Press Release from Fight Sanctuary State: Justice for Angel Mom Agnes Gibboney

Friends…

I was awakened this morning with marvelous news. The kind of news that makes you pause briefly and thank our Father in Heaven.

A couple of years ago I was introduced to a wonderful woman by the name of Agnes Gibboney. Agnes had a story to tell that was both inspiring while at the same time tragic. Let me briefly introduce you to Agnes.

Agnes and her family are from Hungary. When she was a young girl they fled the Communist repression that the creation of The Iron Curtain had brought to a once proud and free nation. They’r dreams and aspirations were to come to the US and start a new and better life for themselves.

Now, Agnes and her family didn’t do as most immigrants do today!

They applied at the US Embassy. They soon discovered that their port of entry to freedom would not be the USA, rather they were sent to Brazil.

Agnes spent her formative years growing up stateless, as the Communist in Hungary stripped her family’s citizenship, confiscated they’re passports and loaded them on a train and then a ship; stateless.

It would be some 20 years before they got world from the US Embassy in Rio de Janeiro that their application for entry to the US had been granted.

From there they followed all of the laws and were in short order naturalized. Finally, after years in refugee camps they were free…Free at last, as the late Dr. King exclaimed from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

Soon after becoming a American, Agnes found herself with child. She gave birth in the early 70’s to a wonderful baby boy. Ronald as their loving parents christen him was a “Freedom Baby”…As Agnes has recounted many times to me; “my Ronald was born the freest of the free, he was our first generation American!”

Ronald’s life was like most kids growing up in Southern California. He was bright, precocious, played sports, he was on his way to enjoying the fruits of American Greatness.

Then came April 27th of 2002…

On that day, while visiting with his children Ronald’s life was cut short by three bullets at the hands of an illegal alien thug. This scumbag had approached Ronald and his friend to dish out retribution for some slight at some Cholo hangout. As Ronald lay in the streets dying, this thug ran away.

Upon his arrest and interrogation, he discovered that he had “busted a cap” on the wrong person. In the glow of a street light he had mistaken Ronald for his intended victim.

April 27, 2002 the day the American Dream ended for Agnes.

The illegal Alien Murderer was charged with 187 Murder in the First Degree.

Thanks to a feckless leftist Judge who took pity on this poor “Victim of Society”,.The Judge continually urged him to accept a plea bargain. This plea bargain allowed a blood soaked murderer to “cop” to voluntarily manslaughter. He received 11 years on the plea and an additional 10, for special circumstances because a fire arm was used in the Commission of his crime.

Luis Humberto Gonzalez y Valencia was sentenced to “break big rocks into little rocks” in a California State Prison until June 24, 2020.

Folks…Remember, Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Ted Lieu all cry out “Illegal Aliens don’t commit crimes!!!!

To that I say let them meet Agnes Gibboney!!!

Fast forward now…We go farther down the Rabbit Hole.

State Senator Kevin de Leon authors and passers SB54…The FIRST statewide Sanctuary Bill in the nation.

It was then that I locked arms with Agnes, Don Rosenberg(son Drew murdered by a thrice deported illegal), Ben Barquam and thousands of other great Californian’s to fight the malignant tumor on our state.

A couple of months ago, Agnes and her family received a letter from the Department of Corrections informing her that the illegal thug who took Ronald’s life was scheduled to be released a year ahead of time (thank you AB109) and that there would be no ICE Detainer filed on him.

No one needs to tell you that at that moment, Agnes was forced to relive all the horrors of losing her son.

Agnes wrapped herself in the full armor of God…and in a “Howard Beale” moment said out loud…”I’m mad as Hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”

She started a letter writing campaign to toe DOC. She rallied the troops up and down the state.

I know that calls were made to DHS, ICE, because I reached out to another “Angel Parent” with those connections. (H/T to Don Rosenberg)

This Thug was released on November 21st. That same day Agnes took to the podium in a well attended Press Conference and decried this injustice.

At this point I want to give a shout out to Ben Barquam, Don Rosenberg, Sabine Durbin, Cynthia Truhan, Greg Brooks and my good friend Ravi Mehta for your “long suffering” dedication to the repeal of not only SB54, but AB460…Thank you!!

I also want to shout out again to Ben and to John Berry for your great job on that Press Conference.

This morning Agnes got news that “ERO” The Enforcement Removal Operations” a division of ICE had descended on this punk cuffed him and he has a one way ticket back to Mexico.

I also want to give a shout out and express gratitude to our Commander in Chief. Thanks to him, this punk will be off our streets, hopefully for good.

