$22.3 TRILLION AND GROWING
This is what happens when an uninformed and uninvolved electorate votes for irresponsible representatives and senators who are more concerned about political games then they are concerned about performing their constitutional functions. Congress is responsible to hold hearings and then pass budgets for the federal government. Congress has completely ignored this responsibility over the last ten to twelve years and allowed our national debt to climb to $22.3 trillion dollars and growing. This puts the United States in the same position as many third world countries where the national debt exceeds the Gross National Product of the country.
When our debt reaches a certain level our law states that the United States cannot borrow any more money until the limit is raised by congress. We have again reached that level. It is estimated that the inherent crisis this causes will be able to be avoided until late summer or early fall. Of course, that time will pass quickly. Congress will be out of session, as is their typical pattern, for much of that time. Currently, the leadership of congress is either not aware of the impending crisis, does not care, is afraid to address a real issue, or is just more concerned with hurling insults and playing political games. Congress has not addressed this matter and it is safe to assume that the reason it has not addressed the matter is because of all the reasons listed above.
What will happen Is shortly before the crisis reaches a drop-dead date, the irresponsible leadership will blame the other party for the crisis. At the last minute some sort of massive bill will be brought before the congress with all sorts of irrelevant matters hidden in the bill and a vote will take place. The overwhelming majority of the representatives and senators will not have read the bill, will not know what is in the bill, probably will not even care what is in the bill, but will pontificate on how responsible their party is and how irresponsible the other party is and then vote along party lines. The loser will again be the American public.
The truth is that the American public will be the ultimate loser, but the hard truth is that the American public will get exactly what it deserves. Our country was designed and still to some degree operates on the basis that the people are sovereign. This means that the people are ultimately responsible for what occurs within the respective chambers of congress. We are responsible for the people we send to represent us. The overwhelming majority of Americans have no idea what the core beliefs of the individuals for whom they are voting are. This is why an individual like Mitt Romney can be elected in a conservative state of Utah. Romney said he was a conservative, that he believed in limited government, and that he believed in fiscal responsibility and was subsequently elected to the senate.
Romney’s record proves that what he said and what he placed on bumper stickers and thirty second ads was a total fabrication of his core beliefs. Romney has supported big government and big spending throughout his political career. This is typical of many situations in both the house and the senate. Romney and many like him will vote to raise the debt ceiling and continue to spend money we do not have. They will continue to vote to give our borrowed money to other countries, to support giveaway programs for non-citizens, and to continue to support the Marxist doctrine of giving borrowed money for entitlements they will refer to as rights.
We, the American public, will once again chastise these people as irresponsible and call for term limits, but when the next election comes, we will vote these same irresponsible people into the same position. All the ills of our nation, our out of control debt, our Marxist polices that have destroyed the family through our socialist welfare and safety net policies and mentality, our accepting and encouraging the murder of the unborn child, our encouragement of illegal immigration and then rewarding this unlawful act, our acceptance of and rewarding immorality, and all the other social and political ills encouraged and rewarded, are totally and only because of we the American people. We have become an uninformed, uninvolved, and foolish electorate who rationalize our irresponsible actions by chastising the very individuals we elected.
Nothing will change unless and until a tireless minority understands that we must accept and understand that we have nobody to blame but ourselves. We must then understand that only we can change the situation by becoming determined to change the course of our nation and become warriors setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of our fellow citizens.
THE 2016 ELECTION WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN WE KNEW AT THE TIME
That the fundamental transformation from a free United States to a Marxist totalitarian state as promised by Comrade Obama was halted and is now being exposed is even more critical than we knew. What we now know is that the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and other national security agencies were being politicized and becoming agencies for the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party and not the nation is evident. We are learning that this transformation was being orchestrated by the White House.
The investigation that Attorney General Barr had begun several weeks ago must be an open and honest investigation, unlike the political investigation of the contrived charges of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party secret police instigated Mueller investigation. That there was a conspiracy to prevent Trump from being elected and then to overthrow the election has been revealed. Who was the instigator and driver, Comey, Clapper, Brennan, or Obama, is not yet known. The investigation must go to wherever the evidence leads.
This investigation and the results are only a part of the bad news facing the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party. The desperation of this collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) group is being revealed in their inane activities.
The American public not only rejected Hillary but is rejecting many of the core objectives of this party that has truly become an anti-American party. Much of the degeneration that has occurred within the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) is reflected in the pathetic group of presidential candidates. The degenerate level was lowered, if that was possible, when the latest, Mayor and collectivist Bill de Blasio joined the group. The level will go even lower when Stacey Abrams joins this pathetic group.
What the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are learning is that their vision for the United States is not the vision of the American people. The American people want free elections without government manipulation. The American people want a peaceful transfer of power and do not want their elections overthrown by a group of sore losers. The American people believe in the right to life, even life that has not been born. The American people believe that we should not have open borders. The American people understand that socialism always fails and does not want socialism to replace free enterprise. The American people do not want to be divided based on sex, race, religion, or any other demographic but want to be judged on the “content of our character and not the color of our skin.” The American people believe that indeed the United States is a shining city on the hill because we are a nation who believes in individualism and has rejected collectivism.
The collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – all virtually the same) are being exposed. What history has taught us is that these people have no sense of fair play and will resort to their typical activity; the ends always justify the means. Their thirst for power and control knows no limits as to what they can and will do. President Trump has shown that he has the strength and character to stand against this evil force of collectivism. We, the American public who understand and believe in individualism, must show the same resolve as we have seen in President Trump.
EUROPEAN UNION APPEARS TO BE CONTINUING WORK OF HITLER
The European Union is showing its pro Muslim bias and Jewish hatred. Their open borders policy has brought about more and more anti-European Union sentiment in many of the nation states. The European Union election is just around the corner. Their latest action could certainly help the anti-globalist movement. We can hope can't we.
EU TO COVER PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SALARIES AND PENSIONS FOR MONTH OF APRIL
The Palestinian Authority cut salaries of public employees by 50 percent to continue to fund terrorists and their families after Israel began withholding tax revenues earlier this year. So, the European Union leadership stepped in to save the day. The European Union has pledged to give the Palestinian Authority 15 million euros to cover the salaries of public employees—salaries that leader Mahmoud Abbas cut to keep up the P.A.’s payments to imprisoned and released terrorists, wounded terrorists and the families of dead terrorists.
The payments made to these families are the result of terrorist attacks against mostly Jews. The attacks and killings are mostly random. It is in the name of the continued goal of the Islamic Jihadists and Palestinians of killing every Jew in the world and eliminating the state of Israel. And now the European Union is directly aiding that movement. The Palestinian Authority is also supported by not only
THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT SAY SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
No, the first amendment does not say church and state must be separated. No where in the first amendment does it say that God can not be recognized and worshipped in our state institutions.
