If/Then: Illegal Migration….

 If the government is going to prosecute illegal migration, then congress needs to change willful illegal migration from a civil infraction, which is how it is designated currently, to a felony.

Key word: willful.  I’m not referring to someone who, for reasons beyond their control, overstayed because of a bureaucratic visa issue, I refer to individuals who knowingly and with intent overstay visas or cross our borders illegally.

There is no deterrent value in our current laws.  Currently, illegal entry in most instances doesn’t rise to the level of a felony unless an illegal re-enters the country after being deported.  That needs to change.  Congress needs to finally get down to the business of reworking our immigration laws and system.

Does Not Compute….

 

Birthright Citizenship: Setting The Record Straight…

 "In fact, no court in the country has ever endorsed the president's interpretation," [U.S. District Judge Deborah] Boardman said. "This court will not be the first."

This statement is demonstrably false.  As will be seen momentarily, at least two US Supreme Court rulings establish that the children of illegal aliens, tourists, foreign workers, and diplomats do not receive citizenship by virtue of being born here.

The following is excerpted from an essay written by Hans A. von Spakovsky:

“Critics claim that anyone born in the United States is automatically a U.S. citizen, even if their parents are here illegally. But that ignores the text and legislative history of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 to extend citizenship to freed slaves and their children.

The 14th Amendment doesn’t say that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens. It says that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. That second, critical, conditional phrase is conveniently ignored or misinterpreted by advocates of “birthright” citizenship.

Critics erroneously believe that anyone present in the United States has “subjected” himself “to the jurisdiction” of the United States, which would extend citizenship to the children of tourists, diplomats, and illegal aliens alike.

But that is not what that qualifying phrase means. Its original meaning refers to the political allegiance of an individual and the jurisdiction that a foreign government has over that individual.

The fact that a tourist or illegal alien is subject to our laws and our courts if they violate our laws does not place them within the political “jurisdiction” of the United States as that phrase was defined by the framers of the 14th Amendment.

This amendment’s language was derived from the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which provided that “[a]ll persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power” would be considered citizens.

Sen. Lyman Trumbull, a key figure in the adoption of the 14th Amendment, said that “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. included not owing allegiance to any other country.

As John Eastman, former dean of the Chapman School of Law, has said, many do not seem to understand “the distinction between partial, territorial jurisdiction, which subjects all who are present within the territory of a sovereign to the jurisdiction of that sovereign’s laws, and complete political jurisdiction, which requires allegiance to the sovereign as well.”

In the famous Slaughter-House cases of 1872, the Supreme Court stated that this qualifying phrase was intended to exclude “children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” This was confirmed in 1884 in another case, Elk vs. Wilkins, when citizenship was denied to an American Indian because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe and not the United States.

American Indians and their children did not become citizens until Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. There would have been no need to pass such legislation if the 14th Amendment extended citizenship to every person born in America, no matter what the circumstances of their birth, and no matter who their parents are.

Even in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case most often cited by “birthright” supporters due to its overbroad language, the court only held that a child born of lawful, permanent residents was a U.S. citizen. That is a far cry from saying that a child born of individuals who are here illegally must be considered a U.S. citizen.

Of course, the judges in that case were strongly influenced by the fact that there were discriminatory laws in place at that time that restricted Chinese immigration, a situation that does not exist today.

The court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment as extending to the children of legal, noncitizens was incorrect, according to the text and legislative history of the amendment. But even under that holding, citizenship was not extended to the children of illegal aliens—only permanent, legal residents.

It is just plain wrong to claim that the children born of parents temporarily in the country as students or tourists are automatically U.S. citizens: They do not meet the 14th Amendment’s jurisdictional allegiance obligations. They are, in fact, subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents. The same applies to the children of illegal aliens because children born in the United States to foreign citizens are citizens of their parents’ home country.

Federal law offers them no help either. U.S. immigration law (8 U.S.C. § 1401) simply repeats the language of the 14th Amendment, including the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

The State Department has erroneously interpreted that statute to provide passports to anyone born in the United States, regardless of whether their parents are here illegally and regardless of whether the applicant meets the requirement of being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. Accordingly, birthright citizenship has been implemented by executive fiat, not because it is required by federal law or the Constitution.

We are only one of a very small number of countries that provides birthright citizenship, and we do so based not upon the requirements of federal law or the Constitution, but based upon an erroneous executive interpretation. Congress should clarify the law according to the original meaning of the 14th Amendment and reverse this practice,” Hans A. von Spakovsky .

How Many Crimes Were Just Committed…?

 Watch this - and spread it far and wide.

https://youtube.com/shorts/QbBo-1LrDys?si=SJMWgT0CnsJWkPrY

Once again, rules for thee but none for me.

A number of crimes, in their view, were committed with this parting gift - and they think it is a joke.

Pres. Elect Trump, Shut Down Mexico’s Lawsuit….

