Skip to content

The Obama regime issues an apology for misleading the Judge overseeing the Executive immigration lawsuit

May 4, 2015

  U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, who is presiding over the challenge to Barack Obama’s Executive action on illegal immigration, has previously accused the Obama regime of misleading the court. Here is more:

“despite the government’s assertions that the executive amnesty programs — Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) and expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — would not start before February 18 (DAPA was scheduled to start in May), an aspect did begin before then.

Days before expanded DACA was set to take effect Hanen issued a preliminary injunction on the executive amnesty programs, to stop the implementation from going forward as the case works its way through the courts.

In early March, however, the Justice Department revealed to Hanen that in fact it had already started to implement an aspect of expanded DACA, and had issued more than 100,000 new three-year DACA renewals.

Hanen was not pleased. In later filings he called the government misleading, accusing the government of “deceptive representations and half-truths.”

  The Obama regime has been denying it mislead the court but last week issued an excuse for the “confusion” surrounding the issue:

“The Government deeply regrets not only the confusion that these statements created, but that it did not recognize the prospect of confusion earlier,” the Justice Department explains in a court filing late last week, according to the Valley Morning Star. “But the miscommunications were not the product of bad faith, and they do not warrant sanctions or further discovery.”

“We sincerely regret the misunderstanding that the government’s statements inadvertently caused, and hope that this submission fully resolves the issue,” the administration said in its brief,”

  There you have it; sure the Obama regime told the judge one thing and then did another but it was not done in “bad faith” and it was just a simple “miscommunication.” And because of this we should all just take the regime at its word and forget all about it. Of course it was Barack Obama’s broken word which got him into this situation in the first place, but we can trust him now…is anyone buying this excuse?

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

18 Comments leave one →
  1. May 4, 2015 7:53 pm

    “All better now…”

    Bunch of *&@%!$#

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Zip-a-Dee permalink
    May 4, 2015 8:15 pm

    I agree w/ Laura. They use flowery wording ‘acting’ as they care while they bulldoze along. They want that great divide between nationalities and religions – whether it’s ‘using’ the Mexicans or Latinos or pushing Sharia Law for the Muslims. We can figure anything that uses the Constitution ‘stupidly’ this Regime is behind it – designed it and are instigating it. Laura’s right!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. petermc3 permalink
    May 4, 2015 9:28 pm

    What situation is he in? This is nothing more than more water off this duck’s back. In his world there is no piper to pay. There is no known entity, unless you believe in a God, with the balls to take him to the woodshed. Lying to a judge or lying to his sycophants…ain’t nothing but a thang.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Zip-a-Dee permalink
      May 4, 2015 10:20 pm

      Yep, his bubble is more inflated than the 08 housing bubble and the unemployment stats of today! Here’s some reality to put some fire to the fake fronts and illusions:

      Liked by 1 person

    • May 5, 2015 5:37 am

      Yes that is true Peter, nothing sticks to this man so really there is no situation because nothing will come from this.


  4. Dr. Jeff permalink
    May 4, 2015 10:15 pm

    I’ll only add a comment about arrogance. After the judge objected to being lied to, this comment was made:

    “…and they do not warrant sanctions or further discovery.”

    Obama’s attorney TOLD the judge that neither sanctions nor further inquiry were appropriate. Isn’t that for the judge to decide? How arrogant to you have to be to tell a judge to back off after you’ve been busted for lieing?

    We know what’s wrong. What I want to know is what ideas do we have for correcting the situation? I’m hoping to hear that the judge comes down hard on Obama and company.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Zip-a-Dee permalink
      May 4, 2015 10:29 pm

      Very arrogant (just following the Alinsky’s playbook). The way they’re re-writing the laws it becomes a crime to stop them. Which is their goal. Need to take the wheels off their little red wagon.

      Liked by 2 people

    • May 4, 2015 10:47 pm

      Astute observation, Dr. J, very arrogant indeed.

      Liked by 2 people

    • May 5, 2015 5:39 am

      Very good point Dr. Jeff, who is he to tell the judge what is appropriate? There really is no better way to describe him than as being arrogant!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. May 5, 2015 1:14 am

    I don’t think an apology cuts it for the rest of us in that kind of situation. Here’s hoping the judge stands up for an independent judiciary and gives the administration some kind of serious consequences for lying to the court like that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • May 5, 2015 5:41 am

      I also don’t think the judge would appreciate it if we told him that this settles everything and no further action is needed…

      Liked by 1 person


  1. The Obama regime admits to breaking court injunction on Executive immigration | America's Watchtower
  2. Judge orders Justice Department lawyers to undergo ethics training after misleading the court on Executive amnesty | America's Watchtower

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: