The Democratic Party is Losing It's Grip

By

 Zeno Potas

      The summer of 2018 has brought a sudden rise of black influencers coming to prominence on social media by openly supporting Republican, President Trump, breaking the decades-old stranglehold of the Democratic Party on black voters. This political earthquake has been a long time in the making but not at all a surprise for those who believe that all minorities cannot remain sleeping sheep.

• "Blacks coming out of slavery sided with the Republicans because those were the ones who fought for them. It was only because of the fact that we’ve got this revisionist history that you’ve got people who don’t know who they are and have formed an allegiance with the Democratic Party, because during the Kennedy administration, that was the party who really we thought were forthright with the Civil Rights Act." 

- Sheila Lewis Ealey

• "Minorities are starting to awaken to the truth and see the scare tactics used by Democrats for what they truly are." 

- Candice Owens

 

      The problem for the Democratic Party is that if the party doesn't keep blacks in line and it loses even 20 to 25 percent of the black vote and any hope of winning any presidential or congressional elections. Democrats may have already seen that threat. That's why they support illegal immigration and voting rights for non-citizens. Immigrants from south of the border who are here illegally may be seen as either a replacement for or a guarantee against the disaster of losing the black vote.
 

      Keeping the black voting block blind to reality and continued unquestioned support for the Democratic Party is essential. They do this by keeping blacks fearful, angry and resentful and painting the Republican Party as racist. Democrats never want blacks to seriously ask questions about what their party has done for them.

• "When you talk about black people right now as Democrats, it is very obvious to me that the Democratic Party are completely selling out the African-American community to go all in on illegal immigration and an open-borders agenda. This is very obvious to anybody who is paying attention."  

                - Rob Smith, a black, gay former Democrat, combat veteran, and author

• "The truth is, the Democratic Party has failed us."        

                           - Cleveland Pastor Darrell Scott

• "I voted for Barack Obama his second term. The Democrats, in my honest opinion, based on my research, I believe the Democrats have historically hated black people. And I think they still hate black people today.” 

                          - Black YouTuber “Uncle Hotep,”

• "Black people [are] working, you know what I’m saying? Jobs [are] coming back. Factories [are] opening up. He’s helping with the drug epidemic and all that. It’s just a beautiful time to be alive." 

                           - Henry Davis

• "After years of voting for the Democratic Party based upon indoctrination and relying on what others said, I began to investigate all of the promises they had made and not kept. At the same time, I researched the Republican Party and what they had done to advance the cause for African-Americans. I saw that the values of the party lined up with my beliefs."

                         - Clarence Henderson

      Long ago Booker T. Washington explained the agenda of black politicians and civil rights hustlers writing: "There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs -- partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."

      White liberals and the Democratic Party are the major beneficiaries of keeping black people fearful, angry, victimized and resentful. It's crucial to both their political success and their efforts to radically change our nation. Racial harmony would be a disaster for Leftists, be they politicians, academic liberals or news media people. For the Leftist elites - the status quo MUST remain.

Christmas - 1776

by

 M. Richard Maxson

      On the morning of December 25, Washington ordered his officers to prepare the army with three days' food, and that every soldier be outfitted with fresh flints and ammunition for their muskets. They were told that they were departing on a secret mission.
Washington's plan was to cross the river at night, march to the nearby town of Trenton, New Jersey, and attack the Hessian garrison right before dawn. At first glance, the decision to transport 2,400 Continental soldiers across an icy river in one night, directly into a severe winter storm of sleet and snow seems irrational.

      Washington's decision, however, was based on strategic motivation, understanding that the Continental Army desperately needed a victory after months of intense fighting with several significant defeats and no major victories. Washington also understood that the element of surprise was the only way that he and his army stood a chance of defeating the highly trained Hessian mercenaries. Once across, Washington intended for the armies to reassemble and march approximately ten miles to Trenton, arriving there no later than five o'clock in the morning to achieve surprise. Despite his meticulous planning, the schedule failed almost before it even began.