 The Biden administration did something unprecedented in American legal history - it allowed a foreign government to bring lawsuit against American firearms manufacturers in an effort to bankrupt them.  Pres. Biden made his disdain for firearms manufacture and ownership clear from the time he hit the campaign trail during his first run.

But he was frustrated by his administration’s inability to pass his desired gun control initiatives, particularly an “assault weapon” ban, legislation that would have had the effect of banning hundreds of semi automatic rifles and handguns, including an entire class of semi automatic firearms - something the United States Supreme Court had already declared unconstitutional in its historic Heller vs DC decision.

Then an opportunity presented itself: Mexico was looking for a scapegoat for its inability to bring violence fueled by the drug cartels that call Mexico home under control.  The Biden administration saw the opportunity to bankrupt firearm manufacturers rather than wasting political capital trying to merely ban specific weapon types.  Allowing Mexico access to the US justice system would make the success off a lawsuit more likely by prejudicing the proceedings: a sovereign country with epidemic violence that also happens to be our next door neighbor and one of our biggest trading partners.  Such an opportunity hadn’t presented itself since Connecticut permitted the lawsuit that bankrupted Remington and Bushmaster to proceed.

He jumped at the opportunity.

Pres.Elect Trump, Mexico has no standing or business bringing suit against American firearms manufacturers in US courts.  After assuming office again, you need to instruct your DoJ to shut down this lawsuit.

President Biden Pardons Hunter….

 Who didn’t see that coming?

“All offenses AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.”

Not just the crimes he copped to in his book, but including those AGAINST THE UNITED STATES - a term used specifically to denote treason. The use of this specific terminology is an implicit recognition by the elder Biden that some of the crimes Hunter committed may have constituted treason.

Trump’s Supposed Mandate Is A Mirage…

As much as I despise Trump, I have to say the numbers don’t tell the whole story. 

Fact: he won the popular vote. 

Fact: he won the electoral college.

Fact: he took every swing state.

Fact: he made significant inroads into the black, latino, and muslim communities - communities that dems always took for granted.

Fact: he did it with the media complex throwing absolutely everything they had at him.

Fact: he did it with Hollywood unleashing hordes of celebrities against him.

Fact: he did it despite the Harris endorsements given by hundreds of former elected officials, military leaders, and presidents from both parties.

The fact that the margins weren’t quite as large as first appeared doesn’t tell the whole story. Winning in spite of everything that was brought against him does. Like it or not (and I don’t) he DOES have a mandate.

President-elect Trump: Prove It….

 

How The Media Put Trump Back In The White House….

 “A Democratic ticket that pulled off the biggest turnaround in approval ratings and the fastest consolidation around a new candidate in the history of modern presidential politics.”

That’s how one news outlet described the meteoric rise of Kamala Harris in the aftermath of the Trump victory.

The problem is, it was all media driven.

Harris has the distinction of being the first presidential candidate chosen and pushed on the country by the media complex. The media committed ALL of their resources to get her appointed in the first place and then to overwhelm all aspects of media with nonstop, pro-Harris content. 

And people pushed back. 

The all out media push backfired spectacularly, propelling the very man they were so anxious to keep out of the White House (and his backers) into it and flipping the Senate to boot.

This was as much a referendum on the MEDIA as it was political issues. The media need to step back and seriously reconsider the role they are SUPPOSED to play in politics.

Of course, they won’t do that. If anything, they will ramp up their efforts next time around.

Thoughts For Election Day, 2024….

A thought as we embark on election day.

“Every person is to be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a servant of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a servant of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for the sake of conscience,” Romans 13:1-6.  

Paul wrote this as he was imprisoned and awaiting execution at the hands of the emperor Nero, one of the most vicious, wicked rulers to ever live.

Regardless of which candidate wins today, God isn’t taken by surprise.  To the contrary, they will win because God intends them to win to accomplish His will and plan; whether for a blessing or judgment on our nation, only time will tell.  “The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the LORD,” Proverbs 16:33.  “Daniel said, May the name of God be blessed forever and ever… It is He who changes the times and the periods; He removes kings and appoints kings,” Daniel 2:20-21.

So before you pull the trigger on, “so and so isn’t MY president” once the results of this election are announced, stop and think about what you are REALLY saying: God isn’t MY god.  “[T]here is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God…”

This isn’t a new problem.

“Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah; and they said to him, ‘Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint us a king to judge us like all the nations.’  But the matter was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, ‘Give us a king to judge us.’  And Samuel prayed to the LORD. And the LORD said to Samuel, ‘Listen to the voice of the people regarding all that they say to you, because they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being King over them. Like all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them up from Egypt even to this day—in that they have abandoned Me and served other gods—so they are doing to you as well. Now then, listen to their voice; however, you shall warn them strongly and tell them of the practice of the king who will reign over them’,” 1 Samuel 8:4-9.

In the end, God will give the people the leaders they desire in line with His will.  Over time I have voiced my strong concerns regarding BOTH candidates.  As I have already said, only time will tell whether today’s results are for our good or our judgement as a nation.

May God have mercy on us.