The Imperial Judiciary Of The United States

 "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s…"

When Jesus was alive, the religious leader of Rome was, in fact, both Caesar and the voice of God, for Emperor Augustus had taken the position of Pontifex Maximus, the chief high priest, for himself.

A separation between church and state would occur in the late 4th century when Saint Ambrose, the Bishop of Milan, would cleave the two.

In 390 AD, in Thessalonica, a Macedonian city in the Roman Empire, the citizens murdered a Roman garrison commander for arresting the most popular Macedonian charioteer just before a major race. A seething Emperor Theodosius ordered his soldiers to slaughter the entire population. When the smoke cleared, 7,000 men, women, and children died in the Massacre of Thessalonica.

Ambrose, the most powerful man in Christianity at the time, banned the emperor from Mass. Theodosius I, an extremely devout man, would spend the next six months seeking Ambrose’s forgiveness and doing penance. Eventually, Ambrose decided the Emperor had shown sufficient contrition and allowed him back into the Church, but not before forcing him to make Christianity the official religion of the Empire and outlawing every other faith.

That was one of the first and most powerful checks on a monarch’s power in the history of Western civilization. Another would come in 1215 when English King John was forced by a group of rebellious barons to sign the Magna Carta, which provided protections for the church and guaranteed the barons a variety of liberties and rights.

Fast forward 562 years and another step towards a truly limited government would occur in Philadelphia in 1787. In an unprecedented advance for Western civilization and, frankly, humanity, the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution of the United States. With a keen understanding of man’s nature, this document was sufficiently robust and prescient that it would last for centuries.

In a direct reaction to the English system, they wrote a constitution in which, while the primary power lay in the legislature, the power of all three branches was checked by the other two and ultimately by the citizens and the Bill of Rights.

To give some perspective on where the locus of power lay in the new constitution, compare the articles that define the powers of the three branches: Article I, the Legislature, has 2,268 words. Article II, the Executive, has 1,025 words, while Article III, the Judiciary, has a mere 377.

The Founding Fathers went to great lengths to divide the powers and put in place checks and balances so that mob rule and demagogues would not take hold of the government and bring about tyranny.

One of those checks was the Judicial Branch:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

Alexander Hamilton assured all and sundry that the judiciary would be the weakest branch, writing in Federalist 81:

It may in the last place be observed that the supposed danger of judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority, which has been upon many occasions reiterated, is in reality a phantom.

He stated that a judicial usurpation of the legislature could not happen:

This may be inferred with certainty, from the general nature of the judicial power, from the objects to which it relates, from the manner in which it is exercised, from its comparative weakness, and from its total incapacity to support its usurpations by force.

This, combined with Congress’s ability to impeach judges for judiciary encroachments, said Hamilton, would be sufficient to keep judicial usurpation from occurring. Hamilton was responding to the writings of Judge Robert Yates, who warned of a rapacious judiciary in Anti-Federalist No. 78.

Hamilton was wrong, and Yates was right. 

Within a very short time, Hamilton’s error and Yates’ prescience became clear. Marbury v. Madison established Judicial Review in 1803, taking for the Court the ability to invalidate a law it deemed in conflict with the Constitution. Although the court would use that power only twice over America’s first 70 years, it would do so 50 times over the subsequent 75 years and over 125 times in the last 90 years. That trajectory not only reflects the extraordinary growth in the areas of American life into which the leviathan of government has inserted itself, but it also reflects a far more activist judiciary.

And how can we tell? Look at nationwide injunctions. Judges issued six nationwide injunctions against George Bush over eight years—one per every sixteen months he was in office. Barack Obama was the subject of 12 or one every eight months. In Trump’s first term, judges issued 64 nationwide injunctions, or one every 22 days. After he left office, the courts retreated, with Joe Biden getting 14 or one every three months. Now, in his second term, Trump has received 12 in only six weeks; that is, one every four days. Meanwhile, in the single four-year period of his first term, he faced more of these injunctions than every president in the previous 60 years combined!

