment with the President)


Savvy and informed observers will also remember that President Bush lobbied Mrs. Pelosi's House Intelligence Committee mightily against having a congressional investigation of the attacks on September 11. Ultimately, Rep. Pelosi became a co-chairperson of the Joint 9/11 Congressional Intelligence Committee -- having access to unpublicized 9/11 evidence at the very highest level.

Moreover, it has been widely acknowledged by hundreds of 9/11 independent researchers and websites exclusively devoted to the unanswered questions of September 11, that Rep. Pelosi's Committee effectively conducted a closed-door, sham and whitewashed 9/11 probe -- with virtually none of the key lines of inquiry publicly addressed -- such as a) governmental deception and prior warnings, b) failed military air-defenses, c) pre-9/11 insider trading and the secret SEC "Control List," d) congressmen and senators meeting on the day of the attacks with the individual funding the hijackers, e) FBI obstruction of its field agents investigating Islamic terrorism, f) V.P. Cheney's refusal to divulge the members and agenda of the Presidential Energy Task Force and its relationship to terrorism, oil, gas, and the Caspian Sea basin, etc.

SUBSIDIZING WEALTH AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE

While Minority Leader Pelosi advocates and requests actions that clearly benefit illegal immigrants -- providing an endless supply of readily available and cheap but illegal labor for California farms [the "public services" for this labor, such as schools, police-fire protection, hospitals, and insurance premiums are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers], she and her grape growing associates and campaign contributors own vineyards in Napa County -- This, with ready-made opportunities to exploit their adjacent access to the infinite and illegal labor bounty.

Moreover, the unregulated immigration [and concomitant violation of multiple federal laws] which the powerful congresswoman advocates has staggering tax implications for medical care, schools, housing, food stamps, police, and fire protection.

Most Americans are totally unaware that Congress has enacted laws related to "chain immigration." For once illegals acquire forged papers or "back-door" bank accounts and driver licenses via matricula consular cards, and otherwise begin to develop their legitimacy as citizens, they may summon their family and relatives to also enter the country to acquire citizenship -- further extending the fraud while abusing the immigration laws. ( INS building, San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)


Since the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has no viable record or clue as to where literally millions of illegals are located, how many there are, and what they are doing, etc., the agency is powerless to stop the endless stream of illegals moving into the cheap labor jobs as prior illegals move on to compete with legal U.S. citizens for better-paying union jobs. Legitimate American citizens just pick up the tab for Pelosi’s support of lawbreakers and her weak congressional oversight of the INS.
(INS Building- San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)

All this, notwithstanding a host of other taxpayer-funded services provided by legal American citizens. And what about foreigners who waited their turn to enter the U.S.A. without resorting to climbing fences, crawling through tunnels, jumping off boats at unguarded coastlines, or wading the Rio Grande river?

That her “undocumented constituents” are exploiting Mrs. Pelosi’s willingness to subsidize illegals at taxpayer expense while potentially providing cheap labor for her personal use and that of her friends, fellow landowners, and campaign contributors merits serious attention. And lawmakers look the other way -- confident that their local constituents will not "recall" them in between elections for their oversight failures.
(INS Building- San Francisco, Ca 1-18-2003)

Politicians from both sides of the aisle are literally tripping over themselves to pander for the votes border-crossing lawbreakers attempting to jump to the front of the line to become illegal citizens -- assisted and supported by powerful lawmakers with campaign and personal finance conflicts of interest. This at the expense of law-abiding Americans who pay for automatic congressional salary increases and lavish pensions and perks, only to become financial and even 9/11 victims of congressional failure to protect the country by sealing the borders from terrorists who murder and lawbreakers who steal services from the public tax coffers.

No one is asking Leader Pelosi whether she is trading campaign cash from cheap-labor oriented industries in return for her un-enforced and unregulated immigration advocacy -- while potentially garnering some extra personal income for herself and her cheap-labor-seeking business associates and contributors -- all off the backs of an endless stream of illegals and otherwise low-cost labor.

Meanwhile, legitimate American citizens pick up the debt-load and increased tax tab for extra “services” and “maintenance” prior to when her “undocumented constituents” obtain their illegal and forged papers to perpetuate the same fraud well into future generations.

Bethany Rich, spokeswoman for the Fed’s General Services Administration (GSA), said “Mrs. Pelosi requested the procedure [to assist illegals] so cardholders would have access to the Internal Revenue Service office in the Federal Building.” However, Rich never explained how or why Pelosi would think illegals should be submitting tax returns if they had violated federal laws by entering the country illegally.