      Time was Washington's greatest enemy. He was worried by intelligence reports that the British were planning their own crossing once the Delaware was frozen over. Marching eight abreast in close formations, and ordered to be as quiet as possible, they left the camp for McKonkey's Ferry.

      Regiments were to assemble at their designated crossing points no later than sunset. The close proximity to the crossing points allowed the soldiers to begin the journey immediately after nightfall struck and complete

the crossing no later than midnight. Washington's plan required the crossing to begin as soon as it was dark enough to conceal their movements on the river, but most of the troops did not reach the crossing point at the river until well after dark. Additionally, a severe winter storm that included wind, rain, snow, hail, and sleet met the soldiers at the banks of the river significantly slowing their crossing. "It blew a hurricane," recalled one soldier. Many of the boats had to combat ice jams and unfavorable currents. To make matters even worse, the extreme darkness caused by the storm made it hard for the boatmen to see the opposite shore. 
 
      Washington was among the first of the troops to cross and upon arrival debated whether or not to cancel the entire operation because it was more than three hours behind schedule. Washington decided it was too costly to retreat and he painfully watched as his army continued to trickle across the river. The Virginia troops were led by General Adam Stephen. These troops formed a sentry line around the landing area in New Jersey, with strict instructions that no one was to pass through. The password was "Victory or Death". Washington's army included a significant number of people who played important roles in the formation and early days of the United States of America. These included future President James Monroe, future Chief Justice of the United States John Marshall, Alexander Hamilton (a future Secretary of the Treasury), and Arthur St. Clair, who later served as President of the Continental Congress and Governor of the Northwest Territory. The army crossed without significant incident, although a few men, including Delaware's Colonel John Haslet, fell into the water. 
 
      Washington had given charge of the crossing logistics to his chief of artillery, the portly Henry Knox. In addition to the crossing of large numbers of troops,

Henry Knox

most of whom could not swim, he had to safely transport horses and eighteen pieces of artillery over the river. Knox wrote that the crossing was accomplished "with almost infinite difficulty", and that its most significant danger was "floating ice in the river". The amount of ice on the river prevented the artillery from finishing the crossing until 3 am on December 26. The troops were not ready to march until 4 am.

       On the morning of December 26, as soon as the army was ready, Washington ordered it split into two columns, one under the command of himself and General Greene, the second under General Sullivan. The Sullivan column would take River Road from Bear Tavern to Trenton while Washington's column would follow Pennington Road, a parallel route that lay a few miles inland from the river.

      Washington led his army on the road to Trenton. It was there that he secured the Continental Army's first major military victory of the war. Only three Americans were killed and six wounded, while 22 Hessians were killed with 98 wounded. The Americans captured 1,000 prisoners and seized muskets, powder, and artillery. Without the determination, resiliency, and leadership exhibited by Washington while crossing the Delaware River the victory at Trenton would not have been possible. General George Washington's commitment to cross the Delaware River on Christmas 1776 foreshadowed the many hardships faced as well as the eventual victory of the Continental Army during the American Revolution.

JANET - The Deep State's Airline

By

       George Sontag

      The Deep State and the Shadow Government have kept their secrets from the American public for decades. Transportation of people and materials around the country and the world without arousing suspicion is essential to the clandestine activities. Business Insider has reported that the secret airline operates out of a private terminal at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas. Called Janet Airlines, it is the heart of an entire clandestine defense ecosystem that is spread across the deserts of the American southwest.

The secret airline, called JANET, that the government uses to covertly ferry people around. As it turns out, this secret airline not only flies under the radar, but also flies in and out of commercial airports.

 

      

      Janet Airlines, is the unofficial name given to a large and highly classified fleet of passenger aircraft operated for the United States Air Force (USAF) to transport the military, contractors, and un-named others. It mainly serves the Nevada National Security Site (most notably Area 51 and the Tonopah Test Range), from a private terminal at Las Vegas' McCarran International Airport. Popular Mechanics reports that JANET’s area of the airport bears the codename, “Gold Coast Terminal.” The fleet's "Janet" call sign, from which its de facto name comes, is said to stand for "Just Another Non-Existent Terminal" Though it’s been reported that AECOM operates JANET’s aircraft, Popular Mechanics reports that we’re not 100% sure who runs the Gold Coast Terminal.