This is what the 1st amendment states about religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
I am not sure why this is so difficult to understand. We must remember that many of the 13 colonies had a state sponsored religion. The state sponsored churches were the Anglican Church and the Congregationalists. The different colonies declared these as official religions. Other religions were practiced but many times with restrictions or persecution. The 1st amendment clearly states that this was no longer permissible; that is the government could not declare a religion was the state sponsored religion and could not restrict the practice of a religion or persecute those who practiced a different religion. The 1st amendment was to protect the freedom of religion and not the prohibition of religion.
The Suprme Court will be hearing another case under the false premise that the 1st amendment calls for separation of church and state. That is a total misrepresentation of the 1st amendment. Again, the first amendment calls to protect the freedom and practice of religion free from government limitations and persecutions. The right to place the cross is what is protected by the 1st amendment.
Separation of church-state
The court is again tasked with taking up a case over the separation of church and state, this time over a state commission’s care-taking of a large cross as part of a memorial for veterans.
The American Legion had built 40-foot tall cross in a memorial park for World War I veterans in Maryland, and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission eventually took over responsibility for the park, including caring for the cross.
But non-Christian residents took up issues with the cross over its Christian symbolism, and argued that the government’s care of the cross is in violation of the Constitution’s separation of church and state.
During oral arguments in the case in February, the justices suggested they would allow the cross to stay.
MARXISTS/PROGRESSIVES (DEMOCRATS) FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION IF YOU WANT GUN CONTROL
We keep hearing from the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) they want to protect the public by placing controls on the citizens rights to own arms. They can do it, but they must follow the constitution.
The 2nd amendment says, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Infringed is to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. The amendment says right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) you cannot infringe or limit the right of people to own arms. If you do you are violating the United States Constitution. I know you do not really care what the Constitution says, but for sake of argument let us assume you really do want to adhere to the Constitution. If you want to infringe on the people's rights, you can change the 2nd amendment. The only way you can do that is to amend the 2nd amendment.
There are four ways. (1) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve. Twenty-six of the 27 amendments were approved in this manner. (2) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. Only the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, was passed in this manner. (3) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve the amendment. (4) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions.
There you are. This is how you amend the Constitution. Get to it if you want to infringe the right of the people to own arms.
COMRADE AND ISLAMIC JIHADIST SYMPATHIZER OBAMA KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS DOING
You do not work as hard and long as Obama and Kerry did and not know exactly what you are doing and why you are doing it. This headline is wrong. It was the goal of the Obama regime to enable Iran to not only continue but augment their terrorist activity and aid. Obama has, by his actions, proven he is anti-Semitic just as he proved by his actions, he is pro Marxism and anti-capitalism. Please, let us be honest in our assessments. Political Correctness is damaging to freedom and independence from the curse of collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressives, and Democrats – all virtually the same) and those who advocate for Sharia and a caliphate. Comrade Obama has proven he supports both, as apparently does the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party.
Obama Was Weak on Iran, Now CIA Chief Says Tehran Is Conducting Nuclear Blackmail
Former CIA station chief Daniel Hoffman said that Iran is engaging in “nuclear blackmail” after Iranian president Hassan Rouhani said that Iran would begin collecting low enriched uranium and heavy water.
“Starting today, Iran does not keep its enriched uranium and produced heavy water limited,” Rouhani announced Wednesday.
Rouhani warned that Europe will face “further actions” if Iran is not compensated in the oil and banking sectors for the U.S. sanctions against Iran.
“If the five countries came to the negotiating table and we reached an agreement, and if they could protect our interests in the oil and banking sectors, we will go back to square one,” Rouhani said in an address.
Iran’s increased aggression and demands stem from former Comrade and Islamic Jihadist sympathizer Barack Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal.
Obama’s terrible nuclear deal was meant to lift sanctions against Iran (which would give Iran billions in extra revenue) in exchange for 10 years of limited nuclear activity from Iran.
There were several problems with the deal, including Iran’s ability to delay inspections of nuclear facilities and the temporary nature of the deal.
Trump rejected the deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran, but Obama’s bad policy spoiled the Iranian regime, which is now demanding more from other countries that signed the deal.
Hoffman characterized Iran’s demands as “nuclear blackmail.”
“It’s quite telling because our maximum sanctions have really taken effect and the Iranian economy is in freefall,” Hoffman said. “The government of Iran is looking for some redress and this is how they seek to get it.”
The enabling of Iran to continue their Jihadist terrorist activities was intended to continue under the supposed Hillary Clinton regime as was the fundamental transformation of the United States from a free and independent nation to a Marxist totalitarian state. Donald Trump’s, and we can Thank God, legitimate election changed the course of both of those un-American and deranged plans. This is the reason for the un-American activities of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to overthrow the Constitution of the United States and our long tradition of “peaceful transfer of power.”
We see the Marxist/Progressives become more and more unhinged and irrational as their plans to overthrow our Constitution and our individualist society become exposed. Yes, the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar. They were however, not looking to swipe a cookie, but their intent was to take away our liberties. The real question is not what the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) were doing, but will the Republicans have the backbone to fully and completely expose the hoax the Marxist/Progressives were playing on the American people.
We are in the midst of a crisis, and our liberty is at stake.
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU SUPPORT AN ISLAMIC TERRORIST COUNTRY OBAMA – BUT THEN YOU KNEW THAT WHEN YOU GAVE THEM THE CASH
700 ROCKETS, 4 DEAD ISRAELIS
Over the course of the weekend, Hamas and Islamic Jihad launched nearly 700 rockets from Gaza at Israel, killing four people and injuring more than 200.
With the current conflict between Israel and Hamas now into its second week, there’s much said about Hamas’s relationship with Iran. The issue that is the crucial one right now is the question of the rockets that Hamas and other groups in Gaza use against Israel. Now some of these rockets are clearly homemade, so to speak, but others apparently have been made in Iran. Hamas is an Islamic Muslim organization sort of an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which in fact, is a leading Sunni Islamic group. But Iran clearly doesn’t make a distinction between Shiite and Sunni as long as each group is anti-American, anti-Israel.
The question remains then, from where Iran got the money to fund these types of assaults.
Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama made that infamous special 2015 agreement with Iran that freed up $150 billion of Iranian assets that had been frozen under sanctions. The Congressional Research Service, the nonpartisan analytic arm of Congress, reviewed a special cash transfer from the Obama regime to Iran in a 2018 report. It found the Obama regime gave a total of $1.7 billion to Iran. Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama had the United States send the money to Iran in euros, Swiss francs and other currencies.
We know that Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Obama is also an anti-Semite. When the Israeli people look up in the sky and see these rockets that are sent to kill them from Gaza, they should understand this was the intent of Islamic Jihadist and Muslim Brotherhood Supporter Obama when he saved the Iranian economy, allowed the Iranians to pursue nuclear weapons, and literally gave Iran cash to continue supporting terror against both Israel and the Untied States.
NOTICE TO MARXIST/PROGRESSIVES (DEMOCRATS) – WE ARE NOT TURKEY YET
Although Comrade Obama promised he would fundamentally transform the United States into a Marxist totalitarian state, the full transformation has not yet occurred. Hillary and Abrams are keeping their hopes alive, however. Both are losers not only in the fact that they lost their respective elections, but that they are like dictator of Turkey, Erdogan, claiming that although his candidate received the fewest votes, the people really wanted his candidate to win. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it.
