Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary
From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.
Liberalism Could be Tolerated, Marxist Leftism Cannot
The arena of political “debate” in the country these days, most of it rather nasty, has drawn clear lines in the sand, as heated rhetoric is thrown about like virtual ammunition between well-entrenched keyboards across the battlefield of social media. As opposing viewpoints, it is widely accepted that one side is commonly referred to as “liberals” and the other side as “conservatives’. I submit there are distinctions among the liberals relative to different eras of the Democrat Party that I explain below.
If we step back for a moment to look at the big picture, we must recognize that we are in the midst of an ideological war that We the People, as Patriots, must win. The stakes are extremely high as America itself, a shining example of freedom and individualism, is on the brink of being “fundamentally transformed” into a communist nation by Obama’s army of Marxist activists.
Dr. Paul Kengor, Professor of Political Science at Grove City College, says that the definition of totalitarianism is to “seek to fundamentally transform – specifically, to fundamentally transform human nature via some form of political-ideological-cultural upheaval.” [1]
I’ve written about this before in The Socialist Agenda of Alinsky and Obama, published in two parts, December 2021. You can read about it in detail HERE.
To lose this war is to subject our descendants into a life of misery under the iron fist of tyranny. The good news is that our enemy is not a superior force in terms of numbers. In fact, it’s probably much smaller than what the media has been making it out to be. The reason I say this is because the media, collectively referred to as the Propaganda Media Complex (PMC), otherwise often called the Mainstream Media (MSM), is actively colluding to deceive the American people into thinking the Democrat Party is a formidable foe. It certainly seems that way because that’s all you hear. The PMC/MSM is the official mouthpiece of the Democrat Party and they control a huge percentage of all the information that we are being fed. They thereby control the social consciousness and the populace is blindly influenced by what they are told.
The Democrat Party has been hijacked by Obama and his 30,000+ member activist army, Organizing for Action. I would argue that they are relatively a minor faction of the Democrat Party but they are in total control of the party, the media, academia, Hollywood, and have infiltrated nearly every major institution in the country. HOWEVER, this faction of Marxist, communist ideologues does not represent the entire Democrat mindset. Democrats are marching in lock-step, as they always do, but many of them are what I call “traditional” liberals, whose core values remain as compassionate, caring people who still embrace the plights of the unfortunate, and have been caught up in the hysteria created by the media that they must resist everything Republicans say and do, simply because they are Republicans. Given the time and opportunity to allow the MAGA movement to show them that their lives will be drastically improved under Trump’s policies, many of them could defect. And if the Democrats are reduced to a faction of pure communists, it’s quite possible they will disintegrate as a viable political force. Our focus, as Patriots, should perhaps be to facilitate a fracture among Democrats. Coerce them to reject their communist leadership and revert to their more traditional sensibilities. They must be convinced that leftism is not the next progression from liberalism, but a perversion of it. They must be convinced that the leadership of today’s Democrat Party doesn’t have the slightest concern for underprivileged citizens. Their only concern is permanent power, achieved by any means necessary, the primary stratagem encouraged by Obama himself.
He has embraced the concept published by Saul Alinsky, in Rules for Radicals, that to achieve any measure of political influence, it is necessary to effect change by dividing the country along socioeconomic lines, pitting the “Have-Nots” against the “Haves”, and playing the core instincts of “traditional” liberals to go along with his “hope and change” campaign slogan. They fell for it, hook, line and sinker. And now, 16 years later, how much better off are they?
The point of all this, is that the Democrat Party has morphed a couple times since its founding in 1828. The party formed by Martin Van Buren in the leadup to the election of Andrew Jackson, that basically held modern-day Republican values, was what could be called the “modern” Democrats, or what I’ve termed “classical” liberals. I don’t believe those Democrats had much to do with what I call “traditional” liberalism, which started to appear in the late 19th century, under Grover Cleveland (POTUS 22, 1885-1889, and POTUS 24, 1893-1897). Cleveland was a fiscal conservative, committed to the principles of “classical” liberalism, who fought against corruption, patronage, and political “bossism”, in other words, a virtual Republican who would be a pariah in today’s Democrat Party regarding his ideals. [2] But he also strongly opposed tariffs working to reverse the effects of the McKinley Tariff bill and was able to relieve some tariffs on raw materials but the revenue shortfall had to be countered by passing an income tax of two percent on income above $4,000, equivalent to about $131,281 in 2022 dollars. We all know how Democrats love taxes, as a means to fund their ever-burgeoning bureaucracy.
During Cleveland’s second term, the Progressive Era arose, often recognized as beginning in 1896 and lasting until 1917. In that period the Progressives were a collective group of social activists focused on defeating corruption, arguing against government waste and inefficiencies, and fighting monopolies. That initial Progressive Era is acknowledged as ending when The United States got involved in World War I. By the time Woodrow Wilson entered the White House (POTUS 28, 1913-1921), the Democrat Party had fully morphed into progressivism and was completely behind his “New Freedom” platform that focused on lower tariffs and breaking up large corporations in favor of the “little man” to create a level playing field. [3] After teaching at several colleges, Wilson was appointed as President of Princeton University in 1902, “where he emerged as a prominent spokesman for progressivism in higher education,” though, as President, he worked to keep African Americans out of the school [4], a policy that wouldn’t pass as progressive today and would, in fact, be deemed racist.