But the thing is, injunctions are found nowhere in the Constitution. Nonetheless, with almost 700 federal judges, activists can easily find fellow travelers who are more than willing to do their bidding. It’s no coincidence that the judges who have issued many of the injunctions against Trump’s executive actions have ties to hardcore leftists:

• The son of the judge who blocked deporting Khalil Mahmoud interned for Chuck Schumer.
• The daughter of the judge who blocked deporting Tren de Aragua gang members works for an NGO that provides legal advice to criminal illegal aliens.
• The wife of the Judge blocking the USAID shutdown worked for Joe Biden.
• The judge who blocked DOGE from cutting NGO funding was the Solicitor General of the District of Columbia, the office that filed a civil lawsuit against the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

Using injunctions, a radical leftist cabal is attempting to thwart President Trump from doing the job he was elected to do, which is to enforce and execute the laws of the United States. He should not allow them to do so. Unfortunately, impeachment is not the answer because there is zero chance of getting a conviction, with half the Senate applauding the judge’s actions.

The first thing Trump should do is ignore the order. This will force SCOTUS and/or Congress to act.

The second thing he should do is strongly encourage Congress to act, regardless of what SCOTUS does. (Or doesn’t do given the Manchurians Roberts and ACB.) Congress has the ultimate constitutional power to define the courts’ jurisdiction, whether granting or restricting it. They should eliminate or restrict federal judges’ ability to issue injunctions in general or, at a minimum, prohibit nationwide injunctions.

The Founders created a system of checks and balances that has served America well for most of her history. But that system only works when the three branches remain true to their nature.

You can argue that Congress has given too much of its power to the regulatory state, but that’s a case of one branch willingly, if foolishly, ceding power to another. In the case of the Judicial Branch, we’re seeing something different. Activist judges across the country are asserting that they basically have the power to micromanage how the Executive Branch carries out its constitutional duties. They don’t, but that doesn’t matter if the Executive Branch allows it to become reality. And the reality is, they’re using Chief Justice Roberts’ treacherous “normal appellate review process” framework to run out the clock on President Trump’s term.  And Trump knows it.

In 1832, in reaction to Worcester v. Georgia, President Jackson is said to have announced: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” Donald Trump should state unequivocally that he will not allow activists masquerading as jurists to hijack the proper functions of the Executive Branch. Americans, like Jesus, Ambrose, and Jackson did, understand there are separate realms of governing, and for good or bad elected presidents execute the laws, not judges.

Follow me on X at ImperfectUSA

The Borg of Uncle Sam...

I grew up in the shadow of World War II. It had been over for almost 30 years by the time I started school, but nonetheless WW II was probably the most talked about subject in my history classes throughout. But the funny thing is, as close as it was, it seemed like it was ancient history.  It was finished. The evil Nazis were vanquished and the world had moved on. America and her allies had won and there were new enemies to slay.

While too young to understand Vietnam when it was raging, by high school I had a better grasp of world events and we were living on Guantanamo Bay, down in Cuba.  Although today it’s more well known for its prison facilities, at the time it was a U.S. Navy training / support station and the enemy was the Soviets and Fidel Castro. 

In the late 80’s after college, I was stationed with the Army in West Germany and our biggest alerts were usually related to the East Germans and they killed an American officer while I was there.  I don’t remember all the details but the Americans said he was on an approved inspection mission and the East Germans said he was spying.

Throughout these decades, I always knew that America was on the right side of history.  It was not that I’d been brainwashed, but it always seemed to me that an objective analysis of the circumstances, from WW II to Korea to Vietnam to the Cold War, America was the good guy, trying to do what’s right.  It’s a funny thing about the “good guy” framework, however, that everybody, even the guys who we know are the bad guys, think they’re the good guys!

Nor is it that I never questioned anything.  In college (of course) I had professors who said the US was the bad guy in Vietnam and that the Soviets only built missiles to defend themselves against the imperialist Americans. I disagreed but my words fell on deaf ears.    

So now we are here 35 years since the collapse of our last superpower enemy and a quarter century from 9/11, and I’m starting to wonder if America’s still the good guy. 

Some time ago it dawned on me that for most of my life I had given the government the benefit of the doubt.  Indeed, while imperfect and often inefficient and ineffective on a wide variety of policies, my default position for most of my life had been that the government was, at the end of the day, working for the American people.