      All Janet aircraft are owned by the U.S. Air Force, registered either to an office at Hill AFB in Utah, or a PO Box in nearby Layton, Utah. While they’re technically owned by the USAF, the aircraft are currently thought to be operated by a division of the AECOM corporation. Even though the secret airline’s planes may be in plain sight at the Las Vegas airport, there are still plenty of things that we don’t know about JANET. As Popular Mechanics notes, due to the airline's secretive nature, little is known about its organization and we can’t say with 100% certainty where — or whom — these planes fly.

       As of mid-2015, the Janet fleet consists of six Boeing 737-600s painted white with a prominent red cheatline. There are also five smaller executive turboprops painted white with less prominent blue trim stripes. The fleet is registered to the Department of the Air Force. You can see Janet airplanes at several airports throughout the U.S. You can hear them on air traffic control. You can fly one in Microsoft Flight Simulator X. But you can’t buy a ticket on a Janet flight, and the people who fly on Janet flights can’t tell you, or even their families, what they do for work. It is seemingly an airline that flies to nowhere.

      When you fly with a commercial airline, you’ll board a plane that bears the airline’s logo in several places but as Business Insider notes, JANET’s planes don’t carry identifying markings like the aircraft that belong to other airlines. Instead, they just bear a horizontal red stripe (for the Boeing aircraft). Or, they have blue trim stripes (for the Beechcraft planes), plus their registration numbers.

      Can you fly on Janet airlines? The answer is NO! Everyone aboard needs Top Secret security clearance. As Business Insider reports, even flight attendants who work for the airline have to qualify for and maintain a Top Secret security clearance. Getting that clearance — the highest level — can be a pretty arduous process. The application requires you to divulge “nearly every bit of information about yourself relating to personal and business finances, residences, employment history, criminal behavior, prior military service, citizenship, and criminal behavior.” An investigator also interviews your employers, neighbors, spouse, and acquaintances. And you have to take a polygraph exam.

      Curious where the airline actually flies? It’s when Janet flights cross from civilian airspace into restricted military airspace that things get really interesting. After checking in with Nellis Control, the Janet then continues into the “Special Use Airspace” but not before Nellis Control approves a frequency change for the Janet. What’s telling in the subtlety of the handoff is what isn’t said; the Nellis controller never specifies which frequency for the Janet to switch to. That’s because the Janet already knows the new frequency. And in addition to the frequency change, it’s call sign has changed, too. It’s no longer “Janet 210” or “Janet 301,” it’s now something else entirely, like “Racer 25” or “Bones 58.” It’s flying inside the most restricted airspace on Earth, heading directly towards a veritable black hole of information. 

      Popular Mechanics reports that “most of the time,” JANET’s planes take off from Las Vegas, head north, then turn off their transponders and disappear from trackers after spending just 15 minutes in the air. One of the places these Janet 737’s go is located inside the airspace described as R-4808N on the map below. “The Box,” or “The Container,” as R-4808N is known, is off-limits. It is restricted airspace within restricted airspace, and incursions into its sanctum are most unwelcome. And yet, the unassuming white and red 737’s are shepherded through routinely, where they disappear before reappearing after different lengths of time.

       It also reportedly shuttles employees and contractors into Area 51, the most famous of the U.S. government’s top secret military bases that the U.S. government still maintains doesn’t exist. It is situated in Airspace 4808 North known as some of the most protected airspace in the world, with fighter jets on duty to shoot down intruders. But JANET’s aircraft regularly go in and out of Airspace 4808 North without incident.