“Any illegal immigrant living in the U.S. can ask to speak to ‘their representative’ [?] in the district where they are illegally residing. Did you know that,” Cindy Jimenez told us, adding that “we do not ask brown-skinned people to see their ID cards in America.”


According to the Washington Times (1-10-2003), Pelosi’s new procedure was reviewed by U.S. Marshals and GSA’s Federal Protective Service, which provides security for the building: “They reviewed the security risks, and deemed them to be minimal,” Rich said.

However, according to staff lawyers at Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement (FILE), actions “aiding and abetting an illegal entrant in his continued illegal residence in the United States constitutes a dangerous and unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public, since, among other reasons, unlike legal entrants, an illegal entrant is not subject to a criminal background or health check before entering the United States.”

Our attempts to directly contact Pelosi for comment as to why she refuses to require illegals to undergo criminal background and health checks before allowing American taxpayers to support them with services accorded only to legal citizens were unsuccessful.

When asked whether she thought the INS was doing a vigilant job in protecting the sovereignty of America’s borders from those immigrants and terrorists who have been entering and residing in the country illegally, Pelosi’s press spokesperson Cindy Jimenez replied, “I am not going to get into issues dealing with why illegals are allowed to pass across our borders. I have to go now. Goodbye.” So much for tough questions.

BANKING ON AN ENDLESS SOURCE OF NEW BANK ACCOUNTS

Los Angeles Wells Fargo Bank -- in violation of federal law -- has entered into an "arrangement" with the Consulate General of Mexico to accept the Matricula Consular card as valid identification for opening bank accounts. [Click here to read story]

Pelosi (D-8th-CA), ranked as the 17th richest Washington, DC House or Senate lawmaker in the 9-9-2002 issue of Roll Call, lists a Wells Fargo Bank mortgage held by her husband on San Francisco real estate for between $500,000 and $1 million dollars, and a joint Wells Fargo account for between $15,000 and $50,000.

Thus, Pelosi benefits from a huge Wells Fargo mortgage while her bank benefits from thousands of new accounts opened by illegal immigrants -- funneled indirectly toward the bank by Leader Pelosi’s pro-illegal advocacy. Such examples of Washington’s unspoken quid-pro-quo business-legislator climate speaks volumes as perks are passed around, even in the face of current unpunished corporate stock fraud.

According to her financial statement, Nancy Pelosi and her husband live in a Washington K Street residence worth between $1 million and $5 million, and recently purchased a Norden, CA town home worth between $1 million and $5 million. A visit to www.opensecrets.org will acquaint the uninitiated citizen as to the financial status of their own legislators and administration officials.

According to the office of Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-6th-CO), chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, a number of American banks currently recognize the card issued by Mexican consular officials throughout the U.S. to illegals as a valid ID to open an account, including such large institutions as Wells Fargo Bank, Bank One, and U.S. Bancorp, etc.

Thus far there are no statistics regarding how many illegal immigrants open new bank accounts using forged documents available on the internet, according to Tancredo. And statistics are thus far unavailable as to how many illegals or questionable immigrants are working in the California vineyards and raisin farms.

But Tancredo said that “Mexican officials have stated that getting local governments to accept these cards is a way to maneuver around the U.S. Congress -- which has so far blocked attempts to pass any amnesty provision for illegal aliens.”

“It is extremely disconcerting to see agents of a foreign country actively trying to lobby American elected officials to aid and abet lawbreakers, but it is even more infuriating when cities and members of Congress become co-conspirators,” said Tancredo.

Unbelievably, Knight-Ridder Newspapers (1-13-2003), reported that Mexico literally bypassed the U.S. government: “The matricula is the greatest achievement of the Mexican government, and it doesn’t have anything to do with the Bush Administration,” said Primitivo Rodriguez, a Mexican sociologist, immigration expert and author. “Mexico never talked with Bush or with Secretary of State Colin Powell or any legislators. They talked to banks.”

The Colorado legislator’s press release on the matter said that the Phillip Burton Federal Building, site of Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco district office, is the first of its type in the country to accept the Mexican Consulate ID card. The building began accepting the cards on Wednesday, January 8, 2003, as part of a four-month trial program, which incredibly, will mainly serve illegal immigrants who are ineligible for U.S. identification.

LAW & ETHICS VS. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

While we have recently been harsh regarding the corruption of the Bush administration, the actions of the House Minority Leader clearly present potential incidences of Federal law violation. And as such, should be investigated and prosecuted with equal intensity so that the public’s confidence in the legal system is restored.

