Kamala Harris: Was she “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

 Why not simply answer the question rather than deny the merits of the question?

Were Harris’ parents lawful permanent residents at the time of her birth? If so, then under the actual holding of [the 1898 Supreme Court case] Wong Kim Ark, she should be deemed a citizen at birth — that is, a natural-born citizen — and hence eligible. Or were they instead, as seems to be the case, merely temporary visitors, perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101(15)(F) of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act? If the latter were indeed the case, then derivatively from her parents, Harris was not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States at birth, but instead owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers — Jamaica, in the case of her father, and India, in the case of her mother — and was therefore not entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment as originally understood.

Despite the Democrats’ “open border” agenda, which subordinates the law to their political objectives, the notion of “birthright citizenship” is erroneous. It is clear that the drafters and ratifiers of the 14th Amendment never intended it to confer citizenship on the children of illegal aliens. Leftmedia “fact-checkers” who dismiss Harris’s parents’ status as irrelevant completely ignore that aspect of the question. In fact, parental legal status is the entire premise of the “anchor baby” debate.

As noted by Eastman, the 14th Amendment states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is key, regardless of the media effort to ignore rather than address the real argument. Contrary to the constitutional mandate, the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) of 1952 establishes in U.S. Code what “jurisdiction” means, and, according to the State Department, that includes children born to illegals.

The fight over the Post Office isn’t about the election!

 Pelosi Goes Postal ✉️

The fight over the Post Office isn’t about the election. It’s really about a multi-billion dollar postal bailout that Democrats and their labor union allies have been demanding for years. Now that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has called the House back into session to pass a $25 billion bailout, Americans need to know that this is nothing more than political theater.

Despite what Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and the mainstream media have been screaming from the rooftops, the Post Office is perfectly capable of handling election mail. So say its current leaders and former regulators who served under Republican and Democratic administrations. The Post Office has already laid out clear and commonsense recommendations so that voting by mail goes smoothly. As of yesterday, it has also delayed all operational changes until after the election, to "avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail," according to U.S. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy.

The real issue is that the Post Office has lost $78 billion since 2007 — money that taxpayers have been forced to cover. Rather than support reforms to make the Post Office profitable, the seven unions that represent its workers are demanding tens of billions of dollars to protect the status quo. 

Congressional Democrats have tried to pass a bailout for years, including earlier in the pandemic. But they weren’t talking about the election then. They’re only talking about it now because it makes good headlines. If only they were interested in passing good policy — and reforms that protect the American taxpayers who already shell out far too much for the Post Office.

Don't Believe Trump Is Blocking Mail In Voting! The Truth Hurts!

 

USPS has been in trouble for years. Congress did nothing.

Now Democrats want a smooth running “all mail-in general election” and they are going mad!

 

U.S Government Accountability Office

U.S. Postal Service's Financial Viability - High Risk Issue

USPS financial viability continues to be high risk because USPS cannot fund its current level of services and financial obligations from its revenues. As stated in GAO’s 2019 High-Risk update, USPS faces financial challenges that include the following:

• Poor financial situation: USPS’s overall financial condition is deteriorating and unsustainable. USPS has lost $69 billion over the past 11 fiscal years—including $3.9 billion in fiscal year 2018. USPS’s total unfunded liabilities and debt ($143 billion at the end of fiscal year 2018) have grown to double its annual revenue.
• Insufficient cost savings: The savings from USPS cost-reduction efforts have dwindled in recent years. Although USPS has stated that it will aggressively reduce costs within its control, its plans will not achieve the kind of savings necessary to significantly reduce current operating costs.
• Unfavorable trends: USPS’s expenses are now growing faster than its revenues—partly due to rising compensation and benefits costs and continuing declines in the volume of First-Class Mail.

 

USPS Unfunded Liabilities and Debt as a Percentage of USPS Revenue, Fiscal Years 2007 through 2018

Further, USPS has missed $48.2 billion in required payments for postal retiree health and pension benefits as of September 30, 2018.  This includes $42.6 billion in missed payments for retiree health benefits since fiscal year 2010, and $5.6 billion in missed payments for pension benefits since fiscal year 2014. If USPS does not make any more payments for retiree health benefits, the fund supporting these benefits is projected by the Office of Personnel Management to be depleted in fiscal year 2030. If the fund is depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for postal retirees. However, current law does not address what would happen if USPS misses those payments. Depletion of the fund, together with USPS’s potential inability to make remaining contributions, could affect postal retirees as well as USPS, customers, and other stakeholders, including the federal government.

 All mail in Voting or In Person?

 

Some folks are wondering why having “all mail in voting” is so contentious?

 

I say it is because the we have two sides that are unable to agree on much of anything. So, on something as grand as the next president why should we be surprised? We hear shrill comments from both for and against the process. Problem is there is some merit to both.

 

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a report in September that urged all states to adopt paper ballots before 2020. Why is paper best for verifying election outcomes?