These so-called “traditional” liberals formed the backbone of support for the Democrat Party for over 100 years, and are to this day, arguably the majority of the party. And then Obama came along and everything changed. Traditional liberalism morphed into “radical” liberalism, or extreme leftism, and all those “traditional” liberals were caught up in the media adulation. He is practiced in the art of deception by his Islamic upbringing and he played the Democrat Party like a fiddle, transforming the party as they went about their lives. Trump and the MAGA movement is the only thing standing in his way.
With that in mind, I’ll take this opportunity to allow “traditional” liberals the chance to save face and denounce the Democrat Party, for many of them aren’t even aware that their beloved party has been hijacked. Life can be busy. There are millions of voters who haven’t been paying attention. They simply go out every four years and perform their civic duty, feeling good about themselves for having voted, but they’ve been disengaged and manipulated by the PMC/MSM in the final weeks, casting crucial votes in swing states that have serious consequences for all of us. We the People cannot afford to continue down that path. We must facilitate a conflict between the “traditional” liberals and those “radical” liberals, also known as the Marxist leftists. It should not be that difficult because the stance they have chosen on every issue is virtually insane. As an example of one of the “hills they chose to die on”, they are publicly advocating for the non-existent rights of violent criminal aliens over all concerns for American citizens. We can split the Democrat Party, effectively driving a wedge that could dissolve the party and force them to rebrand, as the Democrat-Republicans morphed into the “modern” Democrat Party. They could stick with the name, but in my (almost never) humble opinion, they’d be better off rebranding under a new banner because Obama has put such a stain on them, they’d never recover.
Speak out at every opportunity. Stay firm in your convictions. Remind them that this is not their father’s Democrat Party, but a political hijacking. Stay the course. Victory is on the horizon.
Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary
From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.
The Constitution, the Law, and the Case
Article II of the Constitution, Section 1, Clause 8 concerns the oath the President must affirm to before taking office. It reads, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States , and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 reads in part, “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
One of those laws that the President is faithfully executing is the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Interestingly, when you Google that term, the entire first page of results is populated with left-wing propaganda. For example, the Brennan Center is one of the first results, and the very first paragraph claims that, “Although the law was enacted to prevent foreign espionage and sabotage in wartime, it can be — and has been — wielded against immigrants who have done nothing wrong, have evinced no signs of disloyalty, and are lawfully present in the United States.” [1]
only “in wartime”?
done nothing wrong ?
lawfully present in the United States ?
Wow! Talk about misinformation, disinformation, and deception. In one sentence, this “journalist” misrepresents the facts three times.
Worse than the outright lies, the useful idiots who consume this type of “journalism” actually believe the crap they are spewing, and are rising up in open rebellion against the best interests of the country. When you have Democrat politicians standing in front of rolling cameras calling for “resistance”, it’s going to get worse before it gets better.
Let’s go straight to the actual law itself.
Title 50, U. S. Code, Chapter 3 – Alien Enemies § 21
“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually nationalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.” [2]
There it is in black and white. Pay particular attention to the italicized portion that does not require a declared war. That portion does refer to an incursion perpetrated by a “nation or government” and the ensuing portion requires the President to issue a proclamation, but Trump has covered that base also, to wit:
The President has publicly proclaimed Tren de Aragua as a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization operating in conjunction with and sponsored by the Nicolas Maduro regime. The Proclamation further provides detailed information on its leaders and its activities. In other words, TdA is a state-sponsored terrorist organization that has been furthering its “objectives of harming United States citizens, undermining public safety, and supporting the Maduro regime’s goal of destabilizing democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States.” [3]
That meets the requirements of a deliberate invasion and predatory incursion into the United States. The Defense rests!
So what does the destructive left roll out from their never-ending insane resistance arsenal?
Activist District Judges. Judge James Boasberg, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, an Obama appointee with strong Democrat ties (more on that in a moment), issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the flight containing 261 known terrorists bound for El Salvadore. But despite a claimed verbal order, the TRO was not issued in writing until after the plane was outside U.S. airspace and it landed safely in El Salvadore, where the terrorists were sent to a secure prison under terms agreed upon by the Trump administration. I heard that agreement is to cost the U.S. $6 million annually (unconfirmed), however that is a bargain compared to the damage that was being inflicted on our homeland.
The Plaintiff’s argument is that the terrorists were not afforded the right to “due process” under the 5th Amendment. I could remind everyone of the Biden administration’s denial of due process for J6 Defendants who languished in prison for 2 or 3 years, but that’s another story that favors conservatives by comparison. The central question is; do “Alien Enemies” have the constitutional right to due process, i.e., a hearing and/or trial? The answer has already been given above, in the last segment of the Act herein quoted, as such, “shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.” There is no prerequisite for any hearing or trial. As the late great Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia, once said about the Constitution, “It says what it says, and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say.”
The case has been tied up ever since its filing and the current status is that the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has refused to lift Boasberg’s March 15th order barring Trump’s administration from deporting known terrorist immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. [4]
The split decision will undoubtedly go to the Supreme Court.
The Judicial Branch and Early Congressional Acts
Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the government wherein it is stated in Section 1, “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.”
Section 2, Clause 2 states, “In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.”
The Supreme Court is the only court mentioned in the Constitution and all “inferior” courts are subject to congressional approval. Congress first created the District and Circuit court system by the Judiciary Act of 1789.