Today, sadly, my default position is literally the opposite. 

In college I read Robert A. Caro’s biography of Lindon Johnson and according to it LBJ was a deeply egotistical, power hungry son of a bitch who would sell his mother to get power. While I think that’s clearly true, it seems that once in office he was genuinely interested in helping people and solving America’s problems. While he was a feckless buffoon as it relates to Vietnam, in domestic matters he wanted to help solve long standing problems, and that intention is not diminished by the fact that his programs were stunning failures.

That’s the way it is sometimes, people in government make mistakes. We all know that. But what has happened over the last two decades is a much different animal. Beginning with Barack Obama using the IRS to shut down Tea Party groups and right up until the moment someone in the White House used Joe Biden’s autopen to give pardons to half the Democrat Party and their swamp comrades, the American government has transformed from a virtuous, if frequently stumbling, vehicle for safely navigating the country through the chaos of life into an autonomous borg that largely operates without effective constraint and almost solely for the purpose of perpetuating itself. 

Biologists frequently say that the fundamental nature of life is to propagate the species, and that seems to be the path the borg of American government has taken. In the 21^st century we’ve seen an amalgamation of the Democrat party and the bureaucratic state, with a bastardization of both.  Maybe no better example exists than the Department of Education.  The education of children is easily one of the most important things a society can do to help perpetuate its culture and civilization, and the DOE spends $280 billion a year on it. Sadly, of that number, less than $70 billion actually goes to educating children.  The rest goes to bureaucracy, consultants, NGOs and ultimately, back into the pockets of Democrat politicians. This would be a crime even if schools were properly educating children, but they’re not.  Across the country you have failing schools where kids can’t do simple math, easily the most basic skill one should take from school. But you know what they are learning?  How to be LGBT.

This, like so much of the rest of government is far beyond incompetence. It’s criminal. It’s ceased to be a vehicle for ensuring the freedom of American citizens and promoting the interests of the United States.  It’s literally become the opposite. From funding prosecutors who release violent criminals into American communities and funding leftist thefts of elections while quashing of free speech internationally, to funding the invasion of our country and undermining the Bill of Rights, the American government has become the enemy within. 

If nothing else, Donald Trump and DOGE should be applauded for exposing what so many of us felt for so long but could never quite put our fingers on. 

Somewhat like learning that there is no Santa Claus, in the back of my mind I’m a bit wistful for that feeling of inner peace I had when I used to think of the country and the government as a single inherently good entity. While I think the former still is good, the latter, not so much, and I was late to the party in internalizing the idea of a difference between the two. For me Uncle Sam was America and the government combined.  Sadly, the Democrats weren’t under that illusion, and their recognizing the dichotomy long ago gave them decades to brainwash their constituents and hide the inner workings of their machine in plain site, behind countless official looking government seals and compassionate sounding NGOs.

Despite what the Democrat / bureaucrat borg has wrought, I firmly believe America remains a great, if imperfect nation and I remain convinced that taken as a whole throughout most of her 250 years, the county and the government have been mostly on the right side of history.  To the degree that that’s no longer true for the government, I’m glad we’re at a point where much of its malfeasance and malevolence is being exposed. It will take a long time and a lot of courage on the part of Republican politicians to fix this situation, but at least it’s being exposed before it’s too late. We’ll see in the next two years if the GOP has the courage necessary to actually set a course for bringing government back under the control of the citizens. Rand Paul, Mike Lee & Thomas Massie have their work cut out for themselves… Hopefully they’ll get some help along the way. 

I miss Rush Limbaugh...

I miss Rush Limbaugh.  During the Biden years I couldn’t help imagining him up in Heaven begging God to put him back in the game. Today I imagine him sitting in a bar smoking a cigar with Ronald Reagan and buying a round for the house every time a new EO drops. When he was here however there were a few things that he used to say that I loved because of their clarity.  He always pointed out that illegal immigration was all about votes and that Democrats were hypocrites on the issue.  He’d suggest that if it was really compassion that drove the issue, the solution was simple: immediately legalize them with the caveat that they could never vote.  Democrats, of course, never went for it.