(Doro Bush-Koch, Wife of Bobby Koch - - Wine industry lobbyist)



[Lou Dobb’s CNN “Daily Enron Scoreboard” reminds citizens that the legal system is broken and white collar financial crime is left unpunished. Moreover, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott just lost his position for an off-handed racial comment while House Minority Leader Pelosi’s actions literally abet and aid terrorists and law-breaking illegals -- while also encouraging criminal and health hazards. Where is the equality? Where is the fairness? Tucked away behind a cloak of personal and financial conflicts of interest?]

In Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), criminal penalties are provided for regarding Pelosi’s acts which clearly “encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.”

The only question remaining is whether a talented attorney or legal organization has the courage and tenacity to pursue a claim against the Justice Department for failure in its oversight responsibility concerning citizens and/or legislators who use their power to violate federal immigration laws.
FILE’s attorneys clarify Pelosi’s actions by explaining that “encourage” and “induce” include actions that permit illegal aliens to be more confident that they could continue to reside with impunity in the United States, or actions that offer illegal aliens “a chance to stand equally with all other American citizens.”

FILE is an immigration reform group seemingly planning to jump all over those government agencies, legislators and individuals failing to uphold immigration laws by suggesting that they plan to initiate civil action in the courts.

The reform group’s attorneys suggest that “to prove that a state, local government agency [or even a powerful federal legislator like Leader Pelosi] ‘encouraged or induced’ illegal Mexican aliens, all the government [Justice Department] needs to establish is that the agency [or legislator] knowingly helped or advised the aliens, or emboldened them, or made them more confident in their continued illegal residence in the United States.”

Thus, the Justice Department’s and FILE’s lawyers need go no further in their search for incontrovertible evidence than to sit in when Pelosi meets with her illegal “constituents,” as her press spoksperson says she calls them, in the San Francisco Federal Building in her legislative district. And perhaps FILE may want to litigate Justice’s failure to prosecute Pelosi’s actions.


But questions arise as to whether President Bush would quash any Ashcroft Justice Department effort to enforce the law. For George W. allowed Pelosi’s daughter Alexandra unprecedented presidential “access“ for 18 months; moreover, his brother-in-law Bobby Koch, is the top lobbyist for vineyard owner-investor-congresswoman Pelosi, the California Wine Institute, and her fellow grape-growers. Who knew? (Top Right -Bobby Koch)

What a shame that personal and financial conflicts of interest and ethical violations at the very highest levels of government have to affect the enforcement of immigration law which protects Americans from terrorists, foreign criminal and health issues, and illegals who drain the U.S.Treasury’s funds for “services.”

Both Democrats and Republicans should be outraged at such legal and ethical injustices. And what about foreigners who wait their turn to apply for legal entry into the U.S.? Will Congress hold hearings? Fat chance -- unless their feet are held to the fire.

FILE goes one step further in reporting that Section 401 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (amended by the Illegal Immigration and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) prohibits non-qualified [illegal] aliens from receiving most “Federal public benefits.”

The group’s attorneys solidify Pelosi’s actions by explaining that “any policy that accepts the matricula consular for the purpose of doling out city services [let alone the ‘services’ of a Federal House Minority Leader in her district offices] explicitly violates this provision of federal law insofar as the services to illegal aliens are paid for with federal funds.”

Unfortunately, Leader Pelosi is also breaching Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution [the Commerce Clause], according to FILE: “Congress has ‘plenary power’ over all aspects of immigration law, including ‘the right to provide a system of registration and identification’ for aliens, because ‘the entire control of international relations’ is invested in the national government” -- not solely with Congresswoman Pelosi.

Courts have repeatedly held that no governmental authority may establish any policy that relates to immigration other than Congress and authorized federal agencies, and that the “power to regulate immigration is unquestionably exclusively a federal power,” according to FILE’s legal staff.

But it gets worse for the California congresswoman. Entering the United States without inspection [illegal entry] is a criminal offense under 8 U.S.C. [United States Code] 1325. Providing public services to such an alien in “knowing and reckless disregard” of the alien’s illegal status amounts to aiding and abetting a crime, and is a criminal violation in and of itself.

By the INA Section 274 (a) aiding and abetting statute, the distinction is eliminated between principles and accessories in alien smuggling crimes. And courts have held that aiding and abetting also relates to conduct [by any person] while the illegal alien is in the United States.

Moreover, official acceptance of the matricula consular by ANY public entity can be said to be dangerous and negligent, and, therefore, the public entity, and its officers or representatives, may not enjoy sovereign immunity in many states under certain circumstances wherein government immunity is strictly construed by the courts and its waiver liberally or deferentially construed, also according to FILE’s attorneys.