James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay wrote a defense of the Constitution in The Federalist, wherein “they explained their judgment that a strong national government must have built-in restraints: ‘You must first enable government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.’ The writers of the Constitution had given the executive and legislative branches powers that would limit each other as well as the judiciary branch.”
In Federalist No. 78, published May 28, 1788, under the title, The Judicial Department, Hamilton wrote that the judiciary branch was the weakest of the three, calling it the “least dangerous” branch, and argued that federal judges should have the power to examine the constitutionality of the actions and laws of the executive and legislative branches. He sought to bring the judiciary into a more balanced status as an equal branch.
Some would say the judiciary branch is now too powerful. It was never intended by Hamilton for administrative actions of the President of the United States to be subject to the approval of unelected District Judges, nor do they have the constitutional authority to conduct the affairs of state or foreign policy. We have elections whereby the government is chosen by consent of the people. Constitutional Republics are not controlled by individual unelected bureaucrats from any branch.
The Judiciary Act of 1789, approved September 24, 1789, just two years after the ratification of the Constitution, was enacted to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States.
It was enacted by the Senate and the Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, that:
The Supreme Court consist of a Chief Justice and five Associate Justices, any four of whom would be a quorum.
The United States shall be divided into thirteen Districts, defined geographically.
There shall be a District Court in each of those Districts that consists of one Judge, called a District Judge, who shall be appointed (not elected).
There shall be three Circuit Courts, dividing the thirteen Districts geographically into the “eastern”, “middle”, and “southern” circuits, and that there shall be held annually, two courts, which shall be called Circuit Courts, and consist of any two justices of the Supreme Court, and the District Judge of such districts, any two of whom shall constitute a quorum, further defining when such courts should meet.
That the Justices of the Supreme Court and all the District Judges shall take the following oath, to wit: “I, (name), do solemnly swear or affirm, that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the Constitution, and the laws of the United States. So help me God.”
There are many other provisions that define the authority of the courts and how they are mandated to administer justice. The full transcript of the Act can be reviewed HERE. [5]
I just wanted to cover the bare basics here and highlight the oath that specifically requires all judges to act impartially, because that is precisely the problem we are witnessing today, i.e., the coordinated obstruction of administrative acts designed to undermine the constitutional authority of the President of the United States.
The Judicial Act of 1789 has stood the test of time, as much of it still defines how jurisprudence is administered today, but the Supreme Court justices are no longer required to “sit in” on Circuit Court proceedings, a practice known as “riding circuit”, or “circuit riding.” It was a concern that they would be inclined to go along with decisions made in the appellate courts.
That concern, and the attempt by lame duck President John Adams, to expand the federal court system favorable to his Federalist Party, led to the Judicial Act of 1801.
The Judiciary Act of 1801
The Judiciary Act of 1801, often referred to as the “Midnight Judges Act”, became law on February 13, 1801, and reduced the number of seats on the Supreme Court from six to five, effective upon the next vacancy, and created 16 new judges that were rapidly appointed by Adams, before he left office.
The bill expanded the circuit courts, creating three additional circuits with three more circuit judges in each circuit, except for the sixth circuit, which received only one. He passed it under the guise of relieving the Supreme Court justices of the burden of “riding circuit.”
The Act also reduced the number of District Courts from 13 to 10, reorganizing some of the districts, and gave the circuit courts jurisdiction to hear “all cases in law or equity, arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and treaties made , or which shall be made, under their authority”, a form of jurisdiction not previously granted to federal courts.
Thomas Jefferson was declared 3rd President of the United States, after being so decided by the House of Representatives, due to an electoral tie with his Vice President, Aaron Burr, and was inaugurated on March 4, 1801, just 19 days later.
Jefferson was determined to repeal the Judiciary Act of 1801 and rescind the Federalist “midnight” judgeships.
Jefferson viewed the 1801 Act as an egregious attempt by Adams to stack the federal court system with partisan Federalist appointees that threatened the balance of power.
The Judiciary Act of 1802
Jefferson’s Democrat-Republican party majority in both houses of Congress led to easy passage of The Judiciary Act of 1802, adopted April 29, 1802, and reinstated the makeup of the Supreme Court to six justices, although no seat was ever vacated under the 1801 Act. It also restructured the six circuit courts and assigned one Supreme Court justice to each circuit, reinstating the requirement of “circuit riding”. Each circuit court consisted of only two judges and they would refer to the Supreme Court and question of law upon the two would disagree. No District Judge could hear appeals of his own decisions, so appeals from the district courts were to be decided by the circuit justice alone. More importantly, only one judge was required to constitute a quorum, and Supreme Court justices were eventually relieved of their “circuit riding” obligations by 1840.
Jeffersonian Republicans asserted that Congress’s right to establish inferior courts implicitly allowed it to abolish such courts. In other words, if Adams was able to convince Congress to adopt the Judicial Act of 1801, then Jefferson was entitled to lobby Congress to repeal it, which means any Congress has the authority to define the federal court system as they deem appropriate for the times. Jefferson was leery of the federal court system gaining too much power over the administration of his executive decisions, particularly when all these new Federalist judges could bog down his efforts to limit the government’s size and cut taxes. Sound familiar ?
Despite outcry from the Federalists, the Supreme Court upheld the authority of Congress to alter the structure of lower federal courts in Stuart v. Laird (1803), a case that would support Trump’s effort to do the same today.
