The big question now: Will Obozo declare amnesty by executive order?
It's impossible to overstate the importance of this issue, because amnesty would tilt the electorate firmly to the Democrats for decades, and would "legalize" (at least so the Dems would have it) the presence of thousands of gang members.
Moreover, it's clear that ordering amnesty always encourages millions more aliens to enter the country illegally, since they have an excellent reason to believe amnesty will be granted again the next time a Democrat president feels like it.
Obama has specifically said that if congress won't pass an immigration "reform" bill he'll accomplish immigration "reform" himself, by issuing an executive order. And it seems clear that the only reason he didn't do that before the election was because his advisors warned him that doing so before the election would surely cost Democrats control of the senate and lose more seats in the House. Obviously with the elections over that's no longer a factor.
In considering possible ways to prevent this, Americans need to ask every Republican member of congress whether they support the president granting amnesty. If there's a strong showing of opposition, congress needs to have a strategy already devised and ready to go when Obama pulls the trigger.
The first step is to realize that now that Obozo doesn't have to worry about any more elections there is absolutely no down-side for him to declare amnesty by executive decree. Since the Department of Injustice is part of the executive branch, the government agency theoretically responsible for enforcing our laws will heartily endorse anything the traitorous bastard does.
The ultimate restraint on a lawless president, of course, is impeachment. But even with Republican control of the senate, it's virtually impossible to remove him from office that way because even though the House could impeach, that's only part of the process. Next would be a trial in the senate, and a president can only be removed from office if two-thirds of the senators vote to do so. Obviously that would only happen if at least 14 Democrats voted for removal--which won't happen.
Without the restraining force of elections or impeachment, what options remain to restrain a lawless president bent on granting amnesty by executive order? I see only three--and they're all longshots.
The first is for congress to have a motion already prepared, asking the Supreme Court to declare the amnesty order unconstitutional, and to order the executive branch not to act to carry out amnesty until the court has had a chance to rule on the question.
If the Court grants this motion it would give time for voters to flood their congressmen with phone calls, letters and emails for or against. If these contacts are hugely against amnesty (as seems likely), congressional leaders would have a chance--admittedly faint--to persuade the president to rescind the order, on the grounds that obeying the Constitution overrides the benefits of ordering amnesty. It would give Obama the "out" of nobly agreeing that it's more important to uphold the Constitution than to grant amnesty.
As I said, it's a longshot.
The second option is equally faint: Democrat senators who won close races know that amnesty will almost certainly cost them their seat at the next election. There's a chance that if 14 senators were to quietly let Obama know that in the event of impeachment by the House, they wouldn't sacrifice their political careers to defend his action, he might reconsider.
This is even less likely than the first option, for several reasons. But the clincher is that given Obama's personality--extreme narcissist, believes he can pull off anything he wishes because he's The One--he's unlikely to back off what he wants to do, no matter the threatened consequences.
The final option is if leaders of, and huge donors to, the Democrat party decide that amnesty will cost them control of the government in the short run, they might threaten to release all the damning information on Obama--his real birth certificate, college records, name changes and his applying for and accepting scholarships as a "foreign student."
It's naive to think that the Clintons don't have all this information. Hillary didn't use it in 2008 because it was a no-win situation for her: Releasing it to win the nomination would have caused virtually all blacks to stay home, which would have cost her the presidency in any case. Better to stay quiet and hope for another shot after His Excellency's second term.
The difference now is that Hillary is to old to wait any longer, so it's "use it or lose it." And of course she can arrange for the information to be "leaked" by people far down the food chain, and by the time this ever became known she'd presumably be safely in office.
Frankly I think this is the most likely outcome. And again, it's a longshot. But wishing for a better set of choices won't help.
In any case, the GOP has be ready to instantly file a motion with the Supreme Court asking for an emergency stay while the court considers the legality of amnesty for millions by executive order.
And of course you know that months ago the government issued a request for bids to supply 34 million new ID cards, right?