       Area 51 is situated inside the larger Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), which is made up of many smaller distinct zones with different purposes. Many sections of the NTTR have been assigned other Area “X” identifiers (yes, there is an Area 52). Surrounding Area 51 is the restricted Nellis Air Force Range, covering an immense swath of southern Nevada. Apparently, somewhere within or near Area 19 in the northern part of the Nevada Test Site is a hidden runway, totally camouflaged to match the surrounding terrain. According to legend, the runway is capable of revealing its location as needed, using a system of sprinklers to quickly unveil its dimensions. Claims have suggested that a 737 could theoretically be capable of operating from the mysterious vanishing airstrip. The multi-tiered secrecy surrounding the Janet jets, the unusual ways they operate and the places they go are one of aviation’s greatest legends. If it all seems like a big clandestine operation, that’s because it is.

Is Ukraine Behind North Korea's Nuclear Build-up?

By

        Phillip Todd

      For today's discussion we ask the questions – Was the timing of the U.S. funded coup in Ukraine a direct response to North Korea's launching of missiles over Japan earlier in the year? Did the intelligence community trace these missile engines and designs back the factory in Ukraine and was a major factor in pushing the elected leadership out establishing a puppet regime to cover it up? Let us look at the facts.

      During the past years, North Korea has tested launched three rockets capable of striking the U.S. mainland. According to missile experts in the U.S. and Europe the key components of these rockets are based on Soviet designs, much like those displayed in the museum in Ukraine. Michael Elleman is a former U.N. Weapons inspector and consultant to the Pentagon. At his think tank in London, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Elleman compared footage of North Korean launches with photos of Soviet missile engines from the 1960's and they appeared to match the RD-250, an outdated but highly reliable machine. Roughly 200 of these engines still exist, according to Yuzhmash, the missile factory in Dnipro, Ukraine that made them. Elleman concluded that if one had been stolen, it would more likely not have been from Russia, but from the smaller stockpile in Ukraine.

     Founded during WWII to help the Red Army defeat the Nazis, it went on to develop many of the Soviet Union's most powerful ballistic missiles. Yuzhmash operated initially as "plant 586" and was capable of producing of up to 120 ICBM's a year. After the breakup of the Soviet Union the plant was an obvious target for espionage and under pressure from the U.S. and Russia, Ukraine agreed in 1994 to give up the arsenal of nuclear warheads it had inherited from the Soviet Union. It also pledged to disarm the ballistic missiles meant to carry those warheads.

    For the cause of global disarmament, this was a break through, for Yuzhmash, it was a disaster. Thousands of its engineers lost their jobs as the state's demand for missiles dried up. By U.S. estimates, tens of thousands of them were left jobless after the Soviet union fell apart. “There were huge temptations for scientists to take some of their knowledge and potentially sell it elsewhere,” says former U. S. ambassador to Ukraine, Carlos Pasqual.

      Yuri Simvolokov, a union organizer who has helped Yuzhmash workers staged strikes over unpaid wages, says many of them went abroad to find work over the years-not just to North Korea, but also to Iran and Pakistan. “They pay big money over there,” he says of these countries, over dinner with a few of his fellow teamsters. “And if they want to build a rocket, they bring our specialists over. It's nothing new.”

      Starting in the early 1990's, the North Korean military methodically sought to assemble its weapons program from the ruins of the Soviet missile industry. In April 1991, as the Soviet Union was dissolving, a specialist in solid state physics named Anatoly Rubstov was approached by a group of North Koreans at an academic conference in Beijing. The North Korean offer, compared with his prospects back home, most of seemed like saving grace. As he later explained it interviews with Russian and western reporters, he was invited to set up a research institute in North Korea and staff it with Russian engineers. Their aim would be to establish the regime's missile program, according to his own published accounts but it didn't stay secret for long. On October 15, 1992, about 60 of his recruits were detained at a Moscow Airport, and news of their plans caused an international scandal. Under the pressure from the U.S. and South Korea, the Kremlin agreed to prevent Russian scientists from working on the North Korean missile program.