Thus, “If any illegal entrant, whose illegal presence in the United States can be shown to have been encouraged, induced, harbored, and/or aided by any public entity [or elected legislator], commits a crime while illegally present in the United States, during the commission of which an American citizen suffers personal injury,” FILE says it will attempt to help the injured party bring a personal injury suit against the public entity and, to the extent allowed by law, against its officers, individually and severally, for damages.

So House Minority Leader Pelosi is placing her personal fortune of millions in stocks, bonds, vineyards, bank accounts, rental properties, and multiple personal residences -- not to mention her House Leadership position -- at risk in order to violate federal laws and the United States Constitution, her local constituents none the wiser.

Maupin, who owns a gun store, patrols his property on the Mexican border in a fully camouflaged halftrack. Mexicans don't bother him much any more.

The immigration watchdog group also reminds ALL Americans that aiding and abetting an illegal entrant in his continued illegal residence in the United States [as Congresswoman Pelosi is clearly doing] constitutes a dangerous and unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public, since, among other reasons, unlike legal entrants, an illegal entrant is not subject to criminal background or health check before entering the United States.

The organization recently noted an aggressive Mexico City-backed campaign within the U.S. to push for acceptance of the ID card issued to illegals. Roberto Rodriguez Hernandez, general director of the ID project for Mexico’s foreign ministry, made no secret of his motives and tactics, according to the Washington Times:

“It’s necessary to push the need for an [amnesty for illegals] at all levels. A little lobbying, pushing from [U.S.] mayors up to governors, then going through congressional representatives [pro-Mexico federal legislative puppets advocating unregulated and uncontrolled immigration?] and senators is worth the effort.”

Worse, however, is that weak congressional oversight is allowing the above effort to be coordinated on U.S. soil in Mexico’s 43 consulates scattered across the country, as the Bush Treasury Department also appears to have given banks tacit approval to accept the Mexican IDs, according to the Washington Post (12-22-2002).

This is the view of the US / Mexico border one mile from the ocean, facing East. The huge road is for Border Patrol Vehicles only.

The Post cites recent surveys showing a growing gap between what the U.S. public thinks about immigration and what U.S. political and business leaders think: Some 60 % of the public regards the current level of immigration as a “critical threat” to United States security, for example.

Vulnerability to terrorism can indeed be one consequence of the illegal immigration that Democrat House Leader Pelosi advocates but the phenomenon is far from one dimensional.

Pelosi’s legal and constitutional breaches may already be un-repairable, however, for according to the Washington Post, one million Mexican ID cards have already been distributed to illegals living in the U.S. just this past year alone -- health, safety, and terrorism issues, let alone taxpayer-funded “illegal services” notwithstanding.
(Picture, Mexican Government Capitol)

That Pelosi and other uncontrolled immigration advocates are a threat to the health, safety and well-being of American citizens is quite evident; but the Minority Leader is only one key leader in the pro-illegal immigration movement. There are other officials -- some at the highest levels -- who are also ignoring the public surveys, in order to encourage illegal entry into America.


("The fence" in the middle of the freeway is to keep the illegal Mexicans from getting run over by Cars, Trucks, Etc. Thousands a year are hit by cars trying to run from the Border Patrol, SD, CA)


The question is whether some individual or group will legally challenge the clear and present threats Congresswoman Pelosi imposes upon her fellow citizens by her dangerous pro-illegal immigration advocacy and actions -- all in clear violation of multiple federal and constitutional laws.
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/HouseLeaderJoins.htm

http://www.house.gov/pelosi/prlaraza.htm

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi


Pelosi Honored for Her Commitment to Hispanic Issues By the National Council of La Raza
March 3, 1998

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is to receive the National Council of La Raza's Congressional Award at the Ninth Annual Congressional Awards Dinner this evening. "I am honored by the National Council of La Raza's recognition of my work on behalf of the Latino community and all people who seek respect and fair treatment from our government. In San Francisco, the culturally rich Latino heritage adds so much to the diversity of our city. The Hispanic community's commitment to family and democratic values helps to make our nation a better place," Pelosi said.

The award is presented to the legislator who has shown unqualified support for issues of concern to the Latino community. According to Raul Yzaguirre, NCLR President: "Representative Nancy Pelosi is well known for her outstanding record on human and civil rights, as well as her work to preserve access to benefits for legal immigrants. She has been equally courageous as one of the few members of Congress to uphold a fact-based and respectful debate on immigration policy."