Agnes has been to the White House many times. The President calls Ronald “Tom Selleck…only better looking”.

If any of you are unaware of Fight Sanctuary you can read Agnes’ story and more at:

www.fightsanctuarystate.com

Thanks to all of you.

Calling Out Amnesty Pandering at the Beach Cities Republicans (Endorsements for AD-66 Central Committee)

It was really good–and invigorating–to speak out at the Beach Cities Republicans meeting last night.

I liked meeting with many familiar faces, and there were some other people whom I did not recognize, or whom I had not seen for at least two years.

The first guest speaker talked about Lyin’ Ted Lieu and his

One of the guest speakers, William Valladares, was talking about immigration. He was playing up the fact that he is a “minority Latino GOP” whatever. Aren’t we at a point in this country where we stopped judging people by the color of their skin, but started looking at the content of their character?

He then started talking about the “Dreamers”, the so-called “Dreamers.” He said that he supports giving them amnesty. He also said that some of them love this country more than other Americans. I was really offended by these liberal talking points.

Illegal immigration is illegal immigration. Illegal is illegal. Just because your parents broke the law and brought you into the country does not mean that we should ignore the integrity of a nation’s borders and the sanctity of the rule of law. Children often have to deal with the consequences of their parents’ crimes. There should be no exceptions made in the case of illegal immigration.

I spoke out at length about this, and I refused to relent. One person told me to let him finish. I responded that I had a right to counter him on that point. Allan Ku (whom I enthusiastically endorse for Central Committee), also known as Allan Wright, was sitting next to me. He’s an immigrant, and he came legally. He completely agreed with my decision to speak out. I then left the meeting because I was tired, because I had had a long day.

Two minutes later, I received a phone call. A friend of mine, Marlene Silva (whom I also enthusiastically endorse for Central Committee!). She applauded me for speaking out against the speaker who wanted to give amnesty to illegal aliens.

THEN, THEN she told me that six other people also walked out of the meeting because they were so disgusted with the comments from the speaker.

This is the movement that we are starting. This is how we start making a difference. It’s time to stop being civil and play defense in the face of wrong ideas and wrong-doing!

Let’s speak out and win!

I ENDORSE THE FOLLOWING CANDIDATES FOR AD-66TH Central Committee:

Allan Ku (aka Wright)

Peter Michel

Todd Rubenstein

Arthur Schaper (Of course!)

Eric Shuchman

Marlene Silva

Claude Todoroff

LET’S DO THIS! LET’S MAKE THE 66TH AD Central Committee GREAT AGAIN!

Singapore Christian Lawyer Dishonors Faith in Suit to Repeal 377A

It is very troubling to me the lengths that individuals will go to in order to justify promoting or defending worldly or ungodly tenets all while calling themselves Christians.

One of the thorniest issues in this conflict is homosexuality.

There are a cohort of Christians who think that tolerance of homosexuality is acceptable. It’s not.

The proper, holy response to this matter is the Gospel. God sent His Son to die for us sinners, to put away our sins forever, and to bring us into reconciliation with His Father, and now our Father.

This reconciliation takes us from death to life, from sin to son:

“And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:11)

“Such were some of you”. We are not called to remain in sin once we receive the perfect work of the Son.

So, why do Christians insist on placating homosexuals and accommodating homosexuality?

This problem comes up in a considerable fashion in the legal challenges to Singapore’s statute 377a, a law from Britian’s colonial rule over Singapore (and other countries) which criminalizes sodomy and other acts of gross indecency.

One lawyer who is fighting for repeal of this law, Jordan Tan, makes the case that his advocacy to repeal this law is fully in concert with his Christian faith:

Christian lawyer in 377A constitutional challenge explains why hisinvolvement is consistent with his faith

Jordan Tan is one of the lawyers bringing the constitutional challenge against Section 377A in the Singapore Court right now.

Mr Tan is also a Christian. This is noteworthy now because he mentioned that there have been queries as to why a Christian lawyer would be involved in such a case, given that he is advocating to repeal a law that criminalises consensual sexual acts between adult males which goes against the teachings of the church.

Indeed, and it goes against nature itself. God made mankind male and female, and He designed marriage for one man and one woman. This is not open for debate.

On 15 November, Mr Tan took to Facebook to answer this question. He said, “Although my relationship with God is a personal private matter, Christian accountability and the exhortation not to stumble others (Romans 14:12-13) calls for an open and honest response to such queries.”

Here is his Facebook post:

Our Relationship, our standing before God is NOT a private matter. This idea that our relationship with God has no bearing with public awareness and conviction is just inconsistent with Biblical revelation.