Marbury v. Madison – Decided February 24, 1803
Perhaps the most important decision in American constitutional law ever ruled by the Supreme Court was the case brought by William Marbury of Maryland, appointed as a Justice of the Peace for the County of Washington, in the District of Columbia. Marbury was among more than two dozen District Judges and Justices of the Peace appointed by outgoing President John Adams just two days before he left office in March 1801, in an effort to pack the courts with Federalists and stymie President-Elect Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican majority. Outgoing Secretary of State, John Marshall, was not able to deliver all of the commissions, including Marbury’s, before Jefferson’s inauguration, and the new Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver them at the direction of Jefferson, who viewed them as invalid.
Marbury filed suit with the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus forcing Madison to deliver his commission. [6]
In the interim, John Marshall had been appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and he wrote an opinion that held Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission illegal, however, the Court did not order Madison to comply, based on the finding that Congressional adoption of the Judiciary Act of 1789 expanded the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction beyond what was originally set forth in the Constitution. Marbury’s case did not fall into either category regarding foreign dignitaries or state parties, as per Section 2, clause 2, and was therefore outside of the Supreme Court’s “original jurisdiction”.
The Supreme Court struck down the pertinent section of the 1789 Act and announced that the courts have the power to invalidate laws they find to be in violation of the Constitution, now commonly referred to as “judicial review”.
In essence, “any law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void”, a clause I cite regularly in my posts and comments. Perhaps Marshall was reminded of Hamilton’s concern for “judicial review”.
Activist Federal District Judges Undermining the Presidency
Less than two months into Trump’s second term it became clear that the Democrat Party, their leadership, and their propaganda machine in the mainstream media were conducting a coordinated attack on literally everything he was attempting to accomplish for the American people.
Trump’s efforts to deport violent criminal gangs like TdA and MS-13:-
Democrats: Wait. We care more about illegal immigrant criminals than the safety of U.S. citizens. Call Judge Boasberg, a 2011 Obama appointee.
Boasberg’s wife, Elizabeth (nee Manson), contributed $10,000 to Democrats and is the founder/board member of an Abortion Clinic in McLean, VA. She is also an 18-year board member of Verite, an NGO ensuring global supply chains of US corporations comply with fair labor standards. There might be a connection between NGO and money laundering.
Boasberg’s daughter, Katherine, works for another NGO by the name of Partners for Justice as a “capacity building associate”, funded by, you guessed it, USAID. The far-left group provides legal advice to criminal aliens and gang members. [7]
Seems like Judge Boasberg should have recused himself from this case.
Trump’s efforts to expose the fraud, waste and abuse of federal taxpayer dollars through DOGE examinations –
Democrats: Wait. We don’t care about saving taxes. In fact, we need more taxes. You can’t stop our gravy train. We need that money kicked back to our re-election campaigns. Call Judge Paul Englemayer, a 2011 Obama appointee, who blocked Elon Musk’s access to Treasury records. [8]
Trump’s agenda to close the border, reduce the dangers of dangerous illegal immigration like gang members and terrorists, drug trafficking, human trafficking, and the burdens on our infrastructure by concerted efforts to apprehend criminal illegals –
Democrats: Wait. Again, we don’t give a rat’s ass about the safety of American citizens. We need to maintain our virtue signaling compassion for the less fortunate. Call Judge Theodore Chuang, a 2014 Obama appointee, blocked DHS and ICE agents from conducting deportation operations in houses of worship, as a freedom of religion violation. OK, wait outside until they come out, duhh. And by the way, there is NO SUCH THING as “sanctuary” from federal law. If you believe there are Safety Zones for criminals, you’ve been watching too much propaganda.
Trump’s efforts to slim down the bloated federal government, an initiative first undertaken by Thomas Jefferson –
Democrats: Wait: You can’t just eliminate the jobs of all those “non-essential” government employees, you know, the ones who aren’t critical and the ones who don’t even show up to the office. We need them to keep voting for us. Call Judge Amy Berman Jackson, another 2011 Obama appointee, who ordered the Head of the Office of Special Counsel to be reinstated to block Trump from reducing the size of the federal workforce.
You get the picture. It’s resistance on every front.
At this point, it seems like they are projecting the desire for unsuspecting conservatives, Patriots, and all Trump supporters, to believe the party is rudderless, in disarray, and searching for leadership. I’m not buying the ruse. If you look at the efficiency with which they roll out little protests all over the country, and the sheer volume of fronts on which they engage resistance to everything Trump is doing, it almost screams COORDINATION to me.
We know for a fact that the entire Democrat Party “marches” in lock-step, on every issue. They have no defectors. They are united to a fault. That is simply not possible without clear leadership. Schumer is being challenged. Pelosi is a “has-been”. Her replacement, Hakeem Jeffries is a “wannabe”. Bernie and AOC are the latest “cool candidates”. But one person stands out as their Supreme Leader, and he is the only one commanding the total respect of the party. He has a track record of undermining everything Trump wants to do, and he is doing it again. It might sound like a wild conspiracy theory, but it’s as simple as this;
Barack Obama calls George Soros (think, speed dial) and directs the latest “protest” with details, Soros calls his stand-by activist groups to order deployments, and sends those leaders money to fund the operations. But the money isn’t Soros money. It’s YOUR money. It’s taxpayer money laundered through a couple “wash cycles” that was fraudulently earmarked for “worthy” USAID programs like $29 million to “strengthen the political landscape in Bangladesh”.