He also used to use reductio ad absurdum to demonstrate the absurdity of Democrat policies.  My favorite had to do with minimum wages. When Democrats were first calling for a minimum wage of $15, then $20, Limbaugh would argue “why stop there” and suggest $50 or $200 an hour.  He’d of course demonstrate how that lunacy would impact the rest of the economy and things would simply go awry. 

I don’t know if he ever used the reductio argument on illegal immigration per se, but if so it would make perfect sense. As we know Democrats feel like anyone who makes it across the American border should be supported and become citizens.  Imagine how that would work out if the 42 million people in Latin America who want to move to the US did, or the 162 million who want to do so worldwide. That would be an absolute disaster. We couldn’t afford the schooling, housing, healthcare or food necessary to support them.  America can absorb immigrants, but not unfettered millions of them, most of whom need to be supported by the government (AKA taxpayers) and have little interest in assimilating.  America spent a reported $150 billion supporting illegals in 2023 (likely much more) and as a result towns and cities across the country had to cut basic services for citizens in order to do so. Now double or triple that, with its attendant cuts in services for Americans and the reductio quickly becomes absurd indeed.

The notion that the United States should or could support millions of people who cross our border illegally is simply insane. Well, technically it’s not exactly insane in that the people proposing it see it as a rational way to increase and sustain their wealth and power.  Democrats need ever more people dependent on them to overcome the rationality of actual Americans who increasingly see them for the grifters they are. 

What’s worse than the millions of people streaming across our borders is the fact that it’s been facilitated by, indeed driven by American taxpayers, through USAID and other government programs. Americans are literally spending billions of dollars a year in order to facilitate the invasion of their country by millions of illegals who then need to be taken care of by those same taxpayers!

Gad Saad, the author of The Parasitic Mind is writing a book called Suicidal Empathy where he is expected to talk about the west committing cultural suicide by importing tens of millions of non-westerners then essentially abandoning the fundamental concepts that underly western civilization in order to show empathy and avoid being called racists.

In one of Saad’s retweets is a chart showing crime statistics in Denmark.  It showcases the fact that immigrants from third world countries in Asia and Africa are committing violent crimes at an exponentially higher rate than Danes or citizens from other western nations, yet Denmark continues to import these high crime immigrants by the tens of thousands. Of course this same outcome is replicated throughout the west.  In the US, we’re told that illegals commit fewer crimes than Americans, but the truth is – if you disregard the fact that 100% of illegals are in fact criminals by definition – the only group against whom that claim is actually true is black Americans, who commit crimes such as murder at literally 10 times the rate of the majority whites.    

But we’re told allowing this migration from their broken countries is the “compassionate” thing to do…

Except it’s not. If one were to apply reductio ad absurdum to this situation the west will simply collapse and Europe will end up part of the Caliphate and America will become just another Latin American banana republic. How will that work for prosperity?  For freedom? For continued advances of civilization?  From the looks of Iraq, Turkey, Mexico or Venezuela, not particularly well. 

The truth is, if liberals really were interested in helping the disadvantaged from 3^rd world countries, they’d force those fleeing to remain and clean up their own countries.  Allowing those with the motivation and intestinal fortitude to make the trip across the Mexican desert in order to swim across the Rio Grande saps the spirit of their home countries. If they were forced to stay they would likely be the ones pushing hardest for change and improving their countries.

But they are not, because of western liberals.

These western liberals see themselves as the helping hand of God, rescuing the downtrodden, when in reality they are Satan helping to destroy the nations from which said downtrodden emigrated (and simultaneously the ones they immigrate to). 

In her outstanding 2010 book, Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa, economist Dambisa Moyo argues that western aid (at least the little that actually makes it to its destination) undermines much of Africa because it kills domestic farming and industry, often leaving the nations dependent on further handouts. 

Just as parks post signs saying “Please don’t feed the wildlife” because they don’t want the bears to become dependent on food from humans, so too the west should get out of the aid business. 

If the goal was to actually help citizens of 3^rd world countries, these liberals would embark on the long term journey of teaching them the precepts that underly functioning and prosperous nations:  Rule of law, free markets and private property, combined with limited government – things which many western nations have forgotten. 