      Meanwhlie,  in Ukraine, it had been estimated between 15,000 and 20,000 experts in weapons of mass destruction were left jobless after the fall of the Soviet Union. A small team of disgruntled employees or underpaid guards could be enticed to steal a few dozen engines like RD-250, Elleman wrote in a report that was published in August. "These machines could have been flown or, more likely, transported by train through Russia to North Korea without discovery. Russia at that time was a total mess, he says, nobody had any money. The borders were open." As early as 1991, North Koreans were caught trying to acquire Soviet-era missile technology, which has not always been kept under lock and key.  How lax was security? In 2002, six tons of components for a Soviet ballistic missile turned up in a Ukrainian scrap yard!

      So how do you stop starving rocket scientists and engineers from selling their knowledge to others? The U.S. and Europe in 1993, set up two organizations, one based in Moscow and the other in Kiev (The Science and Technology Center – Ukraine) with the aim of giving tax free grants to scientists in Russia, Ukraine, and other formerly Communist nations. It was a handout to keep the scientists from selling their knowledge abroad. It still functions today but on a shoe string budget as Western funds have dried up.

     

       In the early 2000's, well before North Korea would test its first new nuclear bomb in 2006, Viktor Moisa, a retired rocket scientist, welcomed the North Koreans to his institute in Eastern Ukraine just as you would with any other guests. The visitors interest in missile technology did not arouse his suspicion. “They came as tourists at least that's how they presented themselves.” He took them upstairs to the showroom of Soviet satellites and rocket engines, the pride of the institute's collection. They then went out to the yard to view an array of parts for ballistic missiles were on display.

      At Yuzhmash the old missile components are still on display there. Guidance systems, fuel pumps and the massive cones designed to hold new nuclear warheads at the tip of the rocket are still in inventory. He pointed to a rocket that had been in the same spot for over two decades, exposed to the elements, yet it had no evidence of corrosion or other damage. “That was the quality of what we made back then,” Moisa said proudly. That seemed clear from North Korea's latest missile launches. 

 

      Experts in chemical, nuclear, and biological arms, are not hard to find in Ukraine. North Korean spies posing as tourists were arrested in Ukraine in 2011 while trying to purchase copies of the factories designs, both are now serving eight years in prison for espionage.

 

      Today, security at Eurasian government facilities is still lax. As recent as the winter of 2011, two bloggers found a way to sneak into one of Moscow's most secretive missile factories, ENERGOMASH, and spent several nights photographing its technology. They did not encounter a single security guard. Although highly embarrassing for Russia's missile industry, the incident did not make many headlines in the West, where terrorism and wars in the Middle East and eclipsed other security concerns.

      Pyongyang's weapons program had help from a variety of sources. In preparing its latest report to the security council, the U.N. panel sent inquiries to Russian officials, asking for the names and passport numbers of any weapons scientists who might have passed through Russia on their way to North Korea. The regime's ability to enrich uranium, a key step in building new nuclear warhead, is believed to have come from Pakistan. But launching those warheads across continents would be impossible without  Ukrainian or Russian Technology, experts have concluded.

      So we go back to our original question – Was the timing of the U.S. funded coup in Ukraine a direct response to North Korea's launching of missiles that the intelligence community traced designs back the factory in Ukraine? There were other motives to the coup as we at The American Constitutionalist have revealed in past articles but we have to be a bit suspicious as to why Time magazine would publish this story. The plans of the elite are usually not readily apparent. This is a story that is still unfolding. We will continue to watch Ukraine for the Deep State's next move.

* Philip Todd in the European columnist for The American Constituionalist.

Patrick Henry Gives the Speech that Rallied a Nation

by

       M. Richard Maxson

      In 1775 the political climate in the British colonies in North America was tense. While some colonists believed that the colonies deserved independence, others were loyal to the British crown. British troops were housed around the colonies, including Virginia, in order to keep the peace; they were constantly on the move. Some of the men who believed in independence for the colonies were gathering on March 20, 1775, in the Second Virginia Convention. They moved their location from Williamsburg to Richmond so they could discuss their plan—whether or not to coordinate Virginia to defense against the British.