“But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:33)

How do we come to faith in Christ?

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

Confession is a public act. Christians do not have a private faith with Christ Jesus.

He explains why he is acting as a counsel to advocate for the constitutional challenge against 377A and why he considers it consistent with and is an advancement of his Christian Faith. He said, “I am completely at peace with my role advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A in the Singapore courts.”

Indeed:

“They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14)

People can say peace all do, but it does not mean that their standing is in concert with God’s grace or His goodness in a fallen world.

In his post titled “A Christian Advocate’s Role in the Constitutional Challenge against Section 377A”, Mr Tan laid out five points to explain why he thinks that not only is it appropriate for him as a Christian advocate to be involved in this challenge but that it is “required” by his faith.

Quoting Romans 13:1 which says that Christians should submit to the government authorities for all authorities come from God, this means that the constitution is the highest authority in Singapore since that is where the power of all three branches of the government – executive, legislative, judicial – is derived.

We submit to governing authorities as unto the Lord, for:

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” (Romans 13:1)

The highest power belongs to God, and He has empowered all who believe in His son to reign in life (Romans 5:17). Paul the Apostle did not hesitate to appeal to Caesar when he was wronged in court, for example (Acts 25:1-12).

Mr Tan explained, “Given that there are legally meritorious grounds to support the conclusion that section 377A is unconstitutional, it would be wholly inappropriate to shirk away from the responsibility of scrutinising that law against the Constitution and to have it construed or read-down in a manner so that it is consistent with the Constitution.”

No, there are no grounds for repealing the law. Acts which criminalize, and thus discourage gross indecency, carry merit all of themselves.

He added, “Accordingly, advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A advances, instead of detracts from, the highest authority of the land, namely, the Constitution. It is a submission to authority which is called for in the Word.”

The highest authority for a Christian is not a man-made Constitution, but Christ Himself. Full stop.

Mr Tan’s second reason was that he is assisting the court by presenting rigorous arguments in an intellectually honest manner, which is in line with the value of justice. He said, “in our system of law, the adversarial system works best when both sides of an issue are presented rigorously and in an intellectually honest manner. The Court is more ably assisted and the crucible of the adversarial system produces more robust and better-reasoned judgments.

Honesty requires a recognition of the truth, not just speaking one’s honest feelings or thoughts on a matter. I may honestly believe that I am the prime minister of Singapore, and I may ardently profess that I am such. That does not make the prime minister.

Mr Tan quoted Psalm 37:28 which highlight’s God’s love for justice and said that “it is appropriate to participate in a process which serves the ends of justice and to do so in a manner that promotes, at the minimum, better-reasoned judgments.”

Therefore, the just thing to do is maintain 377a. Acts of gross indecency should be criminalized.

The third reason Mr Tan outlined was his view that God prefers obedience grounded in faith instead of fear. He said “my firm view that God does not delight in compliance with the law for fear by persons of criminal sanction; God delights in obedience which comes from believing in Him and having a personal relationship with Him, not fear of going to jail.”

Yes, we should come to God in faith, not fear. His perfect love sent His Son to die for us, to rise for us, and that through Him we live. Part of walking by faith is walking in concert under His grace. The grace of God teaches us to reject sin and live godly lives (Titus 2:11-14). Homosexual conduct is sin, and anyone under grace is no longer under the dominion of sin:

“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” (Romans 6:14)

Next, Mr Tan highlighted Jesus’ iconoclastic way of life as he spent time “in the company of the very religious and the powerful, pursued the marginalised, the weak, and the downtrodden”. Quoting Matthew 20:16 which says the last shall be the first and the first shall be the last, Mr Tan noted how Jesus “loved and cared for the last”.

Connecting that to Singapore, Mr Tan talked about how Section 377A alienates, discriminates, and marginalises an entire community. He said, “In the course of my work, I have found that it has had seriously damaging effects on the LGBTQ+ community and demeans them. In some extreme cases, it emboldens those who would actively discriminate against them.”

This is the most outrageous, failed argument yet. Homosexuality is a behavior, not an identity. LGBT “people” is a non sequitur, and this flawed reasoning evades proper debate.

The behaviors themselves are demeaning, for God did not create man to engage in sexual perversion, male with male, or female with female.

He says this is morally wrong.

Finally, Mr Tan pointed out that 377A forms a serious barrier in the communication and forming of relationships between the Christian community and the LGBTQ+ community, and presents a block for the latter community to form relationships with God.

The Christian community is the Church, the Body of Christ. The Church is not peripheral to the world, but vice versa. The Church does not need to change and conform to allow for more people, but to speak the truth of God’s grace in love.