I’ve said it thousands of times and I’ll keep saying it until he is indicted for treason. Barack Obama is orchestrating everything we see going on in the political arena today. His agenda is to “fundamentally transform” America into a communist nation, and frankly, We the People, for the most part, aren’t even aware of the threat. We are in the midst of an ideological war that we must win.
The Democrat Party is not going away anytime soon. They may be hoping we are celebrating a little too much and getting complacent, but Obama is practiced in the art of deception and as long as he is in command, We the People must be vigilant.
The Democrat Party, which is essentially the Communist Party of America, controls the social consciousness through their Propaganda Media Complex. With alarming regularity, they disseminate misinformation, disinformation, and outright lies designed to fool disengaged voters. They don’t even care about backlash from conservatives bold enough to challenge them, because they turn immediately to ridicule, a strategy recommended by Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals. Then they assume the moral high ground as if their self-righteous egos were somehow superior. We the People must expose them as the far-left Marxists that they are. Boycotts, social media campaigns targeting their advertisers. Total assault on their credibility. The Democrat Party may turn a new leaf under new leadership, but if it continues to stand on the platform they have been pushing since Obama rose to power, they must be totally destroyed. We must go on offense. We must strike while the iron is hot. We must do everything we can possibly think of to discredit the Democrat Party on every front. America is no longer governed by two legitimate political parties with different ideas on how to improve the lives of our citizenry. There are only Patriots and Communists now and Patriots cannot allow Marxists to rule our descendants.
Comments welcomed.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Yon Ebright, K. ; The Alien Enemies Act, Explained ; Brennan Center ; October 9, 2024
[3] Proclamation by the President of the United States of America ; Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of the United States by Tren de Aragua ; March 15, 2025
[4] Kunzelman, M. ; Appeals Court Won’t Lift Order That Barred Trump Administration From Deportations Under Wartime Law ; AP ; Updated March 26, 2025 at 8:54 PM EDT
Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary
From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.
USAID
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was created in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy to form an umbrella agency for coordinating programs of foreign assistance related to socioeconomic development, global health, disaster relief, environmental protection, democratic governance, and other causes designed to counter Russian influence during the Cold War. It is one of the world’s largest aid agencies and has missions in over 100 countries. Kennedy established the agency by Executive Order in response to the Foreign Assistance Act passed by Congress on September 4, 1961. [1]
In fiscal 2001 USAID spent about $24.6 billion in inflation adjusted 2023 dollars. The most recent fiscal year with complete data (2023) shows foreign aid spending at $71.9 billion, whereas $74 billion was dispensed in fiscal 2022. Essentially, in equivalent dollars, the spending has increased three-fold in just over 20 years.
The annual budget is funded by tax revenues and appropriated by Congress.
Figure 1: Annual spending by USAID [2]
Democrats Officially Getting Exposed (DOGE)
Unless you just got back from Jupiter, you’re well aware of the uproar coming from Democrat members of Congress over the revelations brought forward by Elon Musk and his team at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In just the first few weeks of the Trump administration’s second term, Musk has publicized mind-boggling numbers in his quest to expose the staggering scope of government waste, fraud, and abuse from multiple agencies of the federal bureaucracy. Created by Executive Order, the President has the authority to eliminate the agency completely and while that is not his intention, he is determined to downsize the workforce and cut the spending severely, which has triggered Democrats to the brink of hysteria.
Earlier this month the USAID began notifying contractors and grant recipients of the termination of about 230 awards, among others that are under consideration for cancellation. The total value of the cancelled contracts is approximately $7.5 billion.
Here are a few of the contracts and awardees: (these are NOT the Top Ten) [3]
$157.7 million to Chemonics International to “support swift operational transitions” (whatever that means) and initial funding in Libya
$115.8 million to DAI Global to implement water, sanitation, and conservation activity in Lebanon
$93.3 million to DAI Global to reform Ukraine’s financial sector to increase transparency and growth
$90 million to Deloitte Consulting to advance health reform and recovery efforts in Ukraine
$88.9 million to Research Triangle Institute to empower East and Central Africa to strengthen regional development initiatives in Kenya
$84.6 million to Chemonics International to empower Southern Africa to address development challenges and opportunities in South Africa
$83.1 million to Tetra Tech to expand electricity access and low-carbon power solutions in Nigeria
$79.4 million to Education Development Center to strengthen primary literacy skills across Kenya and East Africa
$73 million to Tetra Tech to facilitate Ghana’s transition to a just and decarbonized power sector
$72.9 million to Chemonics International to support community-based initiatives and stability efforts throughout Iraq
All of the Contractors listed above and others that have been cancelled are Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) that arguably participate in fraud, corruption, and money laundering that likely “boomerangs” back into the coffers of the very politicians who approve those appropriations. In other words, the Congressional members that vote for the grants, get a piece of the pie to support their re-election, and likely some of the pie ends up as personal enrichment after going through several “wash cycles”. I don’t know that to be fact (yet), but common sense tells me that politicians who earn $200,000 per year don’t find themselves worth tens of millions of personal wealth without some form of windfall gain, whether legitimate or criminal. And those who protest with the most anger, are likely the ones losing the most, such as Chuck Schumer, Liz Warren, Hakeem Jeffries, Maxine Waters, Jamie Raskin, and the rest of the reprobates seen outside the USAID Building in the early days of Musk’s revelations.