In addition to Congresswoman Pelosi, Senator Pete Domenici will also be honored.


http://www.house.gov/pelosi/matricula.html
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi of California released the following statement today about a pilot program in which the Federal Building in San Francisco will accept the Matricula Consular identification card issued by the Mexican Consulate:
"I am pleased to announce that individuals carrying the updated version of the Mexican Consulate-issued identification card with photo, 'Matricula Consular de Alta Seguridad' (MCAS - Matricula Consular), will now have access to the Phillip Burton Federal Building and United States Courthouse at 450 Golden Gate Avenue in San Francisco. The Matricula Consular will be accepted on a trial basis until April 30, 2003 to determine whether the Matricula Consular will be accepted on a permanent basis.

"The Mexican Consulate in San Francisco has informed me that the San Francisco Federal Building will be the first in the nation to pilot the acceptance of the Matricula Consular. I am grateful to the United States Marshals Service and the General Services Administration -- the agencies responsible for security at the Federal Building -- for working with my office on the acceptance of the Matricula Consular. I also wish to thank the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, La Raza Centro Legal, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, and other community leaders for working with my staff on this important matter.

"For questions about the acceptance of the matriculas at the Federal Building, please contact Harriet Ishimoto of my San Francisco district office at (415) 556-4862."

This one is in Spanish:
http://democraticleader.house.gov/sp/av ... easeID=225

This is from a thread in October 2006-

http://link.toolbot.com/www.alipac.us/22842

Nancy Pelosi's Sour Grapes

http://www.investors.com/editorial/edit ... 1278714751

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 10/31/2006

Leaders: Rep. Nancy Pelosi has her own "grapes of wrath" scenario going on. Is her opposition to enhanced border security due to the fact that the House Democratic leader personally profits from a steady supply of cheap foreign labor?

If Democrats regain control of the House of Representatives, the San Francisco Democrat will not only be the first female speaker, but also the richest. The liberal Center for Responsive Politics puts her net worth as high as $55 million.

There is no record of Pelosi's ever returning her portion of those "tax cuts for the rich" to the U.S. Treasury. Or any record, for that matter, of using her (dare we use the word?) windfall to give the workers at her Napa Valley vineyards a raise.

As Peter Schweizer notes in his best-selling expose of liberal hypocrisy, "Do As I Say (Not As I Do)," part of the fortune of this defender of the working man is a Napa Valley vineyard worth $25 million that she owns with her husband. The vineyard produces expensive grapes for high-end wines. Napa grapes bring up to $4,000 a ton compared with $300 a ton for, say, San Joaquin grapes.

But Pelosi, winner of the 2003 Cesar Chavez award from the United Farm Workers, hires only nonunion workers and sells these grapes to nonunion wineries. Schweizer places Pelosi in a chapter titled "Workers of the World Unite Somewhere Else." UFW members need not apply at the Pelosi family vineyards.

Which makes Pelosi's steadfast opposition to any attempts to enhance border security and stem the flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. all the more interesting since she seems to be among those rich employers who financially benefit from a steady supply of cheap foreign labor.

She led the opposition and voted against the Secure Fence Act of 2006 recently signed into law by President Bush to build a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.

She opposed the Real ID Act of 2005, a valuable anti-terror tool, while bragging that Democrats under her leadership "defeated Republican attempts to restrict the easily forged Matricula Consular card" issued by the Mexican government.

She voted against a bill to make employers such as herself financially liable for hospital costs if undocumented employees seek medical attention, preferring that either taxpayers foot the bill or that hospitals close under the burden, as many are doing throughout the Southwest.

In 2005 she voted against barring the issuance of driver's licenses to illegal aliens and against a requirement that businesses use an electronic system to verify whether new hires have the legal right to work in the U.S.

Nor has Pelosi been a fan of employer sanctions against the hiring of illegal aliens. In 2003, she accused immigration officers of conducting "terrorizing raids" on Wal-Mart stores that led to the arrest of more than 300 illegal aliens.

Loraine Stewart, a farmworker advocate with Napa Valley Community Housing, in a 2004 San Francisco Chronicle article estimated that half of the migrant labor force in the valley consisted of undocumented workers, without whom "not one bottle of wine would get made here."

The people coming across our southern border aren't just seeking better lives. They're joined by drug smugglers and an assortment of people with criminal records. There are also what Immigration and Customs Enforcement calls OTMs (Other Than Mexicans) among whom potential terrorists could sneak in undetected.

Pelosi apparently puts her financial interests above the security of this nation and the safety of its citizens, exploiting undocumented workers in the process. If the people at Immigration and Customs are looking for an employer to check out, we know this little vineyard in the Napa Valley.