And it is possible to do.  The Jews built a breadbasket and then a nation out of what was largely a desolate desert in the late 19^th century.  Hong Kong was a small city 60 years ago but today it’s a bustling world class (albeit Communist) metropolis.  The same holds true for Dubai – only faster! And indeed, changes can happen on a national scale, sometimes quite quickly.  Look at what’s been done in El Salvador in five years and Argentina in one.  It’s amazing what a people can do if motivated to do so. 

But sadly, most of the motivated people in the 3^rd world aren’t using that spirit to build their nations; they’re abandoning their homes for Europe and America… only in most cases to try and replicate the dysfunctional society they escaped in cushier environs.  And as the rapidly unfolding USAID scandal showcases, much of the money for that invasion is being driven by leftists and paid for by American taxpayers. No doubt Rush is watching from above saying “See, I told you so…”

Joe Biden Considers A Scorched Earth Policy On His Way Out The Door

Scorched earth is one of the most brutal strategies in war.  It can be an offensive or a defensive strategy and usually leaves a wasteland of destruction and starvation in its wake.  One of the most famous examples of an offensive use of scorched earth is Sherman’s “March to the Sea” from Atlanta to Savannah in November to December 1864.  He not only burned Atlanta to the ground, but for a wide swath all the way to the ocean he left a trail of destruction, from military targets, to infrastructure to crops.  The goal of course was to damage the military, but more than that to destroy everything and impede logistics and commerce.  The larger goal was to break the morale of the South and any hope that they could not only never win, but show them that their lives would be destroyed if they continued to fight.  He succeeded in spades and his campaign proved critical to the Confederacy’s surrender five months later.

The most famous defensive use of the policy was probably that of Emperor Alexander I when facing an advancing Napoleon during the French invasion of Russia in 1812.  As the French advanced further, the Russian troops embarked on a campaign of taking whatever supplies they could carry then setting fire to or destroying virtually anything that could be of use to the enemy. While in Moscow many buildings were spared, they were largely empty husks by the time Napoleon arrived. Having far outdistanced his supply trains and unable to live off the land, the Napoleon began his slow retreat from a campaign that would leave 350,000 dead French on the fields of Russia.

Another use of scorched earth is retribution.  This was possibly most famously utilized by the Romans in Carthage after the Third Punic War in 146 BC. Wanting to inflict revenge against the city that had loosed Hannibal on them half a century before and ensure their greatest rival never threatened them again, the legions leveled the city down to bricks, burned farms forced citizens to relocate 10 miles inland and barred them from rebuilding. Carthage would remain a desert for a century until Ceasar recognized its strategic value and begin rebuilding it. 

Joe Biden, who, unlike Sherman or Napoleon or Hannibal or Ceasar, will be forgotten the moment he exits the stage, is nonetheless looking at the scorched earth policy with a keen eye.

Biden, the politician who’s never had a job that didn’t come from the government, has contempt for the Republic.  For him, America, and in particular the government is just a vehicle for accumulating power and money.

The man is an inveterate liar. He lies about important things and trivial.  He lied about riding the train, the death of his grandfather and about being shot at in Iraq.   He lied about the truck driver who killed his wife and daughter in 1972, claiming that the man had been drunk despite police records of the time showing no such thing.  He cheated in college, lied about his standing at graduation in law school and, fatally for his 1988 presidential run, plagiarized Neil Kinnock, a British politician.   

If there is a legacy to Joe Biden pre Barack Obama, it is his destruction of the confirmation process for the Supreme Court. For most of our history up until that point in 1987 Supreme Court nominations were largely collegial processes that focused mainly on the candidate’s knowledge of the law and their qualifications for sitting on the bench.  Joe Biden and fellow liberal urchin Teddy Kenedy savaged Bork for his conservative views and, as the New York Times suggested, the Bork nomination “… in some ways, was the beginning of the end of civil discourse in politics.” From that point forward, politics was no longer an arena where ideas were debated as a sidebar to American life.  From that point going forward, Democrats shifted hard left and in less than two decades the cancer of the left would infect virtually every element of American life. 