The basic Flow Chart: They won’t find many direct kickbacks but the end result has certainly been ongoing for many years. The NGOs probably allocate a significant percentage of each contract/grant for “shady” accounting items that go through several “wash cycles” in off-shore accounts that are then re-directed to the political campaigns of their favorite Congress”persons”. From there, one more trip to the laundromat and voilà, another cash deposit into personal accounts.
Some other examples of suspected fraudulent USAID grants provided to foreign
countries and entities: (this is just the “tip of the iceberg”)
$15 million for “contraceptives and condoms” to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan
$6 million for tourism in Egypt
$20 million for a Sesame Street show in Iraq
$2 million for sex change operations in Guatemala
$47,000 for a transgender opera in Colombia
$32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru
$70,000 for a DEI musical in Ireland
$1.5 million for DEI in Serbia
$2 million to promote tourism in Lebanon
$2 million for pottery classes in Morocco
$1 million to help disabled people in Tajikistan become climate leaders
$10 million for voluntary medical male circumcision in Mozambique
$9.7 million to UC Berkeley to develop a “cohort of Cambodian youth with enterprise driven skills”
$2.3 million for “strengthening independent voices” in Cambodia
$32 million to the Prague Civil Society Centre
$40 million for “gender equality and women empowerment hub”
$14 million for “improving public procurement” in Serbia
$486 million to the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening”, including $22 million for “inclusive and participatory political process” in Moldova and $21 million for voter turnout in India
$29 million for “strengthening political landscape” in Bangladesh
$20 million for fiscal federalism in Nepal
$19 million for “biodiversity conversation” in Nepal
$1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia
$14 million for “social cohesion” in Mali
$2.5 million for “inclusive democracies” in Southern Africa
$47 million for “improving learning outcomes” in Asia
$2 million to develop “sustainable recycling models” to “increase socio-economic cohesion among marginalized communities” of Kosovo Roma, Ashkall, and Egypt
$2 million here, 286 million there, among a list a mile long and pretty soon, you’re talking about real money. We could pick any one of those grants apart in a cost/benefit analysis, but, needless-to-say, it’s absolutely outrageous that staggering sums of taxpayer dollars have been shipped overseas, even if they were for legitimate causes, which they are NOT.
Some other examples of suspected fraudulent USAID grants provided to foreign
countries and entities: (this is just the “tip of the iceberg”)
$15 million for “contraceptives and condoms” to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan
$6 million for tourism in Egypt
$20 million for a Sesame Street show in Iraq
$2 million for sex change operations in Guatemala
$47,000 for a transgender opera in Colombia
$32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru
$70,000 for a DEI musical in Ireland
$1.5 million for DEI in Serbia
$2 million to promote tourism in Lebanon
$2 million for pottery classes in Morocco
$1 million to help disabled people in Tajikistan become climate leaders
$10 million for voluntary medical male circumcision in Mozambique
$9.7 million to UC Berkeley to develop a “cohort of Cambodian youth with enterprise driven skills”
$2.3 million for “strengthening independent voices” in Cambodia
$32 million to the Prague Civil Society Centre
$40 million for “gender equality and women empowerment hub”
$14 million for “improving public procurement” in Serbia
$486 million to the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening”, including $22 million for “inclusive and participatory political process” in Moldova and $21 million for voter turnout in India
$29 million for “strengthening political landscape” in Bangladesh
$20 million for fiscal federalism in Nepal
$19 million for “biodiversity conversation” in Nepal
$1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia
$14 million for “social cohesion” in Mali
$2.5 million for “inclusive democracies” in Southern Africa
$47 million for “improving learning outcomes” in Asia
$2 million to develop “sustainable recycling models” to “increase socio-economic cohesion among marginalized communities” of Kosovo Roma, Ashkall, and Egypt
$2 million here, 286 million there, among a list a mile long and pretty soon, you’re talking about real money. We could pick any one of those grants apart in a cost/benefit analysis, but, needless-to-say, it’s absolutely outrageous that staggering sums of taxpayer dollars have been shipped overseas, even if they were for legitimate causes, which they are NOT.
By the way, the abovementioned “Awardees” to those cancelled contracts and grants have contributed to the political campaigns of federal candidates. [4]
Chemonics International
All federal candidates by party:
Democrats – $50,467 (98.63%)
Republicans – $700 (1.37%)
Kamala Harris – $35,415
Donald Trump – $440
DAI Global does not fund political contributions, in cash or in kind, anywhere in the world
Deloitte Consulting
All federal candidates by party:
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte – $54,572
National Republican Senatorial Cmte – $39,300
Kamala Harris – $762,257
Donald Trump – $46,514
Education Development Center
All federal candidates by party:
Democrats – several listed including Sen Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Rep Dan Goldman (D_NY) at $6,600 each
Republicans – none listed
Kamala Harris – $17,742
Donald Trump – $0
Research Triangle Institute
All federal candidates by party:
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte – $19,915
Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte – $15,876
Republican Cmtes – $0
Democrats – several listed including Sen Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), $8,613, Sen Adam Schiff (D-CA), 6,840, and Sen Mark Kelly (D-AZ) at $5,500
Republicans – none listed
Kamala Harris – $118,159
Donald Trump – $0
Tetra Tech
All federal candidates by party:
Democrats – $84,441 (67.5%)
Republicans – $40.652 (32.5%)
Kamala Harris – $57,977
Donald Trump – $15,086
I could go on and on, spending countless hours digging out details but the point is, there are numerous politicians of both parties who have been supported financially by the companies receiving government contracts and grants that total BILLIONS of taxpayer funds. There are Republicans in the lists but most of them are Democrats, and many of them are the same Democrats you’ve seen outside the USAID building, and elsewhere, screaming into microphones as if they were genuinely concerned about the” primary literacy skills in Kenya”.