God calls all of us to come out of the fallen world and come home to Him, to come home to His love.

He says, “It is self-evident which is more important: the roadblock or the potential of forming meaningful relationships with the entire LGBTQ+ community.”

The Church needs to invite homosexuals, transgenders, and other sexual paraphiliacs to be reconciled to God!

“20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. 21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Corinthians 5:20-21)

He continued, “It also self-evident which will lead more people into a relationship with God.”

No. The purpose of the state is to restrain evil. The purpose of the Church is to bring the Goodness of God to the world.

In concluding his post, Mr Tan said he wanted to title the post “A (struggling) Christian’s Role…” for fear that he might be holding himself out as a paragon of a Christian, which he admits he is not. But he decided against it because all Christians are struggling Christians, said Mr Tan.

Mr. Tan is not a paragon of Christian virtue. Not once has he magnified Christ Jesus and His finished work. Not once has he declared that homosexuality is something to abhor and reject, but that God loves sinners, and does not reject those who come to Him.

Rather than normalizing or enabling the destructive behaviors, Mr. Tan should be advocating for the further dissemination of God’s Word, Grace, and Truth to those who are in bondage to homosexuality, transgenderism, and the like.

He then recalled something his senior pastor once said, “The litmus test of whether one is a Christian is whether one struggles. The struggle reflects the continued desire to do God’s will and the human failings which call for the need to rely on God’s strength.”

NONSENSE. The Christian life is a life of rest–the only struggle is to enter into His rest!

“Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.” (Hebrews 4:1)

Yes, there is a passage about fighting:

“Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.” (1 Timothy 6:12)

The literal translation reads “Let the good fight of faith by fight.”

This is a fight of trusting God, of resting in the truth of His Word. Faith, after all, is about seeing what is invisible, and recognizing that God’s promises have come to pass.

Mr Tan continued, “In my years on this journey with God I have found that in addition to weighing decisions against the Word and prayer, it is peace which characterises making the correct decision which pleases God.”

No. We are always supposed to have his peace. It’s not the sudden presence of peace upon making a decision which matters. We should refrain from actions when there is a lack of peace:

“And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.” (Colossians 3:15)

In this case, Mr Tan says “I am completely at peace with my role advocating the constitutional challenge against section 377A in the Singapore courts.”

Final Reflection

This Jordan Tan fellow is brazenly disregarding Christ and Him Crucified. There is some other perverse pretext for his advocating the repeal of 377A. He is more interested in being liked and accepted by some community of sexual deviants, perhaps.

Or, if his sentiments are genuine, he is clearly misguided about this effort. He thinks that he is helping individuals come closer to Christ by taking away the secular sanction against an abominable behavior. What church, what pastor has told him that the quiet promotion of homosexuality is acceptable and in keeping with Biblical truth?

This challenge must be met with conviction and clear understanding of God’s Word. The churches of Singapore must restore the full understanding of the Gospel, which takes us from death to life, which takes from living in sin to living in the Son, and thus sets us free from dead works, sin and death.

Keep 377A.

VIDEO Calexico Border: Trump’s Motorcade Met by The Remembrance Project & Trump Supporters

We The People Rising http://wethepeoplerising.com EMAIL robinhvidston@wethepeoplerising.com Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

PRESIDENT TRUMP GREETED BY SUPPORTERS AT THE BORDER Donald Trump Visits The Wall Calexico, CA Border Town 4/6/19 Report by Robin Hvidston VIDEO – At the border: The Remembrance Project &Trump Supporters Welcoming President Trump. https://youtu.be/KMd1KJF-Nbg ABC NEWS video on Twitter: https://twitter.com/10NewsBrian/status/1114230449352482816 Members of The Remembrance Project joined with local Trump supporters to welcome President Trump as the motorcade passed by from the naval base to the the border patrol station. Waiting for the president’s motorcade to arrive. After the president’s motorcade passed, a convoy of trucks and cars followed in the same direction as the border patrol station where the president met with local law enforcement and representatives. Donald Trump Visits The Wall https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/05/donald-trump-visits-the-wall/

The “Not Racist” Drama of Congressman Steve King

Republicans have been playing defense on the race card for far too long. Their instinctive need to make nice with the trigger-happy, race-baiting media has forced so many conservatives into a corner, preventing serious discussions about race: how it should matter less, but still matters only because of Democrats who exploit color differences to push their extreme, socialist policy goals.

The last controversy to blow open this genuflective self-loathing among Republicans has occured because of remarks which Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) had made to the New York Times a few days ago.