The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have made the same claim along with Hillary. President Trump received substantially more Electoral College votes than did Hillary. In the United States, since George Washington won the first presidential election, the candidate with the most Electoral College votes is the winner. This is how it is done because that is the way the United States Constitution says it should be done. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and Hillary believe that it does not matter that she lost the election based on the way the United State Constitution dictates, because she is Hillary and a Marxist/Progressive, she should have won regardless of the Electoral College results. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and Hillary believe apparently that the fundamental transformation called for by Comrade Obama has been completed and therefore they can do what is happening in Turkey.
Turkey’s top election authority voided the Istanbul mayoral election won by an opposition to Erdogan, dictator of Turkey, candidate and ordered a do-over, ruling Monday in favor of a request by Erdogan’s party to throw out the vote it narrowly lost. Opposition leaders said the Supreme Electoral Board’s decision to invalidate the results from Istanbul’s election raises concerns about President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s grip on power and Turkish democracy in general.
A top aide for Erdogan told The Associated Press that the voiding of the mayoral election in Turkey’s biggest city amounts to “a victory for Turkish democracy” by ensuring the results reflect the voters’ choice. Does that not sound like something the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are alleging? Despite the actual vote count, what we the Marxist,Progressives want is what the people want.
Ekrem Imamoglu of the opposition Republican People’s Party placed first by a slim margin in the Istanbul March 31 mayoral election, defeating the ruling party candidate, former Prime Minister Binali Yildirim. Erdogan’s Islamic-based Justice and Development Party then charged that a series of election irregularities made the results illegitimate.
What happens if Erdogan does not get the results he wants in the next election? Perhaps he will institute what the California Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have instituted and allow for “ballot harvesting” or ballot creating until you have enough votes to declare the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) candidate the winner. After all, is that not what the people want????
CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS - DOES IT HAVE MEANING OR JUST ANOTHER GAME
House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler is making what he calls a final “counter offer” to Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to grant immediate access to the underlying evidence in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
Nadler’s new offer comes as the Justice Department said earlier this week it would not comply with Nadler’s subpoena for the unredacted Mueller report and all of the underlying evidence and grand jury information. In a letter to Nadler, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd said Congress is not entitled to the information, adding that the request is “not legitimate oversight.”
A vote by congress to hold AG Barr in contempt will bring about another potential long drawn out court fight with the final answer to be determined by the Supreme Court. The DOJ has redacted information that the law requires it redact and has made this less redacted report available to congress. As of the last report we saw, no congressperson has viewed this report. The other question is does oversight entitle congress to have all the investigative material or the report. Much of the investigative material would be just that investigative and the Special Prosecutor deemed it to be irrelevant and of no meaning to the outcome of the case.
A contempt of congress charge would end with the end of congress. The case would still be in the court system. It would become irrelevant and the Supreme Court would probably not hear it because it no longer had any basis.
Here’s what that means, and what could happen next:
What is contempt of Congress?
It means someone has obstructed the work of either Congress or a congressional committee.
House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has threatened to hold Barr in contempt of Congress — not because he skipped the hearing, but over a subpoena to obtain the unredacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.
While there are many ways someone can be in contempt of Congress, these days it usually happens when someone doesn’t comply with a congressional subpoena, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said.
Sometimes that disobedience means refusing to appear before a committee to testify, and sometimes that means refusing to pony up requested documents.
What’s the point of holding someone in contempt of Congress?
“Contempt may be used either to coerce compliance, to punish the contemnor, and/or to remove the obstruction,” the Congressional Research Service said.
There are several ways members of Congress can do this:
1) They can tell the House or Senate sergeant at arms to detain or imprison the person in contempt until he or she honors congressional demands. This is called “inherent contempt.” But it’s super rare and hasn’t happened in modern times.
2) Congress can certify a contempt citation to the executive branch — headed by the President — to try to get the person criminally prosecuted.
3) Congress can ask the judicial branch to enforce a congressional subpoena. In other words, Congress can seek a federal court’s civil judgment saying the person is legally obligated to comply with the subpoena.
What are the challenges of holding someone in contempt of Congress?
If an official refuses to disclose information after the President says it’s protected under executive privilege, “past practice suggests that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will not pursue a prosecution for criminal contempt,” the Congressional Research Service said.
It can also be hard to get the executive branch to help. If the person in contempt is an executive branch official, efforts to punish him or her for not complying with a subpoena fail in many cases, the research center said.
So why don’t members of Congress just use “inherent contempt” and tell their sergeant at arms to arrest the offender?
“Although the contemnor can be incarcerated until he agrees to comply with the subpoena, imprisonment may not extend beyond the end of the current session of Congress,” the Congressional Research Service said.
“Moreover, inherent contempt has been described as ‘unseemly,’ cumbersome, time-consuming, and relatively ineffective, especially for a modern Congress with a heavy legislative workload that would be interrupted by a trial at the bar.”
DEMOCRATS CONTINUE TO QUOTE MARX – MUST BE BECAUSE THEY ARE MARXISTS
We hear from the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party the absolute collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) philosophy of “Hope and Change.” This was the campaign slogan, a slogan used by many collectivists throughout history, used by Comrade Obama in 2008. It was in 2008 that Comrade Obama told the American people that indeed it is the goal of his party, the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party, to fundamentally transform the United States into a Marxist Totalitarian state. Marx had previously told the world that nations would become Marxist nations through two methods; revolution or transformation.
The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party is the party that follows the Marxist dictate of sharing the wealth; taking from those who have achieved and redistribute to others the party determines is in need. AOC has now documented this by submitting the “New Green Deal” as a bill before the legislative branch. In this bill she states that all should have a minimum wage even if they simply do not want to work. Somehow this is “fair and just.” The overwhelming majority of Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party presidential candidates have endorsed this bill although they did not have the courage of their convictions when they did not cast a yea vote in the senate.
Elizabeth Warren has proposed that it is not only “fair and just” to confiscate individuals’ incomes, but now it is “fair and just” to confiscate the wealth of the individual based on value on some random date each year. If the values of land and stocks are high one year, the tax is on the inflated value. If the value decreases, the individual would not receive a refund. These funds would be used to reduce the debt students have accumulated because the government under Comrade Obama imposed a monopoly on loans for students and used the Marxist criteria for granting the loans; just apply, ability to repay and credit history are not considered because they are discriminatory.
Now Spartacus AKA Corey Booker is directly quoting from Marx in how this system is supposed to work. Spartacus said in an interview when pressed on the fact that most Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), including Spartacus, were pushing policies that would require tax increases. “What’s the counterargument?” he was asked.
“We live in a nation with far more patriotism than people are expressing,” Booker replied, going on to argue that patriotism and consideration for fellow citizens would lead Americans to see past their own personal economics to understand that they should be glad for the opportunity to invest in each other.
“This is a moment where across this country, farm towns, factory towns, cities to suburbs, we have so much common pain where Americans are seeing, from the cost of prescription drugs, cost of college, we’re all hurting because we have not designed an economy that invests in each other,” he concluded.