Nancy Pelosi’s net worth is estimated at $267.6 billion based on her holdings in companies like Apple, MicroSoft, Google, Amazon, and Netflix, but rumors have run rampant over the years into her suspicious buy/sell decisions at perfect moments in time, i.e., insider trading.
Other members, such as Mark Warner (D-VA) and Rick Scott (R-FL) gained their wealth from business ventures that pre-dated their civil service. [5]
According to Quiver Quantitative the following politicians are ranked in order of wealth based on their stock portfolios: (it should be understood these are only partial components of their true wealth) [6]
Rick Scott (R-FL) is ranked No. 1 with a net worth of $548.69M
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is ranked No. 2 with a net worth of $261.77M
Dan Goldman (D-NY) is ranked No. 6 with a net worth of $184.01M
Kevin Hern (R-OK) is ranked No. 10 with a net worth of $109.60M
From there, it drops off quickly, including some notables like,
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is ranked No. 23 with a net worth of $50.53M
Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is ranked No. 40 with a net worth of $22.16M
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) is ranked No. 49 with a net worth of $18.92M
Debbie Dingell (D-MI) is ranked No. 69 with a net worth of $13.73M
Elizabeth Warren is ranked No. 110 with a net worth of $6.68M
Jamie Raskin (D-MD) is ranked No. 133 with a net worth of $5.01M
Adam Schiff (D-CA) is ranked No. 212 with a net worth of $1.84M
Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is ranked No. 214 with a net worth of $1.80M
Chuck Schumer’s total net worth is estimated at about $70 million. Elizabeth Warren’s at about $67 million.
Tell us exactly how your net worth grew so substantially on a salary of $174,000.
What are the sources of your income ?
It is incumbent upon the Attorney General to conduct full audits and launch investigations into how Congressional members amassed millions in personal wealth from their positions of civil service. We the People want indictments and prosecutions of every politician who has financially benefitted from foreign aid contracts and grants.
Comments welcomed.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Wikipedia ; United States Agency for International Development
Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary
From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. American Patriots must join together, speak out in free and open discussion to fight the “woke” anti-American mob, and further the cause of FREEDOM.
Biden Pardons His Family 22 Minutes Before Trump is Sworn In
I suppose it’s not surprising that former President Biden pardoned five members of his own family as his last act in office. He lied to the American people repeatedly that he would not pardon his son and then he did. Hunter Biden was indicted for tax evasion and weapons charges.
In September of 2024, Hunter was convicted in Los Angeles of three felony tax evasion counts and six misdemeanor counts after pleading guilty with no plea bargain. His plea was accepted by the Judge who scheduled sentencing for December 16, 2024, whereby he faced a maximum sentence of 17 years in prison. [1]
Would any sane person plead guilty without seeking a deal unless he had been assured by his father that he would be pardoned from all his crimes?
In a separate case, brought in Delaware, Hunter was convicted of three felonies related to the purchase of a revolver in 2018 when he lied on a mandatory gun-purchase form by saying he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs. At the time, the President said he would accept the outcome and “continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal”. [2]
Now we know that Hunter never had anything to worry about. Hunter was granted a “full and unconditional pardon” for all crimes he “committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024,” by his father on December 1, 2024, just 11 days before he was scheduled to be sentenced in his gun conviction case. [3]
The pardon just happens to cover the period of time when Hunter first conducted business deals with the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
As you may recall, Joe Biden bragged in a 2018 video taken during a Council on Foreign Relations interview, about withholding a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine unless they fired the Prosecutor who was investigating his son’s business arrangements with Burisma. Low and behold, they fired the Prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, and Biden, then President Obama’s V.P. and liaison for the Ukraine, authorized the aid. This interview was clear evidence that Joe Biden was corrupt, and a window into the money laundering operations his son was conducting for the personal benefit of the Biden family. Hunter Biden had no experience whatsoever in the energy sector and no legitimate reason to be engaged in business deals in the Ukraine. Since then, all kinds of evidence has surfaced regarding Hunter’s business deals in China, Kazakhstan, and other foreign countries, with over 100 offshore shell companies and secret accounts popping up. Somehow investigations were stonewalled and the Propaganda Media Complex covered for them until Biden got into the White House in January 2021, at which point we were all supposed to forget about it.
Fast forward to January 20, 2025, Joe Biden’s final day in office, and loose ends need to be wrapped up, so Biden calculates the timing of his last act as President to be announced just minutes before President-Elect Trump is sworn in as the 47th President. In fact, the announcement that Biden was granting a “full and unconditional pardon” to five members of his own family, wasn’t made until Trump and the entire Inauguration Party were in position in the Capitol Rotunda.