 

The idea of a post-election paper audit is a form of quality control. You want to have people inspect enough of the paper records to confirm with high statistical probability that the outcome on the paper and the outcome on the electronic results is the same. You’re basically doing a random sample. How large a sample you need depends on how close the election result was. If it was a landslide, a very small sample—maybe even just a few hundred random ballots selected from across the state—could be enough to confirm with high statistical confidence that it was indeed a landslide. But if the election result was a tie, well, you need to inspect every ballot to confirm that it was a tie.

 

The key insight behind auditing as a cyber defense is that if you have a paper record that the voter got to inspect, then that can’t later be changed by a cyber attack. The cost to do so is relatively low. My estimate is it would cost about $25 million a year to audit to high confidence every federal race nationally.

 

Widespread voting by mail poses risks of disenfranchising voters, delaying election results?

Expanding vote-by-mail systems takes an immense amount of equipment, time, staff and funding, yet some want to impose universal vote-by-mail mandates on every state this fall. It has taken Washington state nearly a decade to navigate the complications of expanding vote by mail to every voter. Waving a wand from D.C. cannot change existing nationwide election infrastructure in a matter of months — nor should it.

Widespread voting by mail also risks severely delayed election results. Processing mail ballots is time consuming, particularly in states that have low levels of voting by mail. Due to the large number of mail ballots, California counted votes for over a month after the Democratic primary this spring. California legislators now want ballots to be counted even if received 17 days after the election!

Finally, mail voting is less secure than in-person voting. Voters, particularly in vulnerable populations such as the poor or the elderly, can be coerced to yield their ballots because there is no ballot secrecy. Voters’ ballots can be lost, delayed or thrown out by election officials without the voter knowing.

All Americans deserve an election system that is easy to access, secure and final. Instead, many states offer bloated rolls that include millions of ineligible voters; tabulation of ballots that takes weeks instead of hours; and with ballot harvesting, substantially increase the risk that ballots are coerced from voters, misdirected or completed fraudulently.

Until states bring their election systems up to date and make them secure, automatic vote by mail will continue to pose significant risks of election fraud, delay and lack of finality.

Simply said, we are suffering from an issue of trust; both people and the system.

Simple Americans simply want their vote to count. The hysteria whipped up by the media has NOT assured anyone their vote will be counted or thwarted in some way. All Americans want to feel secure that winners are truly winners and not the product of a failed process.

Get to know Kamala Harris!

 So what does Kamala Harris actually stand for?

→ Immigration: Like most liberals, Sen. Harris wants to “reexamine” ICE, saying the country should consider “starting from scratch” with the immigration agency. She also supports decriminalizing illegal border crossings.

→ Police: Sen. Harris’s view of law enforcement is still somewhat murky, but it’s not positive. When asked about defunding the police, she called for “reimagining how we do public safety in America.” Earlier this summer, she told The New York Times: "It is status-quo thinking to believe that putting more police on the streets creates more safety. That's wrong. It's just wrong." She also applauded Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti’s plan to slash police funding by $150 million.

→ Abortion: National Review calls Sen. Harris “the most radically pro-abortion candidate to run for president or vice president in the history of our country.” She cosponsored the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would override state’s restrictions on abortion by requiring states to get “preclearance” from the federal government and would destroy states’ rights.

→ Energy/Jobs: Sen. Harris planted herself squarely with the far left of the party, endorsing the Green New Deal and sponsoring an “equity plan” for climate change with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She would also ban all fracking, killing millions of jobs in the process.

→ Health Care: During the presidential campaign, Sen. Harris sponsored Bernie Sanders’ version of socialized medicine, AKA—Medicare for All, before she backed away from it. She also cavalierly called for abolishing private insurance, saying, “Let’s eliminate all of that.” (She has since “clarified” that position.)

→ Executive Power: As a presidential candidate, Sen. Harris promised to use executive power to sidestep Congress and implement her liberal agenda. The list includes restricting gun rights, legalizing illegal immigrants, and implementing equal pay. 
 
Sen. Harris is now competing for the second most important job in this country. Her liberal positions on the biggest issues facing America matter, and they deserve to be studied and questioned. 

The New Crime Wave 💥

America is getting less safe by the day. According to a new Wall Street Journal analysis, murders are up by nearly 25% this year. This crisis isn’t contained in just a handful of cities — it’s happening across the nation. The Journal found that homicide is rising by double-digit percentages in at least 36 of America’s largest cities. The usual suspects are on the list, like Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia. But so are cities like Omaha and Phoenix. Austin has seen homicides rise by a staggering 64%. Amidst the pandemic, murders “are up because violent criminals have been emboldened by the sidelining of police, courts, schools, churches and an array of other social institutions,” as the Journal puts it. This crisis deserves far more attention — and action — from policymakers. Crime begets crime, and if this new wave isn’t stopped, it will claim even more lives and spread even farther. If our elected leaders won’t keep us safe, then the American people need to hold them accountable. → Read more: Homicide spike hits most large U.S. cities (Wall Street Journal) → Read more: Feds send agents into three U.S. cities for Operation Legend (New York Post)

A CANADIAN'S VIEW OF PRESIDENT TRUMP

Ernie Meggisen, a Canadian, wrote the following on Donald J. Trump...
 