This is the same argument used by Marx when Marx was asked why people would perform at their optimum when his philosophy of “from each according to their ability to each according to their needs” was employed. Marx replied that out of the sense of peoples' goodness, duty, and understanding their effort was contributing to the good of the community, all would perform at their optimum.
History reveals the facts, people do not perform at their optimum and many stop performing. This is just one of many reasons that collectivism always fails. The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party is a DANGER TO AND AN ENEMY TO THE UNITED STATES. They claim patriotism, rule of law, the Constitution, and the American way while they advance an agenda totally contrary to the very principles upon which our nation was founded. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) despise these very principles of rule of law, limited government, divided government, sovereignty of the people, and individualism. They instead embrace all that is collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) which has brought social decay, financial collapse and tyranny every place it has been tried.
I strongly urge every Freedom Loving American to learn and understand the evil that is collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) and you will identity the suggestions made every day by Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to further advance the United States down “The Road to Tyranny.”
I AGREE WITH POLL THAT SAYS SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT MUST CHANGE
The AP-NORC poll finds that discontent with the government system is closely tied with policy concerns. It asked Americans how they think the government is performing on a series of issues as well as whether it has a role in handling those issues at all. Those who are most critical of the way government handles issues they think it should be dealing with are most likely to want changes, with 65% saying they desire major changes and 18% seeking a completely different system of government.
By contrast, among those happiest with the government's performance on those issues, 48% say they want major changes and 8% want a total overhaul.
Our government is not functioning properly. Our government is not functioning as it was designed to function. Our government MUST BE CHANGED AND IT MUST BEGIN TO AGAIN FUNCTION AS IT WAS DESIGNED.
Our government was designed to be a limited government. The powers our federal government was to have are enumerated in the Constitution. Our government no longer adheres to its limitation. Our government has become exactly what it was never intended to become and that is a government that dictates and dominates the lives of its citizens. Our federal government was never intended to control our education system, or do control our health care industry or any industry, or to become a central planning force for our economy, or to protect those who break our laws by entering our country illegally, or to dictate outcomes and incomes of citizens, and yes our government is no longer a limited government.
Article I of our Constitution clearly gives the legislative branch of our government the power to pass laws. No other branch has that power; not the executive branch or the judicial branch. Our legislative branch has abdicated their constitutional duty for the very reason they were the only branch given that power. The power to pass laws was given to the legislative branch because they were closest to the people. The people could then choose who they wished to have represent them based on how they voted for laws. Our legislators have become more interested in their power and financial success then in being the servant they were elected to be. Consequently, the legislative branch has abdicated their responsibilities of passing laws and budgeting so they can increase and perpetuate their own power and wealth. This is not the fault of the legislators, but it is the fault of the electorate. Our system was designed for a virtuous people electing virtuous representatives. We must once again become a virtuous people electing virtuous representatives.
The executive branch was designed to be the administrative branch. That means they were to administer the laws the legislative branch passed. The executive was to be the civilian who was to be the head of the military or the Commander in Chief. Only congress could declare war. Over the years the executive has usurped powers that have been abdicated by the legislative branch. The constitution does not say that the executive has the power to act if congress does not do what they want congress to do. FDR extended the power of the executive way beyond the limits of the Constitution and executives ever since have taken on the role of an activist executive with Obama greatly expanding the power of the executive even taking power over immigration when he stated several dozen times that the executive does not have that power. The executive must again adhere to the Constitution and not pass, change, or abolish laws through regulations and executive orders.
The branch of government that has gone far beyond its limitations as stated in the Constitution is the very branch that was most responsible for ensuring the Constitution was followed; the judicial branch. The courts no longer rule on law but make law from the bench. Courts today overrule both the legislative branch and the executive branch when they are constitutionally performing their duties because a small group of judges or a singular judge politically disagrees with the actions of the superior branch of government. The judicial branch does not have the power to make law but only give opinions. Because the Supreme Court issues a ruling does not make that ruling the law of the land. For example, abortion is not the law of the land but an opinion of the court. The judicial branch has usurped power it is not granted by the Constitution. The judicial branch was not designed as a political branch. The judicial branch must adhere to the Constitution.
The biggest change we have seen in our government is we the people. Our type of government can only exist when those who vote are informed, involved, and knowledgeable. The vast majority of voters today are none of the above. They vote on bumper sticker ads. This has allowed unvirtuous people to remain in office for years. A dictatorship operates with and demands that the people are not informed, not involved, and not knowledgeable. A republic such as our demands the opposite.
Yes, our government should be changed. We should change our government to operate according to the Constitution of the United States. But mostly, to remain a free and independent people, we must become a virtuous people who vote for virtuous people and we must again become an informed, involved and knowledgeable people. Our government operates the way we the people allow it to operate. When the government operates only as it wishes to operate, than it is to late for freedom and independence and we will have become a nation under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat as desired by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats).
AND THE CHILD CONTINUES TO INSIST THEY DID NOT EAT THE CHOCOLATE
The child’s face is covered with chocolate. The wrappings are all around them and yet they insist to the parent they did not eat the chocolate. This is what we witnessed during the Attorney General Barr hearings before the Senate Judiciary committee. When I viewed the hearings from that respect, I was able to listen with the hope of probably learning something. The fact is that all the evidence had been exposed, the chocolate on the face and the wrappings at their feet, no collusion and no obstruction. The more the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) tried to find something that would make the chocolate and wrappings disappear, the more ridiculous and childish they became.
Supposedly these Marxist/Progressives (Democrat) Senators are intelligent and rationale people. This theory was certainly put to the test. We must them wonder why they continue to insist they did not take the chocolate. They did base their total attack on the false hope that Mueller would find something that could be construed as collusion but there was none and subsequently even Mueller and his Clinton supporting investigators could not find a shred of evidence. Rational people would understand their continuing denial will become detrimental to their agenda. We must then question why they continue this ridiculous strategy. We might have the answer and that answer is the soon to be released Department of Justice IG report.
The findings of the IG could be riveting and could bring indictments of CNN’s and MNSBC’s chief spokesmen, Brennan and Clapper. These indictments could also reach to former FBI agents including Comey. The revelations are threatening the very heart of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party and their now overt efforts to fundamentally transform the United States to a Marxist totalitarian state. The Untied States is and has been in a revolution for years. That revolution just might be coming to a head and these Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) want to place their collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) agenda in the best light they belief they can. More hearings like the one with Barr will make that goal even more elusive.
This comes from a former CIA agent who as such had experience with Brennan. It is scary but totally plausible. We have seen the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) embrace and support such groups as Antifa and Black Lives Matter who would be at the forefront.
John Brennan is about to be indicted for plot against Trump, prepare for violence, says fmr CIA officer
Kevin Shipp warned that if John Brennan and others are indicted for an attempted coup against the president of the United States, the violence from Leftists “is going to increase to the point where it’s going to be very, very bad.”