 

      On March 23, convinced that war with Great Britain was inevitable, Patrick Henry drafted a series of plans for Virginia to recruit militia and cavalry and presented them to the Convention’s president. Although no one wrote

what he said at the time, the impression that his speech left was so great that decades later some of the men who attended could recite entire portions from memory. It was a biographer who put together and published an approximation of that fiery speech that Patrick Henry delivered that day. Among the men in attendance the day Henry delivered his famous speech were Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.

       While the specifics of most of the wording cannot be verified, many agree that the final words of Henry’s speech were, “I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” It is this final “liberty or death” phrase which usually identifies the speech, although a similar phrase or idea has been used in many other contexts. The speech inspired many of the men to vote to support troops in Virginia, which added to the coordinating colonial efforts for the American Revolution.

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death

by Patrick Henry,1775

       "Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth - and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it. 

 

       I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the house? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation – the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.

      Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature has placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged. Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come!! I repeat it, sir, let it come!!!

       It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace –but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! – I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.”

The Founding Fathers on Immigration

by

      George Sontag

     Here are just a couple of facts about immigration and immigrants in this country:

• Most of the crimes in Texas, California, and Arizona are federal crimes, connected to illegal aliens.

• 27 percent of all Californians were not born in the United States. More than 40 million foreign-born immigrants currently reside in the U.S. -- the highest number in the nation's history.

• The Social Security Administration has told Congress that more than half a million illegal immigrants have received new Social Security numbers, under President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive action allowing younger immigrants to stay in the United States and work. Low-income immigrants with no net tax liability could gain as much as $3 in Social Security benefits for every $1 they pay into the system, which means Americans will now be subsidizing these immigrants.

      Our founders, asserted their concerns publicly and routinely about the effects of indiscriminate mass immigration. They made it clear that the purpose of allowing foreigners into our fledgling nation was not, as it is today, to recruit millions of new voters or to secure permanent ruling majorities for their political parties. It was to preserve, protect and enhance the republic they put their lives on the line to establish.

      In a 1790 House debate on naturalization, James Madison opined: "It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable? It is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or

wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of."

      This is a far cry from the rhetoric heard today from the left. Madison argued plainly that America should welcome the immigrant who could assimilate, but exclude the immigrant who could not readily "incorporate himself into our society." It was not because "diversity" is our greatest value, not because big business needed cheap labor, as Madison asserted, "Not merely to swell the catalogue of people."

 

      George Washington concurred in a letter to John Adams, similarly emphasized that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that "by an intermixture

with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people." That is as relevant as ever today because that is not happening. We are allowing cultures and groups to keep their own beliefs and customs, some which are repugnant and contrary to what is American. This is causing civil unrest within the country.

      Alexander Hamilton, wrote in 1802: "The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family." Hamilton further warned that "The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another." These words clearly were very much against what is now called 'globalism."

 

      He predicted, correctly, that "The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds of distrust; the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader."

      The survival of the American Republic, Hamilton maintained, depends upon "the preservation of a national spirit and a national character." He asserted, "To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Trojan horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty. While billions of immigrants may benefit by moving to this country, this nation state has only one responsibility. We must decide if such an admission complies with our law and serves our national interest."

 

The Courts - The Constitution - The Threat

by

       M. Richard Maxson

         with comments from Christopher Scalia

      To complete the “fundamental changing of America” the plan was set. After years of ignoring the Constitution (because it is an obsolete document) the end game was to put Hillary Clinton in the White House and begin replacing Supreme Court justices that were originalists with left-leaning activist judges. The lower courts were already teaming with these appointees. Their campaigns financed by money from those who do not like the current United States and it's laws. Changing, restricting, and replacing the Constitution is the end game.

  

      That all came to a crashing halt with the election of 2016. The rage that came out of the Left was and still is deafening. President Trump has now appointed two Justices and the Left is doing their best to keep Justice Ginsberg healthy until they can regain power and get the ball rolling again. They pulled every dirty trick they could think of and showed true Americans just how disgusting their political leadership could be. Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed yet the Left, soon to take control of the House, has stated they will continue to go after him via impeachment. They will go to any means to get the Supreme Court stacked with anti-constitutionalists.