Make no mistake...I'm not posting this for debate.  I don’t want your
commentary.   ..Unfollow or unfriend me if it makes you feel better.
 
Just consider this...  When you think    that your    President Trump is a
jerk; HE IS...
 
He’s a New Yorker..  He’s crude and can be downright rude.  Some say he's a thin-skinned, arrogant, bombastic ass.  ..No argument, even from most republicans if they're really honest.
 
He gets his feelings hurt and he’s a hot head. ..He hits back; harder.
...And he probably should Tweet less.
 
But let me tell you what else he is...And if you disagree with this that's
your privilege.  ..But in that case my friend, you'd be DEAD WRONG!!!  ..And here's why;
 
He's a guy who DEMANDS performance. ..And more    importantly; RESULTS!!  He spent his entire life in the private sector where you either produce or get your ass fired!
 
He's a guy who asks lots of questions. ..And the questions he asks aren’t cloaked in fancy “political” phrases; they are “Why the hell...?” questions.

 
For decades, the health industry has thrown away billions of face masks after one use. ...Trump asks, “Why are we throwing them away?  Why not sterilize them and use them numerous times?” (Good question.)
 
He’s the guy who gets hospital ships readied in one week when it would have taken a bureaucrat weeks or months or never to get it done.
 
He’s the guy who gets temporary hospitals built in three days.
 
He’s the guy who gets auto industries to restructure to build ventilators in a business that’s highly regulated by agencies that move like sloths.
 
He’s the guy who asks “Why aren’t we using drugs that might work on people who are dying; what the hell do we have to lose?” (Another good question.)
 
He’s the guy who restricted travel from China when the democrats and liberal media were screaming “xenophobia” and “racist.”  ..Now they’re wanting to know why he didn’t react sooner?  When he shut down the borders in the early days of the corona virus, the democrats screamed even LOUDER.  ..Then the rest of the world, including the European Union quickly restricted travel between their own member countries.
 
He’s the guy who campaigned on securing the border - protecting America - in the face of screaming democrats and the liberal media. ...And these SAME leaders of your democrat party (both the Clintons, Chucky Schumer, Harry Reed, Barack Obama, Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi et al...)  ALL were in FAVOR of constructing the wall 'UNTIL' Trump had the fortitude to actually do it!!!  
 
Now your comeback might be:  'Oh, he said Mexico was going to pay for it'..  Does that ring a bell?  Well, let me quickly set you straight on this one: Have you compared the old EXTREMELY one-sided NAFTA agreement (negotiated by none other than Jimmy 'peanuts' Carter) with the NEW U.S.M.C. agreement?  Well I have...And let me tell you this:  Mexico will now end up paying much MORE for your goods than you will for theirs...And why you might ask??  Because they're far more    reliant    on the U.S than you are of them.  Yes, it will take time but the bottom line is;...They WILL end up paying for the wall just like Trump said all along!  .Admittedly as a Canadian, this new USMCA is certainly not as beneficial as NAFTA was for both my country and Mexico.  Previously our farmers had a huge monopoly over your farmers
but 'fair is fair'...
 
Has Trump made mistakes? ..Of course.  You can't fault a person for being a human being.  Only ONE perfect man walked this earth 2000 years ago, Jesus!
 
Everyone I know has made mistakes and continues to make them and LEARNS from them.  
 
Trump is and has accomplished more than any U.S. President in my lifetime. (I'm 77 years old)  ..He puts in 18 to 20-hour days. He isn’t hiding in his office; he’s out front - Briefing - ALL Americans almost every day.
 
According to democrats and liberal media, when he offers hope he’s lying, and when he’s straight forward he should be hopeful. It’s a no-win situation for him every day with the haters and naysayers, but he is NOT deterred.
 
I’ll take THIS kind of leadership 6 days a week and TWICE on Sunday over a “polished, nice guy” politician who has seldom or never held a real private sector job in his or her adult life, reads prepared and “written by a speech-writer” speeches from a teleprompter and ONLY answers pre-scripted questions selected for him/her prior to the open forum.  (Sorry folks, but that's EXACTLY what your previous POTUS did.)
 
I am completely mystified as to why this man has been bombarded by the media and liberal electorate EVERY day since back in 2015 when he announced his run for the U.S. presidency.  
 
...And whether you want to believe it or not, Americans, let me tell you one more thing, if you REALLY think that Hillary would have accomplished even a fraction of the things for the betterment of the American public that POTUS Trump has, you've really got your head in the sand.
 
I can only wish he was MY President! - For the good of America, you'd better hope he's re-elected this November.
 
I DO!!!