Nancy Pelosi


Nancy Pelosi

11/8/02

http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE ... 21108.html

Does Pelosi’s Non-Union Vineyard Use Illegal Aliens?

http://www.capoliticalnews.com/s/spip.php?article13

Does She Pay a "livable wage"? Does She Provide First Class Health Class Coverage?

Monday 30 October 2006, by admin

Now we have the answer as to why Nancy Pelosi is so supportive of illegal aliens and promotes an Open Borders policy. This ultra-rich Bay Area liberal owns a Napa Valley vineyard. Better yet, it is non-union!

I did not know that Cesar Chavez was ardently opposed to illegal aliens...he even worked with the INS to deport them—sounds like he and Chris Simcox of the Minutemen could be friends! As Ruben Navarrette Jr. reported in the Arizona Republic: ( 8/31/97)

"Cesar Chavez, a labor leader intent on protecting union membership, was as effective a surrogate for the INS as ever existed. Indeed, Chavez and the United Farm Workers Union he headed routinely reported, to the INS, for deportation, suspected illegal immigrants who served as strikebreakers or refused to unionize."

But, the Progressive Pelosi has lots to answer. Lets start with these questions:

1. She supports "Livable Wage" measures—does she pay her employees a "living wage"?

2. She believes in unions, why doesn’t she push her members to join a union?

3. She believes Wal Mart is a bad company for not providing every temporary worker or intern with world class health insurance—does she provide her workers with the same health care coverage she gets as a member of Congress?

4. Since she is a promoter of the concept of Global Warming, I presume she has no gas or diesel generated machines in her vineyards—she should not be part of the problem.

5. Does Pelosi take any Federal Agriculture funds to grow or not to grow in her vineyards?

6. Does she check to see if illegal aliens are working for her at the vineyards? does she call the appropriate agency and check the documents and Social Security cards?

These are just a few questions that must be asked of this Progressive—is she honest with her votes or with her money?

Steve Frank



Pelosi’s Stake in Illegal Immigration By Joseph Klein FrontPageMagazine.com | October 30, 2006

The Minuteman Project, founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the liberal press.

So it was no surprise that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”

Gilchrist did not stop there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the Foley page controversy.

Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.

At the same time, Pelosi has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus Mall.

How many other terrorist suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the “matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’ licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally register to vote in our elections.

Pelosi also believes in giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share information they learn about an individual’s immigration status with Federal immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the deportability of alien terrorists.

Jim Gilchrist cut to the chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want you to read:

"As we’ve shown again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."

Pelosi sees Jim Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker of the House.

Gilchrist, of course, is accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the "Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans. Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance, which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement declaring:

“The Minutemen are not a legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is illegal.” (Emphasis added)

We have come to the point in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border and reporting illegal entry to the authorities.

Leftist slogans like “no human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants, but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values, not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be thrown aside now?

What we are witnessing is a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out?

It is high time, as Jim Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.

http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/005211.html
July 01, 2006
Pelosi: 'Republican Record on Border Security Is an Unmitigated Failure'
Nanci Pelosi has ordered the following to be promulgated:
The primary obligation of elected officials is to protect the American people and to protect our borders.

"Reports that the Bush administration cannot muster even half of the National Guard troops scheduled by the end of this month for deployment at the border demonstrate yet again that the Republican record on border security is an unmitigated failure. It is unacceptable that nearly five years since 9/11 our nation's borders remain in a perilous state of insecurity...
Needless to say, that's rich. In "Nanci Pelosi, supporter of sweatshops, opponent of citizens and laws" I offer the following 2003 quote about the WalMart raids:
"We think there might be a better way to go about this because the fact is that it is against the law for the employer to hire these people so there should be more focus on the employer and less in these terrorizing raids."
It's statements like that that encourage illegal immigration. In fact, she almost sounds like a Wal*Mart flack.

She's called illegal aliens her "constituents" and she supports allowing people to access federal buildings using Mexico's Matricula Consular card.

In short, Nancy Pelosi is as strong a supporter of illegal immigration as president Bush. While she's right about the National Guard, she and Bush are still on basically the same side of the issue.

http://link.toolbot.com/dailytexanonline.com/22840

La Raza seminar draws business, political speakers
Politicians work to garner Hispanics' support in elections
by Nicolas Brulliard (Daily Texan Staff)
Posted: 7/15/03
National-level politicians and businessmen courted the Hispanic community at the National Council de La Raza Annual Conference on Monday.

Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean, U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as well as Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, addressed the NCLR audience in an effort to gain the support of the Hispanic population for upcoming elections.

Hispanics are expected to play a key role in the electoral process, as they now constitute the largest minority in the nation with more than 38 million people, according to figures released last month by the U.S. Census Bureau.