      The Democratic party's main supporter does not sit still. He went to plan B. The logic is that the district attorneys are the ones who decide which cases to prosecute and bring before the courts – or not. Since they cannot yet control the courts, they can control what the courts decide. Buried in the MSM are headlines like these:

• Soros put nearly $1.7 million in Philly DA’s race

• Billionaire Soros Pumps $400K Into San Diego DA’s Race

• Billionaire George Soros Pours Money Into Alameda County District Attorney's Race

• Soros buys another district attorney race, this time in Texas

      This should terrify every American patriot. Chief Justice Antonin Scalia was a champion of the Constitution. He has gone and can no longer defend his country but his son has something to say about the state of our nation. Here are his thoughts:

      “Although I don’t think my father (or anyone) could have predicted the twists and turns of the past several weeks, I don’t think he would have been shocked by the no-holds-barred fight over a Supreme Court vacancy, either. He long ago warned Americans about the excessive intrusion of politics into the judicial appointment process. And he explained that a large share of the blame belongs to the justices themselves.”

      “My father believed that a major reason the judicial confirmation process has become so heated is that federal judges too often exceed the role envisioned by our nation’s founders and usurp the power of elected representatives. Alexander Hamilton famously argued “that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power” and that “the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from” the judicial branch. But Hamilton qualified that claim. He said it would only be true as long as “the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive.” Hamilton agreed with the French political philosopher Montesquieu, who warned that “there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.”

      “Maintaining that separation means limiting the role of judges. My father explained that for most of American history, Supreme Court justices recognized that the meaning of legal texts – including the Constitution – did not change. Judges understood that their job was to interpret that original meaning – referring to tradition, history and precedent when necessary. When dealing with laws and statutes, this approach is known as textualism; in reference to the Constitution, it is called originalism.”

      “But over the course of 20th century, judges began to think of the Constitution as a “living document” whose meaning changed with the times. That may seem like a reasonable idea at first; after all, the Constitution was written in 1787 and a nation’s interests and priorities can change dramatically over generations. Shouldn’t the Constitution keep up with the times? In fact, the Constitution establishes democratic processes, both in the states and in Congress, with the flexibility necessary to adapt to changing circumstances. This can happen through new laws and through constitutional amendments. That is, for example, how women earned the right to vote: not by judicial decree, but through the 19^th Amendment.”

      “On the other hand, if the Constitution is a living document, consider who ends up determining its new meaning: unelected judges with lifetime appointments – men and women who are intentionally protected from the will of voters at the ballot box. As a result, many debates and compromises that should have occurred in the political realm have been short-circuited by the judicial branch for decades.”

      “A freedom-loving people respectful of the rule of law may be expected to let lawyers decide what a constitutional text means; but they cannot be expected to let lawyers decide what a Constitution ought to say,” my father said. Or as he put it in another speech, “no court can expect to remain immune from severe political pressure ... if it assumes the role of inventing solutions for social problems instead of merely applying those solutions prescribed in democratically adopted statutory or constitutional text.”

      “One way to help make our judicial confirmation battles less polarizing, then, would be for judges to return to the more limited role they had held for most of our nation’s history: applying laws and statutes according to their text and interpreting the Constitution according to its original public meaning, using history, tradition and precedent as guides.”

      “This change in perspective is long overdue, but it will not happen overnight. Right now, it is primarily only Republicans who see the value in originalist judges like Justice Kavanaugh – and we saw the lengths to which Democrats fought his confirmation.”

      Constitutionalists know that federal judges have been increasingly usurping power from the Executive branch. Too many judges believe it is their right, their duty, to act upon their sympathies and policy preferences This judicial activism is a threat to our representative government and the liberty it secures.

Activist advocates want judges who will do for them what they have been unable to achieve at the ballot box. A judge can have personal opinions on whether a government policy is or isn’t heartless but they should decide legal questions based on the law and the facts—not their policy preferences.