Joe Biden did that.

Not satisfied with ruining our economy, adding trillions to the national debt and allowing 10 million illegal aliens to invade the country, on his way out the door Joe Biden may be getting ready to eviscerate what’s left of our justice system and the rule of law.

Presidents have used their pardon power for years, with the most famous being that of Richard Nixon by Gerald Ford. Last week Joe Biden, despite saying he would not do so, pardoned his son for every federal crime he may have committed over the last 11 years, both those for which he had been convicted and those he had not.  That ensures that the Trump administration cannot charge the younger Biden once they take over the White House.

Biden’s pardon was unprecedented.  Most pardons are for specific crimes, and while Ford’s pardon of Nixon was a similar blanket immunity, it was specifically tied to the dates he was President. The younger Biden’s, however is far from specific and applies to no official duties.  It just happens to coincide with the moment Junior joined the board of Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company, despite having zero experience in or knowledge of the energy business.

Controversial pardons are nothing new.  Bill Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 Puerto Rican terrorists in August, 1999 and later his brother, but Biden is said to be mulling doing something extraordinary, preemptively pardoning the people who used the justice system to persecute Donald Trump and his supporters, including the treacherous Liz Chaney and Adam Schiff.  Then there’s also Anthony Fauci, the COVID liar and General Milly, the traitor who thinks it’s his job to inform enemies of his Commander in Chief’s plans.  There are no doubt many others he’s considering, including Mayorkas & Garland.  And to top it all off, Biden is being encouraged to, and is no doubt considering, offer a blanket pardon to all illegal aliens who are here in the United States illegally.   

Combined with the $2 million the DOJ paid Page and Strzok for releasing their text messages about conspiring to keep Trump from winning in 2016, what we’re seeing Biden contemplate here is a scorched earth destruction of the rule of law.  Basically one party is telling its stormtroopers they can use the police power of government to persecute their opponents with no limitations because if they succeed, their opponents never make it into office to hold them accountable, and if they fail, their crimes can be pardoned before the enemy ever takes over. Heads we win, tails you lose…

If Biden burns down the Republic on his way out the door, Democrats has better take cover.  The Constitution is, as John Adams said, “made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Democrats have shown themselves to be anything but.  If they see fit to torch it, they should not be surprised if the GOP doesn’t decide to stop playing the patsy limiting themselves to the Constitution’s Marquess of Queensberry Rules. There’s a reason FAFO videos are so popular.  Americans covet justice; Democrats flout it at their peril.

 

A Sixth Sense About Democrats

Memory is a strange thing. Arthur M. Schlesinger writes in A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House that JFK once said that his brain was filled with random bits of what he called useless information and he often had memory of how he’d come to know it in the first place.  The example he used is that he knew for some reason that the level of salt in our blood is the same as in ocean water. For myself, memory is like a roulette wheel where I’ll forget someone’s name two seconds after being introduced but somehow remember the color of the corduroy pants my mother made me wear 50 years ago… maroon and gold!

It's into this hodgepodge of my memory that something sticks out like a pulsar in the dark of space:  The moment the ring drops to the floor in the movie The Sixth Sense, when we suddenly realize Bruce Willis’s character is dead. I was simply dumbfounded. It immediately made sense, but I couldn’t believe that I’d not recognized it the whole time. The movie flashes back over the different scenes from Willis’s newly revealed perspective and it was suddenly as if I’d just watched a different movie than the one I’d actually seen.  From Willis’s eyes everything was clearly there, but I simply hadn’t seen it. The signs were there, but I just didn’t recognize them…

That movie came back to me this week when a piece of news came out that was every bit as crystalizing as that ring crashing to the floor and rolling. The Democrats hate Americans.  As millions of Americans picked themselves up and surveyed the extraordinary damage wrought by hurricane Helene, to their horror they discovered that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, an agency specifically set up to help American citizens and communities recover from natural disasters exactly like Helene, had run out of money.  And it wasn’t because the agency wasn’t given any money.  No, FEMA didn’t have any money to help Americans who had lost everything, were waiting to be rescued or who were hungry and thirsty because… the Biden / Harris administration spent $1 billion in the last two years providing housing and other services to illegal aliens.  Literally, a program specifically created to help Americans recover from disasters didn’t have any money left to help Americans recover from disasters because it had spent all it’s money on services for people who had come into the country illegally. 