Americans, he said, need to arm themselves, and be ready to defend themselves, and they need to be aware there are going to be “beatings” and “probably shootings” – including shooting at police.
Shipp was a high-ranking officer stationed at CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, and also at Camp Stanley, an Army weapons depot north of San Antonio, Texas, that has a secret CIA facility.
Most Americans don’t realize, said Shipp, that we’re already in a civil war – a war that has been “brewing over 60 years” in this country.
“We have, you want to call it the Dark left. The DNC is fully involved, and all their congressmen and senators,” he said. “There is a Marxist movement within the DNC that is in control right now. If you go back and you matched up the progressive goals with Marxist documents, you’ll see that they are one and the same.” (I have done this and report on it consistently. The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party follows the “Communist Manifesto” and other Marx writings along with the policies put forth by Saul Alinsky. Hillary Clinton had a personal relationship with Alinsky and Obama was the best student the Alinsky School ever had according to Alinsky’s son.)
The Democratic Party, Shipp said, is attacking “the three Cs”: the Constitution, which they want to be understood to be a “living document” that can be changed with the times; Christianity, which underlines the Constitution; and the Culture.
They have to do these three things, he said, “to turn this into a global, Marxist government.”
Of former CIA Director John Brennan’s comment last Friday about President Trump’s “sociopathic ramblings,” he said the truth of the matter is clear.
“John Brennan is saying these crazy things because I think he knows he is going to be indicted for this coup against a candidate and then elected president,” said Shipp. “He is the one that took the dossier. He’s the one that disseminated it. He’s the one that leaked it to the press, calling it intelligence, falsifying intelligence. Those are felonies. He’s the one that broke into the Senate on Capitol Hill, into his bosses, the Select Committee, to spy on the torture report. This man has committed several felonies and he knows darn well he has, so he’s coming out screaming and yelling, like a Mockingbird, to the press, trying to cover, before this whole thing comes apart at the seams.”
Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper are feeding information to CNN, MSNBC, said Shipp – bizarre statements – because it’s “all they have.”
“They have nothing,” he said. “If they had evidence that none of this was true against them, they’d be coming out with it. But they’re not. Instead, they’re saying, ‘I know you are but what am I?’ and making accusations that are completely baseless.”
“This rises to the level of treason,” he said of Brennan’s and Clapper’s use of their positions to try to take down the president.”
“These people, they’ve got to be charged,” he said, “they’ve got to be indicted, and, in my opinion in the field, they’ve got to be put in prison for a few decades.”
NEWSFLASH – RUSSIA HAS BEEN INTERFERING IN AMERICAN POLITICS FOR YEARS
This article is written by Stephen F. Cohen, who is an American scholar and professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University. His academic work concentrates on modern Russian history since the Bolshevik Revolution and the country's relationship with the United States. It is well worth reading and can be collaborated by other writers who were able to review records in Russia for a short period after the fall of the Soviet Union.
We have seen feigned outrage, for political purposes or from a state of ignorance, by Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) as they called the false and fake stories of collusion between now President Trump and the Russians. This so called collusion never existed, but the fact that the Russians have tried to affect our elections has been existent for years.
The Long History of US-Russian ‘Meddling’
The two governments have repeatedly interfered in each other’s domestic politics during the past 100 year.
By Stephen F. Cohen
Even though the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee found “no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia,” Russiagate allegations of “collusion” between candidate and then–President Donald Trump and the Kremlin have poisoned American politics for nearly three years. They are likely to continue to do so for the foreseeable future, due not only to the current subpoena-happy Democratic chairs of House “investigative” committees.
At the core of the Russiagate narrative is the allegation that the Kremlin “meddled” in the 2016 US presidential election. The word “meddle” is nebulous and could mean almost anything, but Russiagate zealots deploy it in the most ominous ways, as a war-like “attack on America,” a kind of “Pearl Harbor.” They also imply that such meddling is unprecedented when in fact both the United States and Russia have interfered repeatedly in the other’s internal politics, in one way or another, certainly since the 1917 Russian Revolution.
For context, recall that such meddling is an integral part of Cold War and that there have been three Cold Wars between America and Russia during the past one hundred years. The first was from 1917 to 1933, when Washington did not even formally recognize the new Soviet government in Moscow. The second is, of course, the best known, the 40-year Cold War from about 1948 to 1988, when the US and Soviet leaders, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, declared it over. And then, by my reckoning, the new, ongoing Cold War began in the late 1990s, when the Clinton administration initiated the expansion of NATO toward Russia’s borders and bombed Moscow’s longtime Slav and political ally Serbia.
That’s approximately 85 years of US–Russian Cold War in a hundred years of relations and, not surprisingly, a lot of meddling on both sides, even leaving aside espionage and spies. The meddling has taken various forms.
In the period from 1917 to 1933, such interference was extreme on both sides. In 1918, President Woodrow Wilson sent approximately 8,000 US troops to Siberia to fight against the “Reds” in the Russian Civil War. For its part, Moscow founded the Communist International (Comintern) in 1919 and urged the American Communist Party to pursue revolutionary regime change in the United States, an historical analogue of the “democracy promotion” later pursued by Washington. During these years, both sides eagerly generated, and amply funded, “disinformation” and “propaganda” directed at and inside the other country.
During the second Cold War, from 1948 to 1988, the “meddling” was expanded and institutionalized. At least until the McCarthyite attempted purge of such activities, the American Communist Party, now largely under the control of Moscow, was an active force in US politics, with some appeal to intellectuals and others, as well as bookstores and “schools”—all amply supplied with English-language Soviet “propaganda” and “disinformation”—in many major cities.
US meddling during those years took various forms, but the most relevant in terms of the role of social media in Russiagate were nearly around-the-clock Russian-language short-wave radio broadcasts. When I lived in Moscow off and on from 1976 to 1982, every Russian I knew had a short-wave radio as well as a nearby place where reception was good. Many were enticed by the then-semi-forbidden rock music—Elton John was the rage, having surpassed The Beatles—but stayed tuned for the editorial content, which was, Soviet authorities complained, “disinformation.”
Suspect “contacts” with the other side was another Cold War precursor of Russiagate. Here too I can provide first-hand testimony. By 1980, my companion Katrina vanden Heuvel—now my wife and publisher and editor of The Nation—joined me on regular stays in Moscow. Most of our social life was among Moscow’s community of survivors of Stalin’s Gulag and the even larger community of active dissidents. In mid-1982, both of us were suddenly denied Soviet visas. I appealed to two sympathetic high-level Soviet officials. After a few weeks, both reported back, “I can do nothing. You have too many undesirable contacts.” (Our visas were reissued shortly after Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in March 1985.)
DEMOCRACY AND WHY IT IS EMBRACED BY THE MARXIST/PROGRESSIVES
Democracy means equality. The great significance of the proletariat's struggle for equality and of equality as a slogan will be clear if we correctly interpret it as meaning the abolition of classes. But democracy means only formal equality. And as soon as equality is achieved for all members of society in relation to ownership of the means of production, that is, equality of labor and wages, humanity will inevitably be confronted with the question of advancing father, from formal equality to actual equality, i.e., to the operation of the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.