"The Hispanic community enriches our country every day," Pelosi said. "Hispanic values ... are American values." Pelosi spoke briefly on health care and representation of Hispanics in Congress before insisting on immigration and education reform.

"Congress must pass the DREAM Act now," she said, referring to the pending bill designed to clear federal barriers to education and work confronted by children of undocumented immigrants. However, Pelosi's focused primarily on the 2004 presidential election, in which she will not be a candidate.
"You don't need a president that just speaks Spanish," she said. "You deserve a president that understands Hispanics."

As 7.3 million Hispanic citizens are not yet registered to vote, motivating the Hispanic community might prove to be a key factor in the election.

"You have the power to decide the next election and determine the next president of the United States," Pelosi said.

Former governor of Vermont and presidential candidate Howard Dean delivered a vibrant campaign speech, emphasizing immigration, racial profiling and health insurance.

"In my state 99 percent of children under the age of 18 have health insurance," he said.

Dean criticized President Bush's record in office, but also directed his attacks at other Democrats as well, reproaching them for being too conservative.

"We are not going to beat George Bush by being Bush lite," he said.

Democrats did not have a complete monopoly of the podium Monday. Hutchison, the only Republican speaker at the four-day conference, interrupted a long list of Democratic speakers.

NCLR President Raul Yzaguirre insisted Sunday that his organization was nonpartisan and had invited many Republicans to the conference. Most had simply declined the invitation, he said. Hutchison, who received over 50 percent of the Hispanic vote in the 1996 senatorial election, discussed issues ranging from access to health care to tax reliefs for married couples.

While all three politicians present on Monday advocated support of small businesses, major corporations had the last word at the conference. Dell CEO Michael Dell spoke about access to computers for Hispanic families, and Washington Mutual President Kerry Killinger discussed the problem of home ownership. Sixty-eight percent of Americans own their home, but only 48 percent of Hispanics own theirs, Killinger said.

"That 20 percent gap is unacceptable," he said.

Joining action to his words, Killinger then formally pledged that Washington Mutual will donate $1 million to NCLR for home ownership and economic development in the Hispanic community.

http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/061013_pelosi.htm

Nancy Pelosi: Illegal Alien Employer?
By Joe Guzzardi

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is much in the news as the 2006 elections enter the home stretch.

But not as much as she should be, given her vulnerability on illegal immigration.

Pelosi, the always smirking super-liberal from California’s 8th Congressional District is one of the desperate Republicans’ most valuable assets.

"Vote Republican," GOP candidates from coast to coast urge, "Or we may get Pelosi as Speaker."

Even more frightening, candidates do not hesitate to point out, Pelosi would stand just second in line, behind the Vice President, to succeed to the White House.

And to the patriotic immigration reform community, few names raise hackles as quickly or as high as Pelosi’s.

VDARE.COM contributor Don Collins recently pointed out (despite being a Democrat, like me) that Pelosi ranks dead last in Congressional immigration voting. Hence Pelosi’s combined F-/F grade at Americans for Better Immigration for both her career and her most recent immigration votes.

More grating is that Pelosi has consistently flaunted her open-borders bias even when the smarter course would be for her to remain silent…or at least subdued.

Even her peers consider Pelosi a blabbermouth, according to a recent Time magazine article, " Anyone Knows Not To Mess With Me." [ By Perry Bacon Jr, September 4, 2006]

Who can forget that in 2003 Pelosi went to bat for Mexico, illegal immigrants and Wal-Mart all in one statement? In response to alien round-ups at the retail giant, she said that the "terrorizing raids" would end when workers in all sectors of the economy were legalized.

The kicker: Pelosi delivered her remarks from Mexico. She was there sucking up to President Vicente Fox, along with a team of like-minded Congressional colleagues Representatives: David Hobson (R-OH); Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX), Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; Sam Farr (D-CA); Hilda Solis (D-CA); and Linda Sanchez (D-CA)!

But the complete Pelosi story is even uglier.

Pelosi sits near the top of the list of wealthy Congressmen. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Pelosi and her husband have amassed a fortune approaching $55 million—much of it from real estate development and Napa Valley vineyard ownership. (Take a few moments to peruse the C.R.P. list to find out how much money your local representatives have in the bank.)

And it is a near certainty that part of her and her husband’s wealth is derived from illegal immigrant labor. Their vineyards use non-union labor to pick grapes and sell those grapes to non-union wineries. Read the various Internet blogs on the subject—including our friends the Lone Wacko and Flopping Aces.

Take it from someone who just this morning walked though a Lodi, CA. vineyard with his dogs—illegal aliens work in those fields.

