Discussing proposed immigration reform legislation on his June 6 show, Newsradio 850 KOA host “Gunny” Bob Newman falsely accused U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) of “vot[ing] in favor of felons receiving amnesty.” Newman apparently was referring to Salazar's June 6 vote against a proposal (Senate Amendment 1184) by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) to bar felonious illegal immigrants from eligibility for the Senate's proposed “Z visa,” which would allow illegal immigrants to work in the United States before beginning naturalization procedures. However, Newman ignored the fact that Salazar had voted earlier that day in favor of Senate Amendment 1333*, which would bar illegal immigrants who are sex offenders, felony drunk drivers, domestic abusers, firearms-related criminals, or associated with criminal gangs from entering the United States.

Moreover, Senate Amendment 1150, which the Cornyn amendment proposed to amend, already stated that "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall, pursuant to the requirements of this section, grant a Z-A visa to an alien if the Secretary determines that the alien ... has not been convicted of any felony or misdemeanor, an element of which involves bodily injury, threat of serious bodily injury, or harm to property in excess of $500."

Furthermore, after a caller characterized Salazar's stance on immigration reform as treasonous, Newman leveled the serious but baseless charge that “it could very well be treason.”

From the June 6 broadcast of Newsradio 850 KOA's The Gunny Bob Show:

NEWMAN: And then when I saw my own senator, Ken Salazar, vote in favor of felons receiving amnesty, I thought back to how many times on this station I warned people about what this Salazar character is up to. That he is a liberal wolf in sheep's clothing. That he will harm this nation. That he will go against the rule of law. That he will be anti-American sovereignty when it, when it, when it comes to border and immigration reform. And here he is doing exactly what I warned about. Sometimes for me, [caller], it is very frustrating.

CALLER: I consider it nothing less than treason.

NEWMAN: You know, they -- it, it could very well be treason. But when you look at, at the law and who's in power, nobody is going to file charges against, against them. They, they do owe allegiance to America -- our, our members of Congress do -- and that's what the treason statute states. I think it's section 2381 -- but, but I'm, I'm not exactly sure. I don't have it open right now on the, on the World Wide Web. But, [caller], thank you for your call. But they may very well be guilty of it, but that doesn't mean that you're ever going to see charges.

However, Amendment 1150 states that "[a]n alien is ineligible for Z nonimmigrant status if the Secretary determines that the alien ... is an alien ... for whom there are reasonable grounds for believing that the alien has committed a serious criminal offense as described in section 101(h) of the Act outside the United States before arriving in the United States; or ... for whom there are reasonable grounds for regarding the alien as a danger to the security of the United States; or ... has been convicted of -- (i) a felony; (ii) an aggravated felony as defined at section 101(a)(43) of the Act; (iii) 3 or more misdemeanors under Federal or State law; or (iv) a serious criminal offense as descried in section 101(h) of the Act." In addition, S.A. 1333 -- which Salazar voted in favor of -- would deny Z visa eligibility to illegal immigrants convicted of sex offenses, felony drunk driving, domestic abuse, firearm-related crimes, or to immigrants associated with criminal gangs.

Supporters of the Z visa program rejected Cornyn's amendment because, according to a June 7 Houston Chronicle article, the amendment would have undermined the program by “deny[ing] legalization to 635,000 people who ignored deportation orders or returned to the United States after being deported -- both felonies.” The Chronicle further noted:

Democrats siphoned support from Cornyn's amendment, defeated on a 51-46 vote, by offering a rival version, which passed 66-32. Like Cornyn's, it would deny legalization to gang members, sex offenders and felony drunken drivers -- but would forgive people who had been ordered deported.

Democrats insisted Cornyn's amendment could keep most illegal immigrants from gaining legalization, because they had previously used fake IDs, and charged it was aimed at derailing the immigration bill.

“It is a Trojan horse,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “Nothing short of an attempt to kill the whole bill in the guise of tough enforcement.”

Additionally, just before the June 6 Senate vote on Cornyn's amendment, Schumer argued against the proposal on the Senate floor:

[T]his guts the bill because it not only eliminates -- it not only says that felons should not become citizens, and we agree with that, it says that anyone who has filed an illegal paper should not become a citizen. That is every immigrant who would be on the path to citizenship. This body voted against eliminating that provision overtly a few weeks ago. Now they are trying to do the same thing covertly because if you vote for this amendment, you will say no one will have a path to citizenship, no one who works, because everyone who has worked had to file a Social Security paper or something like that. Anyone who wants to keep this bill going at the moment should vote against the Cornyn amendment. The Kennedy amendment dealt with felons. This is a stealth, Trojan horse amendment to kill the bill by saying no one -- no one -- who has ever worked shall have the path to citizenship.

Similarly, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) told the Senate that “the Cornyn amendment would still make vast numbers of these families ineligible for our programs, keep them in the shadows where employers abuse and underpay them, which hurts the immigrants but it hurts American workers, too, by depressing their wages.” Kennedy compared Cornyn's amendment to S.A. 1333, which he sponsored:

Cornyn says he wants to be tough on gang members, sex offenders, individuals convicted of domestic violence. So do we. We have addressed any provisions not covered by the current law. Our amendment goes even further than the bipartisan compromise bill.

He wants to exclude gang members. Our amendment does that too. Nobody who has engaged in illegal activity as part of a criminal gang will be allowed to enter or stay in this country. He says we should bar sex offenders from coming here. Our amendment does that. Any convicted sex offender who fails to register will not be allowed back in the country; if already here, then those offenders will face deportation.

Cornyn says immigrants who commit acts of domestic violence or endanger their families should be punished. Our amendment does that. He says drunk drivers should be deported. Our amendment does that. Any immigrant with one felony conviction for drunk driving will not be allowed to enter this country. If convicted here, then the drunk driver will be deported.

He says there should be consequences for individuals engaging in fraud. Our amendment does that. Our amendment punishes anyone who commits perjury or makes false statements when seeking immigration benefits. If any person lies on their application, then this individual will be prosecuted and subject to criminal penalties.

He says we should go after immigrants convicted of firearms offenses. Our amendment does that, too.

Later in the broadcast, Newman agreed with a caller's statement that Salazar's position on immigration is “nothing less than treason,” saying, "[I]t could very well be treason." Newman added that “they do owe allegiance to America ... our members of Congress do -- and that's what the treason statute states.” In fact, U.S. law regarding treason (§2381) specifically states the following:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

*In this version of S.A. 1333, the Congressional Record incorrectly referred to the measure as S.A. 1303.