Lenin, The State and Revolution (1917)
"But I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. Yes, even for terrible people, because once you start chipping away…you're running down a slippery slope," Sanders added. "I believe even if they are in jail, they're paying the price to society, that should not take away their inherent American right to participate in our democracy."
Bernie Sanders, April 2019
What Bernie Sanders stated incorrectly is that the United States is a democracy. Our nation was specifically designed not to be a democracy. Madison explained why the Untied States was designed as a Republic when he stated, “We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man. What has been the source of those unjust laws complained of among ourselves? Has it not been the real or supposed interest of the major numbers? Debtors have defrauded their creditors. The landed interest has borne hard on the mercantile interest. The holders of one species of property have thrown disproportion of taxes on the holders of another species. The lesson we are to draw from the whole is that where a majority are united be a common sentiment, and have an opportunity, the rights of the minor party become insecure”
In conversation Plato explained that it is that freedom's excesses, and the refusal of many in a democracy to accept any limits on what they can get or buy or conquer eventually hit reality. And when the reality hits, the frustration and insolence at finding that money does not grow on trees or that the world cannot be hammered into the shape our ideology demands easily gives way to a new form of government. That new government promises to remove all the perils and difficulties of self-government in favor of the certainty and security of raw executive power.
In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”
John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”
Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”
Marx contradicted our founders and brings to light what Bernie Sanders and the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) mean when they call for a true democracy in the United States. Marx explained that in democracy, the constitution, the law, the state itself is on the self-determination of the people and a particular content of the people.
The particular difference between a republic and a democracy is:
A republic protects the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. A democracy is the majority imposing their absolute will. A republic is likened to a suspect being tried in a court following the constitutionally demanded right that the government must prove guilt and not that the suspect must prove innocence. A democracy is the suspect being tried by the mob without the constitutionally mandated protections but with the emotion and irrationality of the mob prevailing.
A republic is protecting the rights of the individual such as freedom of speech and religion. A democracy is demanding limitations on the freedom of speech when it is considered to be offensive, or hate speech, or contradictory to the ideas of the majority. A republic is protecting the rights of the individual to worship God as they believe is correct. A democracy is restricting that worship when that worship contradicts the ideology of the majority and thus the majority forces submission or administers severe penalties.
THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AN APOLOGY TO THE WRONG PERSON
Anita Hill Reveals Biden Called Her, But She Didn't Exactly Accept His Apology. Anita Hill has revealed to the New York Times that former Vice President (and newly declared 2020 candidate) Joe Biden phoned her earlier this month to express his regrets about the 1991 Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Hill testified against Thomas at the time, claiming he had sexually harassed her when she worked for him at the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission.
The person that should receive an apology from Biden, Paul Simon, Ted Kennedy, Herb Kohl, Howard Heflin, Dennis DeConcini, and Howard Metzenbaum is Justice Clarence Thomas. The confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas was not unlike the hearing for Bret Kavanaugh. Wild accusations with no collaboration. I remember listening to the hearings and reading the outlandish reports in the media. Here was a black nominee for Supreme Court Justice who did not collaborate with the idea that the Constitution could mean whatever you wanted it to mean but that the words of the Constitution had real meaning. He also said that the law could not apply differently to different people depending on their political persuasion.
This is how then nominee Clarence Thomas described the hearings:
“This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.”
Oh yes, Biden should apologize, but he should apologize to Justice Thomas and the American public for allowing what should have been a discussion on difficult matters to descend into the circus it did based on wild accusations with absolutely no collaboration of any kind. If you watched the Kavanaugh hearings, you saw the Thomas hearings. You witnessed the standard approach used by collectivists, “The ends always justify the means.” Truth and civility have no place in any hearings, according to the collectivist, when what they regard as the standard is being threatened.
Lenin described these antics so accurately when he said, “There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel.”
Collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats-all virtually the same) believe their revolution is unquestionably moral. “From the point of view of communist morality, the struggle against everything which hinders the cause of communist construction is moral and humane and for this reason we consider the struggle against the enemies of communism to be of a moral nature,” Lenin explained.
Nominees Clarence Thompson and Brett Kavanaugh represented a hindrance to the communist cause or the cause of the Democrat party and so any attack on them was considered justified. These collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – all virtually the same) can not be bothered with such things as The Constitution of the United States, rule of law, decency, morality, truth, and facts.
IS THIS THE NEW NORMAL
The political world is being turned upside down. The consummate politician who has claimed that “experience” is the critical element in any political campaign is being told differently time after time. The consummate politician who has claimed that continuing to follow the status quo is the proper road to stability and is always best for the electorate is being challenged. This so called new normal is sweeping across the world. This movement Is not being reported by the news media in the United States. Consequently the American public is not aware that the movement that swept Donald Trump to victory in November of 2016 is sweeping the world.
We can and should discuss whether or not this movement is occurring because of the ineptitude of the politicians along with their narcissism, or is the reason because of an uninformed, uninvolved, and unknowledgeable electorate. I would surmise that it is a combination of both.
Recent happenings such as the Brexit vote in the UK, the election of anti-immigration and anti-European Union advocates in members of the European Union, the election of an individual who had never held public office to the presidency of the United States, and now a complete and total novice elected in Ukraine. The recent election in Ukraine is stunning and amazing especially because of the situation in which Ukraine finds itself today. Perhaps that is the reason for this stunning happening. Here is an article that describes what happened. This appears to be a continuation of the repudiation of the pollical elite who are telling us that collectivism and globalism is the way to peace and prosperity because under these perverted systems the political elite will control all happenings. Of course, just as Obama and Clinton claimed, their control will be in the best interest of the “people”, the same claim made by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, and all collectivist and globalist aspiring tyrants.
The repudiation of the collectivist and globalist elitism has proven to be beneficial to the public in the individual states of the European Union and the United States. Because the politicians have delayed Brexit, the jury is still out in the UK, but more and more we are hearing that a no deal Brexit is and should be the way the UK exits, we hope to see final results sooner rather than later. All should watch the results in the Ukraine carefully.
The World Just Witnessed the First Entirely Virtual Presidential Campaign
Ukraine’s new president-elect made no public speeches, held no rallies and gave no press conferences. And now he’s about to be in charge of a geopolitical hotspot. What could go wrong?
By ADRIAN KARATNYCKY April 24, 2019
Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who was elected president of Ukraine by a landslide on Sunday, is probably the least prepared individual to head a democracy in world history.
Until this weekend, his main experience in politics was playing a schoolteacher who becomes the president in a satirical television program. He ran with no party affiliation. Until two days before voting began, he had no clear team of expert advisers—not even on foreign policy and national security, the president’s key constitutional responsibilities. And, remarkably, Ukraine’s nearly four-month-long election campaign did little to provide answers as to who Zelenskiy is and what he truly thinks.
This is because Zelenskiy ran the world’s first successful presidential campaign that was entirely virtual. He not only traded on the image of a complete outsider, he also did no face-to-face campaigning, made no speeches, held no rallies, eschewed travel across the country, gave no press conferences, avoided in-depth interviews with independent journalists and, until the last day of campaigning, did not debate.