Under normal political circumstances—that it, a true Republican in the White House against a thorn-in-the side Democrat—the best way to get rid of Pelosi would be to influence constituents to vote her out of office by backing her Republican challenger.

Pelosi is, after all, up for re-election in November. She is opposed by three-time chairman of the San Francisco Republican Party and solid anti-illegal immigration candidate, Mike DeNunzio.

DeNunzio on illegal immigration/ Pelosi:

"We can end illegal immigration with secure borders and fair rules for citizenship, including a strict guest worker program. Nancy Pelosi supports ‘ sanctuary cities’ like San Francisco that flout the law and create a magnet for illegals. We should honor those immigrants who played by the rules and contributed to our nation, not reward those who broke the law."

DeNunzio is in every other way a natural candidate for the White House to support. He backs Bush on things I don’t: the Iraq War, national defense, tax cuts, homeland defense, private social security accounts, energy and health care.

If Bush weren’t such a RINO he could turn the Pelosis’ hiring of illegal immigrants for her personal gain over to his hatchet man Karl Rove to do some serious dirt-digging and mud-slinging.

Rove could lead a non-stop campaign similar to the one currently waged against ex-Congressman Mark Foley to expose Pelosi as a criminal who exploits illegal aliens for personal gain.

Things for Pelosi would quickly turn white-hot…if only Bush would come to his senses about immigration.

Since the Eighth District is solidly Democratic—in 2004 Pelosi won against a token opponent with 84 percent of the vote—even heavy financial backing from the Republican Party might not be enough put DeNunzio over the top. ( Spending to date for 2006: Pelosi $1.2 million, DeNunzio, $71,000)

But, since, according to the Federal Election Commission website, Republican committees have raised $104 million more than Democrats, it could easily send DeNunzio say $1 million to bring him on cash par with Pelosi.

So—yesterday I spoke to DeNunzio to ask him what assistance the RNC had given him.

DeNunzio told me that he had traveled to Washington, D. C. to meet with party leaders—and that he specifically requested that the party did not give him any money, since he felt that it would be more advantageous to help "competitive races" in the effort to "prevent Pelosi from becoming Speaker."

I guess this self-sacrifice is understandable, at least from the point of view of a party chairman. The GOP is a tight corner. Incumbent Pelosi is vulnerable…but on the one issue that Bush refuses to address intelligently.

By default then, Bush is stuck with Pelosi as House Minority leader—and that’s if he gets lucky in November.

Joe Guzzardi [ e-mail him] is the Editor of VDARE.COM Letters to the Editor. In addition, he is an English teacher at the Lodi Adult School and has been writing a weekly newspaper column since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM.

http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/showinsi ... /10/161331

With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
For the story behind the story...


Friday, Jan. 10, 2003

Rep. Pelosi Abets Illegal Aliens

San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, has pressured a federal building in her hometown into becoming the first in the nation to accept Mexican-issued ID cards, a favorite tool of illegal aliens.

The congresswoman insists she just wants cardholders to have access to the Internal Revenue Service office in the Phillip Burton Federal Building, which also houses offices of the FBI and, wuddayaknow, Nancy Pelosi.

Opponents say accepting the ID cards encourages illegal aliens "to continue to break the law and creates an unsafe atmosphere," the Washington Times reported today.


"There is no one in the United States of America that needs a [Mexican-issued] ID card other than someone who is here illegally or someone here who is a felon," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.


"This is not a secure system, and even if it were a secure system, what is the responsibility of our government to accept a foreign government's card?"

Mexico issues the Matricula Consular cards through its consular offices. "Cardholders are widely recognized to be in the United States illegally because they otherwise would be able to obtain state-issued cards, such as driver's licenses," the Times noted.

'Co-conspirator' Pelosi

Tancredo fumed that a top government official such as Rep. Pelosi would support the scheme. He called her a "co-conspirator" to lawbreakers.

"I know that we are not supposed to be surprised by even the most bizarre behavior emanating out of San Francisco," he said, "but we should at least be taken aback when a member of Congress from that area encourages people to violate the laws of this nation."

Pelosi mouthpiece Cindy Jimenez claimed the program improved safety "because people will have an incentive to register with the Mexican consulate while they are in the U.S."

'To Pay Their Taxes'


"The intent of the effort is to allow these individuals to have access to the federal building if they want to go pay their taxes as well as use the post office, and also be able to talk to their representative," she said.

Really? We didn't realize that illegal aliens filed returns with the IRS. But Jimenez is half right: Many non-citizens do break the law by voting, and Comrade Pelosi is definitely "their representative."