Like that bouncing ring in the movie, that ill spent $1 billion released a cacophony of images of the disdain in which Democrats hold American citizens. The release of at least 425,000 convicted criminal illegal aliens into the heart of America, including 13,000 convicted murders and 15,000 who were convicted of sexual assault! California literally making it illegal require proof of citizenship when seeking to vote. Native born Americans losing 850,000 jobs over the last year while foreign born workers added a whopping 1.2 million!

And if there was any suggestion that the disastrous response to Helene was somehow a fluke by an otherwise effective administration, one merely needs to recognize that it comes on the heels of equally disastrous responses to calamities in Maui and East Palestine, OH.  The indifference to the plight of distressed Americans stands in stark contrast to the laser focus the Democrats have had for sending hundreds of billions of dollars to the extraordinarily corrupt government of Ukraine, flying illegals into the American heartland or using NGO’s to hide from the American people the billions spent on illegals.

This American horror story of despair should (but likely won’t) shock Democrat voters into recognizing that the party to whom they have given fealty hates America, disregards her Constitution and sees her citizens – including themselves – as nothing more than cows to milk then eventually butcher.    

How much love for their country can a party have that not only allows, but encourages and assists in the invasion of its own country by eight million people in four years, a population of larger than 37 out of 50 states?

How much value does a party put on the lives of citizens when it unleashes 13,000 known brutal killers into their midst?

How concerned for the safety and security of women and children can a party be that releases 15,000 rapists to prey upon them?

The answer is simple to all three questions is the same:  None.

Eight million illegals in four years.  A total of 640,000 criminals, 13,000 murderers and 15,000 rapists!   Of course the Democrat’s propaganda machine immediately jumped in and protect Biden /Harris by claiming that less than 5% of that number were released during their administration. So we’re supposed to believe that of the “11 million” illegal aliens released in America before Biden was installed, 420,000 of them, or 3.8% were convicted criminals, but of the 8 million released by Border czar Harris a mere 20,000 were convicted criminals, or a rate of .0025%.  So, somehow, of the illegals arriving before the Biden / Harris administration 1 in 25 was a criminal but magically of those arriving during it, only 1 in 4,000 were.  Umm... sure.

And none of this is incidental.  It’s deliberate. Democrat sanctuary cities and states have been obstructing ICE and federal immigration enforcement for decades and just days after his instillation Joe Biden eliminated some of the most powerful border protection programs Donald Trump had put into place…

Later, when Arizona built a wall of shipping containers to try and stem the flow of illegals across its border, Biden and Harris sued to force their removal.  Then, Texas installed floating barriers in a effort to interdict illegal crossings of – and reduce drownings in – the Rio Grande, again, Joe Biden and Border Czar Kamala Harris sued for their removal.

And for those states like California who leave their border as welcoming as an Amsterdam brothel, the Democrats reward them by flying hordes of illegals to other states like Texas who have been fighting the invasion largely on their own.

All of this should be a red flag to Americans. Democrats clearly value illegal immigrants over American citizens.  Even for those Americans animated by abortion rights or poverty programs or green energy, things that usually align directly with Democrats, the fact that Democrats prioritize illegals over citizens to the point of putting the lives of said citizens at risk should give them pause.  The truth is, it’s hard to fight poverty or save the planet if you’re broke, or worse, dead. 

Just as that bouncing ring woke Bruce Willis’s character up to the reality that was there in front of him the whole time, Helene's showcasing of the demonstrable truth that Democrats have for decades prioritized illegal aliens above American citizens should wake blue voters up to the notion that the party can and will sacrifice anything for power, including the safety, security and indeed, the lives of Americans… The Republicans may be a flawed party, but they at least have a clear plan:  Close the border and deport illegals.  Go to any Trump rally and if nothing else you walk away knowing one thing, his objective is to prioritize and protect the lives and prosperity of American citizens. After all, isn’t that basically why governments are constituted in the first place.