And now this virtual candidate is about to become the president of a country at the epicenter of a hybrid war that could easily ignite into a major European conflict.
Before he ran for office, Zelenskiy was omnipresent on Ukraine’s most popular TV network, 1+1, filling hours of weekly programming with his variety shows, comedy talent contests and his series about an outsider elected president, “Servant of the People.” When he announced his candidacy in a New Years’ 2019 video greeting, after opinion polls showed him to be among the favorites, many assumed he would run a typical celebrity campaign—full of public appearances and stump speeches.
He didn’t. Unlike President Donald Trump, who staged regular rallies and appeared in town halls and in televised debates, Zelenskiy avoided human contact with his electorate. He addressed voters through short YouTube and Instagram posts and appearances on TV. (One of his online videos, calling for a debate he postponed until the last minute, garnered 14 million views.) Instead of preparing for the presidency and holding substantive public meetings, he traveled with his comedy troupe and performed in variety shows. He also spent much of the first month of the campaign producing the next three episodes of his TV series.
After winning a first-round election that required a runoff—Zelenskiy played table tennis at his campaign headquarters with a reporter, made a vague one-minute statement laced with platitudes and followed by just three minutes of Q and A. As the election continued, a 15-minute interview on his home TV station, and a softball interview of his wife and him at home, were the most detailed press scrutiny he faced.
Zelenskiy’s virtual-first strategy allowed him to run his campaign on general themes and vague promises and to avoid issuing detailed positions on policy issues. His political messaging focused on discontent with the way things are—and lambasting Ukraine’s business and political elites for making them that way. Some voters even appear to have conflated him with his TV persona, a high school teacher whose viral Youtube rant against corruption and government incompetence gets him elected Ukraine’s president.
Those searching for detailed policy positions searched in vain. While he solicited advice from voters on a campaign website, his platform published online contains only a few anodyne sentences each on key issues of security, the economy, health care, education and the fight against corruption. Throughout the campaign, short video blogs showed Zelenskiy interacting with a range of informal advisers, usually well-regarded reformers or nongovernmental organization leaders who over the course of three months explained to the public what they thought the candidate might believe. But many had no official status in his campaign until three days before voters went to the polls. His inner circle seems to be mainly made up of longtime colleagues from show business, partners in his comedy troupe, and a handful of lawyers linked to his main backer, the Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskiy, who is accused by the Ukrainian government with defrauding Ukraine’s banking system of $5.6 billion.
When outsider celebrities, sports heroes and entertainers typically run for office, they usually try to allay fear about their inexperience by showing a command of the issues. Zelenskiy did the exact opposite. While trading on his celebrity, he also embraced his inexperience, suggesting this meant he was open to fundamentally new approaches. He called on the public to help him devise his platform virtually and, scarily, preached plebiscitary direct democracy.
Zelenskiy won. In the end, the Ukrainian public proved so tired of the status quo, characterized by slow growth, widespread poverty and significant corruption, that the voters of a country partly under Russian occupation and subject to regular military attacks rejected an experienced incumbent—President Petro Poroshenko, who had rebuilt Ukraine’s military and competently marshaled international aid and diplomatic support—and took a chance on a political novice.
AMAZING THIS IS EVEN QUESTIONED
It seems so obvious that you would want to know the count of citizens in your country when you are taking a census. At least it seems obvious if your goal is to run a nation for the good of your citizens and not for those who are intentional law breakers. A nation such as the United States can only exist because the citizens voluntarily adhere to the laws of the land. If every citizen of any country determined they would not comply with the laws of their country, a chaotic situation would occur, and the country would no longer function. Those individuals who voluntarily break the laws of the United States by willfully and knowingly violate our immigration laws are actually bringing about the chaotic situation that destroys a nation.
Perhaps the most critical and thus confrontational element of asking if you are a citizen on our census form is that the representation within the House of Representatives is based on the census count. Those who are criminally living within our borders should not be counted when representation and other such matters are considered. The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party will disagree with me, not because they have the good of the United States at heart, but because they place their insatiable appetite for power and the need to transform the United States to a Marxist totalitarian state above the American principles of freedom and independence.
This is a quick take on the arguments made before the Supreme Court concerning this question of whether or not we should know how many citizens we have.
The Supreme Court appeared willing to allow the Trump administration to add a question asking every American household to identify citizens and non citizens on the 2020 census.
The court appeared split along ideological lines during oral arguments Tuesday. The court’s more conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, noted that the census asks many questions beyond simply counting people and that it didn’t appear unreasonable to add a citizenship question. The court’s more liberal justices noted that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had failed to ever articulate a rationale for why adding the citizenship question was the best way to go about getting the data the Trump administration wanted.
The Census Bureau’s own experts estimate that an additional 5.8% of households with a non citizen are unlikely to respond on their own to the census, which goes out to every American household just once each decade. That translates to approximately 6.5 million people.
ELIZABETH WARREN GOES TO THE HEART OF HOW MARX TOLD SOCIALISTS TO “SHARE THE WEALTH”
Directly from “The Communist Manifesto” Marx and Engels state that it is necessary for the “Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.”
Under Comrade Obama’s regime we saw the centralization of credit for all students as the state declared a monopoly on all loans to students. This has had predictable consequences as it has made these students slaves to the state, it has raised the cost of college tuition enabling the institutions to greatly increase their bureaucracies just as we saw when the government entered the health industry with Medicare, and it enabled a bureaucracy to extend credit without the use of any necessary underwriting rules which has created over a trillion dollars of noncollectable or classified debt.
Collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) Elizabeth Warren has the solution for the problem the Marxist monopoly on student loans created.
“Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s opening shot on a higher education plan raises the bar for 2020 candidates, moving far beyond free college and calling for sweeping loan forgiveness for millions of Americans likely to vote in the Democratic primaries.
Warren’s proposal to cancel a large swath of the $1.5 trillion in outstanding student debt catapults an idea percolating on the edges of progressive politics since at least the Occupy Wall Street movement squarely into the mainstream of a Democratic presidential primary. The $640 billion student debt cancellation plan is the most ambitious higher education proposal yet from a 2020 presidential candidate.”
This is Sharing the Wealth 101. We make loans to all who apply, even knowing that payback is only a dream, and then we forgive the loans by confiscating the private property of others. This is one of the main criteria Marx outlined in his road map to his classless society that would be totally conforming and totally equal.
This is the road map to a society that will end in social decay and financial collapse as did all those nations who adopted these Marxist policies that were instituted under FDR, LBJ, Comrade Obama, and now being touted by the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) candidates. The tactics of these collectives (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – all virtually the same) are clearly outlined in my books; My Grandchildren’s America, Goodbye Constitution, Freedom, America and The Road to Tyranny.
We Freedom Loving Americans must understand the tactics of the collectivists and we must understand the safeguards for our freedom and liberty our founders wrote into our founding documents. After I had spoken the other evening a lady made the comment, “I studied the Constitution in college, but I have never heard the safeguards of our documents laid out so clearly as I did tonight. Thank you, Don.”