There was no way for Trump to be informed of the pardon before he finished his speech. Judging by the remarks Trump made that essentially blasted the previous administration for a horrendous performance, you can assume he would have criticized Biden’s pardon in the harshest terms. Later that night, as Trump was signing Executive Orders and fielding questions from the White House Press Corps, he was asked by Peter Doocy of Fox News whether Biden had left the traditional letter in the drawer of the Resolute Desk, to which Trump reacted and pulled out an envelope addressed to “47”. I have to wonder whether we will ever hear about the complete content of that letter, but I’d surmise there is some “juicy” thumb-nosing language that basically boasts that the Bidens are untouchable.
As Quid Pro Joe, the experienced criminal, once said, “Nobody fucks with the Bidens.”
The Senate Confirmation Hearing of Pam Bondi
On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, the Honorable Pamela Jo Bondi, former defense lawyer during President Trump’s first impeachment trial, and Attorney General for the state of Florida from 2011 to 2019, appeared before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for confirmation hearings on her nomination for Attorney General of the United States.
Ms. Bondi has the support of numerous legal and law enforcement organizations and is expected to be confirmed, but Democrats never pass on an opportunity to degrade the character of their political opposition with personal attacks and attempts to cast doubt on the worthiness of a nominee. The hearing for Attorney General was more of the same.
Every Democrat on the committee had certainly seen the memo, from Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-IL), or perhaps a higher authority, that Ms. Bondi should be repeatedly questioned on their “concerns” that she might use her position to weaponize the Justice Department against political opponents of the Trump administration. Imagine “lieutenants” of the Biden regime acting all high and mighty and offended that the Attorney General would even think of such an abuse of power. Apparently, they are tone deaf and totally blind to that exact strategy perpetrated against then former President Trump for four long years in all-out lawfare designed to prevent him from retaking the White House. Mindboggling hypocrisy.
She consistently stated that she would follow the law, which is the proper response.
During the hearing, Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT) asked the nominee, “Can you say ‘no’ to the President of the United States when he asks you to do something unethical or illegal?” Notice Blumenthal presumes Trump will ask her to do something, not whether she would say no if he asks.
Next up for the Democrats was Sen. Hirono (D-HI), the 77 year-old disgrace representing Hawaii. Her first question was, “Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?” Does she have some evidence to present that would embarrass Ms. Bondi, or is that just an attempt to degrade the nominee’s character?
Later, Hirono states that “in fact, President Elect Trump considers the DOJ to be his law firm” and follows that up with, “If President Elect Trump asks, suggests, or hints that you, as Attorney General, should investigate one of his perceived enemies, would you do so?”
Ms. Bondi reiterated that the DOJ would make charging decisions, saying, “It is the Department of Justice’s decision to determine what cases will be prosecuted.”
I have a simple solution that could allay the Democrat fears, and would keep President Trump’s hands clean.
Open letter to the President of the United States
We the People respectfully suggest to Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, that you, sir, refrain from making any directives, requests, or suggestions, to the Attorney General regarding prosecutorial discretion of any American citizens.
It will not be necessary for you to communicate directly, or indirectly, with the Attorney General in regards to any perceived political targeting you may have been subject to from the previous administration. Further, we recommend that you record every conversation you have with the Attorney General in an effort to defend yourself against any future lawfare.
We the People have your back. We know who the corrupt politicians are and we will urge the Attorney General to investigate, indict and prosecute all of them to the letter of the law.
We the People simply ask that you remain “on the sideline”. We’ve got this one.
This is not a revenge campaign. This is a justice campaign, and We the People demand justice.
Signed, We the People
The Attorney General Must Enforce the Law
Open letter to the Attorney General of the United States
We the People hereby request that the Attorney General of the United States conducts thorough investigations into the actions taken by all corrupt politicians that violate existing federal statutes, specifically for violations of federal statute 18 U.S. Code § 595 – Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments, and other crimes that may be discovered, including but not limited to:
18 U.S. Code § 594 – Intimidation of Voters
18 U.S. Code § 610 – Coercion of Political Activity
18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
We hereby refer for prosecution, the following:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., former President of the United States
Merrick B. Garland. former Attorney General of the United States
Christopher A. Wray, former Director of the FBI
John L. Smith, former Special Counsel for the U.S. Dept. of Justice
Alvin Bragg, Manhattan District Attorney
Letitia A. James, Attorney General for the State of New York
Fani T. Willis, District Attorney for Fulton County, Georgia
Jared S. Polis, Governor of Colorado
. . . and others as may be determined during the course of investigations.
It is of utmost importance that full investigations be undertaken to assure the American people that the unprecedented “lawfare” conducted against political opponents shall be prevented in the future by holding those who perpetrated these acts accountable for their corrupt behavior.
This is not a campaign of revenge or retribution. This is the proper course for exacting justice, deterring abuse of power, and restoring faith in the Department of Justice.
Signed, We the People
Comments welcomed.
FOOTNOTES
[1]Robert Hunter Biden Convicted on Three Felony Tax Offenses and Six Misdemeanor Tax Offenses ; U.S. Department of Justice Press Release ; September 5, 2024
[2] Chase, R., Lauer, C., Kunzelman, M., Durkin Richer, A., Long, C. ;President Joe Biden’s Son, Hunter Biden, is Convicted of all 3 Felonies in Federal Gun Trial ; AP News ; June 11, 2024