Here’s what Congressman King said:

“White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” Mr. King said. “Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”

Putting nationalism and white supremacy in the same sentence is wrong. Supremacy based on skin color is patently ridiculous. However, the former bulldozer operated did not advocate for white supremacy. This representative was trying to criticize the shouts of racism, the empty epithets of hate from the Left which they rely on to silence conservatives. Later, King went to further lengths to clarify his remarks: “I want to make one thing abundantly clear: I reject those labels and the evil ideology they define.”

 

There. Congressman King cleaned up his statements. Many people have uttered misstatements on a range of issues before, and they have corrected myself. So did this official.

 

Then the real problem emerges. What has caused this conflagration of fiery issues and misunderstandings to break out? With a cursory glance at the article published by the New York Times, it’s clear that the Times is pushing another substantially offensive bias of their own, and right in the title of the article:

Before Trump, Steve King Set the Agenda for the Wall and Anti-Immigrant Politics

Unbelievable! King has never opposed immigration per se. However, he has been a vocal, consistent critic of illegal immigration, and he has demanded the removal of illegal aliens from the United States. Consider Mexico, with some of the most draconian immigration laws in the world. Colombia has a wall with Venezuela.; Israel has two walls. Compared to these countries, the United States is extensively lenient when it comes to illegal immigration.

 

The New York Times engages in unmistakable bias toward call King by calling him “anti-immigrant” in the title. Even the article contradicts its misleading headline:

 

At the same time, he said, he supports immigrants who enter the country legally and fully assimilate because what matters more than race is “the culture of America” …

 

King is not anti-immigrant. He’s also no racist.

Here’s the real problem: Republicans are forced to prove that they are “not racist”. This challenge (From the left) turns into bottomless, self-loathing. How does one prove a negative? The progressives, with the real history of racism, will never stop playing the race card against opponents. Someone could have a black wife, Hispanic kids, Asian parents, a long pedigree of non-white, non-European ancestors, etc.

 

Incidentally enough, what King is enduring now is precisely what he was decrying! One more time, the “race card” has turned into a perennial distraction from more substantive issues. Congressman King is being pilloried by a political establishment desperate to prove that they are “not racist”.

 

This hasty damage-control action from Minority Leader McCarthy is proof positive that the knee-jerk reaction of mea cupla in the face of the false claims of racism has still not left establishment-leaning Republicans. President Trump fights back against the Fake News Fraud of the liberal legacy media. They keep chanting “Racism! Racism! Racism!” about border security and retention of American culture. McCarthy launches into castigating King for inartful statements. Desperate to be liked by the legacy media, failed Presidential candidate and now carpetbagger US Senator Mitt Romney hostilely attacks Trump’s manners and demeanor. Sad!

 

Of course, there’s more to this controversy:

 

1. Kevin McCarthy, the new GOP House minority leader, is consolidating power against conservative insurgents. Four years ago, McCarthy had a chance to be Speaker of the House but for his own flippant remarks about the Benghazi investigations. He (honestly, yet unwisely) suggested that those hearings were meant to hurt Hillary Clinton’s Presidential election bid. How ironic that McCarthy wants to tar and feather King for an inartful phrase, when he was publicly pilloried for the same failing. (and how about those allegations that McCarthy was having a long-term affair?)

 

2. The Big Business, Cheap Labor Lobby wants to get rid of one of their biggest opponents in Congress. King remains a thorn in the side to every Chamber of Commerce donor and Congressional puppet in both chambers of Congress and throughout the DC Swamp. He was Trump before The Donald appeared on the scene. If the amnestarians can’t stop the President, they will settle for King.

3.The NeverTrumpers want a scalp, too. Even the NeverTrumper conservative mag National Review has jumped into the anti-King mosh pit. The Weekly Standard would have done the same thing if they hadn’t folded a month ago. Honestly, when even the former Buckley flagship rag wants to toss you overboard, you should prepare for smooth sailing. After all, their “Never Trump” issue didn’t make a damn difference in stopping his election, and Trump has accomplished more conservative goals in two years than all the Republican Presidents elected during William F. Buckley’s lifetime, including Reagan.

Was Congressman King’s statement inartful? Yes. Is he a racist? No. This whole King controversy is another example of the liberal media straining to way to paint an effective conservative as a racist, and all the other Republicans in Congress are scrambling to denounce him so that they don’t get tarred with the race card because they said nothing. This bumbling is sad, so sickening, especially because Congressman King has championed many conservative causes, including life, liberty, and the restoration of American sovereignty. Let’s hope he stands firm in the face of this race-baiting onslaught from both sides of the aisle.