Every freedom loving American must understand the evil and tyrannical aims of the Marxist as well as the necessary safeguards for freedom and liberty instituted by our founders. When you do you must begin to “set brush fires of freedom in the minds of men” as directed by the Father of the Revolution, Sam Adams.
FROM THE EYES OF AN OUTSIDER
From 'the ultimate bureaucrat' Barack Obama to 'it is what it is' Donald Trump, the departing French ambassador, Gérard Araud, reflects on navigating D.C. His advice to the people he leaves behind; calm down, take a deep breath.
“Washington is a bit hysterical,” Araud said in an interview a few days before he was set to retire. “People are so appalled by the behavior of the president that they listen a bit too much to their guts instead of really listening to the brain.” So, what should their brains tell them? That Trump, for all his flaws, is asking legitimate questions, Araud said. That the Republican president saw the world “shifting, in a sense, to a new era” and that his “genius” was understanding the “malaise” in the United States.
It’s a malaise, Araud is quick to add, that is leading people to embrace populism and nationalism in France and other countries, too. “We have to address the concerns of these people,” he said. “It’s a serious crisis of our democracy.”
Barack Obama, Araud said, was the “ultimate bureaucrat.” He was famed for his attention to detail and reliance on meetings, briefings and other processes to help him make decisions. Trump is “totally, totally different,” Araud said. He came to the White House from the world of real estate, pays little attention to bureaucracy or process, Araud said.
Araud applauded Trump for tackling head on tough topics like China’s questionable moves on the global stage and North Korea’s nuclear program. He also argued that although some of the questions Trump asks might seem odd at first glance, they are nonetheless fair game. For instance, Trump has wondered why the United States should go to war to protect the tiny nation of Montenegro if it were attacked. To foreign policy types, the answer is obvious: Montenegro is a NATO member and the military alliance is built on the idea of collective defense. Araud, though, pointed out that many ordinary Americans would pose the same question if the scenario ever arose. By raising the point, Trump is exposing the fact that not everyone is automatically on board with the views of foreign policy elites in places like Washington.
And this is why the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), media, and self-proclaimed elites hate Donald Trump. He is not one of them. He refuses to obey their demands for political correctness. He asks the hard questions such as why do we think that way; is it just because we always have.
The American public agreed with President Trump as proven that evening in November of 2016 when it became obvious Hillary had no road to victory and the wine and tissues came out in abundance.
This rethinking of the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) movement is also taking place in Europe with a movement that is questioning the demands and dictates of the Globalist European Union. Again, be sure to watch the elections the end of May.
People throughout the world who have lived in the era where people determined their own lives and their own thoughts are rejecting the self-proclaimed elitists proclamation that all aspiring tyrants make; we know what is best for you so you must follow our demands on how you are to live your lives and what your thoughts are to be. THE INDEPENDENT THINKERS OF THE WORLD ARE RISING IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ELITEST MOVEMENT AND SAYING THAT WE THE PEOPLE WILL DETERMINE OUR OWN LIVES AND OUR OWN THOUGHTS.
The ride to freedom and independence will not be a smooth ride. Their will be bumps in the road. Collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – all virtually the same) and Globalists do not understand that we independent people refuse to conform to their evil and tyrannical dictates. They will continue to try to enslave people so they can control. It is their way to power. Freedom lovers, do not give in, do not give up, we have a President who fights for us and does not understand the word quit. Our President is not only leading a freedom movement in the United States, but people throughout the world have reason to hope for a reversal of the evil and tyrannical movement of the collectivist and globalist and a movement toward freedom and independence once again.
IF YOU CHERISH FREEDOM YOU WILL AGREE THAT WE MUST KNOW
This was the headline:
Investigations Are Coming: Trump, Pence and 2020 Campaign Want to Know How Mueller Happened
Every American who loves freedom should be obsessed with this thought and not just Trump, Pence, and the 2020 campaign. This charade was a direct attack on the very essence of our Republic; free and fair elections and an acceptance and peaceful transfer of power once the decision has been made.
What we know now without any question is that the claim of Trump and Russian collusion to rig the 2016 vote outcome was clearly predicated on a known lie. We know that the FBI knowingly and falsely sought FISA permission to entrap anyone that might bear false witness to support their false scenario. This was a misuse of the FBI and our judicial branch of government whose function is to protect against such misuse.
Once the results of the election were known, these rouge elements did not accept that they had failed in their attempt to control the outcome of the election, but they doubled down on their knowingly false accusations and investigations and again used a special prosecutor to try to overrule the will of the American people and set aside a unique gift the United States had given to the world; peaceful transfer of power.
If the United States is to remain a nation that champions freedom and liberty, it is critical that a thorough, fair, and non-political investigation be made as to how this travesty of justice came about. We have clues that agencies in our government had been politicized. We have clues that people, Seth Rich, were murdered to protect those perpetrating this scheme. We have clues that people, Hillary and Bill Clinton, became wealthy in their collusion with the Russians. We have clues that this scheme went to the highest levels of our government.
We as Freedom Loving Americans must maintain that fundamental element of our Republic; it is the duty of the government to prove guilt and not the duty of the accused to prove innocence, in the course of this investigation. Despite the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) reversal of this fundamental principle of freedom, we must remain true to those principals that are essential to our freedom.
Absolutely, it is mandatory that a fair investigation be made, starting immediately, and that it be completely transparent. It is imperative that the investigation be allowed to proceed based on facts and not conjecture and that it be allowed to reach to whatever level of government played a part in this destructive ruse.
It is critical that once again this be emphasized: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A POLITICAL INVESTIGATION BUT AN INVESTIGATION WHOSE ONLY GOAL IS TO EXPOSE THOSE WHO DECEIVED AND SOUGHT TO UNDERMINE THE VERY ESSENCE OF OUR REPUBLIC.
Don Jans' - BOOKS AVAILABLE HERE
Receive 5% discount
No shipping or handling charges
At Checkout Add Coupon Code: AM
Review of "The Road To Tyranny" "Your definition of Individualism and Collectivism was clear and relevant. I had heard about the slippery slope before, I now understand what it is and that it is real. You made so clear how our freedom and liberty are under attack. The book was easy to read and to understand. I really appreciate that you did not resort to “bumper sticker” attacks but stayed with reason and facts. I have purchased more books to give to people who would never otherwise be aware of what is happening.
June 5, 2018
What's Next Aileen ? - Don Jans, Author
The Road To Tyranny Individualism to Collectivism
SPEAKER INFORMATION CONTACT AT: MYGRANDCHILDRENSAMERICA@GMAIL.COM
Don Jans is a nationally acclaimed SPEAKER and AUTHOR contrasting the policies proclaimed by Karl Marx with the principles upon which our NATION WAS FOUNDED:
Dec 1, 2014 Presentation with Don Jans http://www.thevillagesteaparty.org/dec-1-2014-with-don-jans.html
Dec 1, 2014 Special Interview with Don Jans
Contact info: firstname.lastname@example.org