Search Results

The very beginning of this chapter addresses slavery in the Caribbean and not North America. " UN Officials said it provides an opportunity to think about the historic causes, the methods, and the consequences of slave trade that must never be forgotten." Is this opportunity including ALL historical incidents of slavery? No, of course not, just the Transatlantic Slave Trade, since the UN and Africans, namely North American blacks, only believe and argue that that slave trade was the only one in human history, at least the only one that matters, since after all, they want a lottery payday despite no slave or slave owner being alive today to justify reparations in 2025. " And, with the approaching 500th anniversary of the date Africans were first forced into slavery in America, many like Felicia M. Davis, the director of the HBCU Green Fund, which invests in sustainable campus solutions for historically black colleges and universities, said she believes African enslavement demands reexamination." First and foremost, it's only been less than 405 years since the first African "slave" was brought to North America. Secondly, less than 335,000 Africans were even bought to then North America for slavery purposes. Third, Felicia M. Davis was never a slave from the 1600-1865, a complete disingenuous claim on the author's part. Moreover, what Davis feels, thinks, and/or believes is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what can be proven. Finally, African enslavement has been going on long before the discovery on the Americas, and long before Europeans got involved in slavery whereas the Arabs and Africans themselves were knee deep in African slavery. In fact, European whites were enslaved in far greater numbers than Africans were brought to North America. Work in Progress as of 3/8/25

The author begins the premise of the preface with the following declaration: " Contemporary attempts to deny, ignore, justify, or condone the legacy of the centuries-long genocide and the international economic consequences of the Transatlantic Slave Trade (1500-2024) have to be resolutely challenged and refuted." The Transatlantic Slave Trade ended in 2024? Odd. -- checks notes -- The Transatlantic Slave Trade began in 1526 and ended in 1807 by Britain, and 1808 by the United States. Not 2024. Ironic the author invokes the term 'genocide' as being applied to Europeans, but not the Africans involved in the slave trade themselves. Historically, Africans have been committing genocide of their own peoples for centuries. Even to this very day, in the year 2025, genocide is still occurring. https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/10/africa/sudan-genocide-explained/index.html Rwanda has been entangled in nothing but genocide and slavery for years upon years, decades in fact. " As a result of the international slave trade, unprecedented economic profits and wealth were acquired in Europe and in North and South America." And yet the only black ancestors of slaves that the world ever hears from, are North American blacks. No one else, anywhere. Despite the FACT that less than 335,000 Africans were even taken to North America, and the remaining 10.7 million, were taken to South America and the Carribean. As a result, ancestors of other black Africans in other countries are taking the lead from North American (self-entitled and The author then states: " The brutal consignment and enforced categorization of African people as mere property devoid of any human attribution was part and parcel of the emergence of the haunted ideology of white supremacy. " White supremacy is used like the infamous race card, neither of which having any political, social or legal value. I mean really, what was the "brutal consignment and enforced categorization of {1.5 million} White Europeans as mere property devoid of any human attribution {being} part and parcel of the emergence of the haunted ideology of black supremacy " where the Barbery Pirates are concerned? The level of hypocrisy and denialism of other historical facts surrounding human slavery knows no bounds. " Distinctive in the annals of human history, the Transatlantic Salve Trade is ladened with evolving factual narratives that are stained with the blood of cruelty, injustice, and inhumanity." And the slavery of white Europeans by the Barbery Pirates and sold in North Africa was what, a walk in the park? " The Transatlantic Slave Trade: Overcoming the 500-Year Legacy is a contemporary testament, history, and documentation of events to empower our remembrance and reckoning and the possibility of reparations." No, all this book is eliciting is furthering the infamous victimhood-mentality among black Americans who descended from ancestral slaves. In essence, you're keeping our own as slaves to the Democratic plantation of beggars to their own demise. " At a time today when there are renewed efforts to burn and ban books about race and racial justice, we are grateful to find a publisher courageous enough to publish our findings and recommendation. We affirm -- and believe -- that truth is therapeutic." There is a plethora of literature that is scientific in nature, legal, historical, and categorical that has been written of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, and all this book does is rehash it all in the agenda driven perspective of the author(s). " One fact is irrefutable and must be noted. The transatlantic slaver trade was the longest-running genocidal crime against humanity in world history, causing the death, enslavement, and suffering of over 60 million people from Africa, plus an additional 4 million descendants of Africa born into enslavement in North America and South America." This spurious claim is factually inaccurate. The number of Africans who died during the transatlantic slave trade varies widely, with estimates ranging from 6 to 150 million. The official UN estimate is 17 million. The transatlantic slave trade forcibly displaced around 12.5 million Africans between the 17th and 19th centuries, with approximately 10.6 to 11 million surviving the Middle Passage across the Atlantic. Not all of the deaths were at the hands of white Europeans either, much of which killed by other Africans . That's just a historical fact. " We hold an unwavering conviction that remembrance, education, and commitment to truth may be further realized by those who are reached by this book." Well, you have to actually convey substantiated truth to impart truth by those reading this book. Thus far, I've seen very little truth. I invite my readers to the next blog covering Chapter 1, and every subsequent chapter thereafter.

By Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr. & Stacy M. Brown DEBUNKING the Foward written by Chuck D. This book is an example of Afrocentrism revisionist history intent on reducing the actual impact of Eurocentric historical achievements and even their hiccups. Afrocentrism focuses its emphasis on African culture (undefined) and the contributions of Africans to the development of Western civilization (which is minimal) while highlighting what they perceive, or can misconstrue, as gross failures of all Europeans. The forward alone begins on a logical fallacy, an appeal to ignorance, regarding the history of slavery not in just North America, but the world over. " The Transatlantic slave trade is a brutal scar on the face of humanity, a monstrous crime that tore millions of Africans from their homeland, dehumanized them, and built the so-called American dream on their blood, sweat and tears." An inconvenient historical fact regarding the Transatlantic slave trade always left out is, of the 12.5 million Africans sold into the bondages of slavery to the Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch that sailed them across the Atlantic, roughly 11 million survived the journey. Of that 11 million only 335,000 Africans were brought to North America. The remaining 10.7 million were taken to South America and the Carribean islands. And yet people like the author of the Foreword, Chuck D, goes out of their way to deny those facts in order to make it sound like every single one of the 11 million Africans transported and survived the Atlantic crossing went to North America, which is just factually inaccurate. The next appeal to ignorance is the assertion that the slaves in North America built the American economy and the proverbial American Dream. Alas, as factual history would demonstrate it, the enslaved in North America did not build the "so-called" American dream. They were a small section of the labor force on plantations, that in reality, cost more to maintain than in making a profit for Southern plantation owners, both white AND black. Yes, there were several black freemen who owned slaves alongside white slave/plantation owners. The very first legally recognized slave owner in North America was black, a former slave himself, named Anthony Johnson. Yet another inconvenient truth many black Americans either don't want to know or purposely deny the reality thereof. Chuck D then goes on with the following: " The chains of slavery may have been broken, but the shackles of systemic racism are still very much intact. From police brutality and mass incarceration to economic disparity and educational inequality, the echoes of the slave trade reverberate through every facet of American life." The systemic racism argument is antiquated and about as useful as bringing up police brutality, there just is no systemic racism and/or police brutality in present day (last 30+ decades) policing. Author and scholar Larry Elder discusses fatherlessness is the root cause of problems faced by the black community, not systemic racism . Larry Elder changed the mind of a liberal regarding so-called systemic racism. Where is the proof of institutional and systemic racism? Police brutality? Uh, yeah, no! Police go where the crime is, not where it is not. And when dealing with certain suspects, one group stands out above the rest as being very violent, so the police have to be hypervigilant around them for personal safety. That group is African or black Americans. This is just a fact, and an inconvenient truth. A truth that is replicated by the increased crime rates the UK has been experiencing with the influx of illegal migrants and so-called "asylum" seekers. But I digress... A black Harvard professor angered about what happened with George Floyd wanted to study bias in policing use of force, and he did not one but two studies on the same subject in order to control for any variables and ensure the accuracy of the initial study, which was affirmed by the second. Controversial study confirms that police are more likely to shoot whites, not blacks An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force - by Professor Roland Fryer Another institute of higher learning also did a study that demonstrated that police are less likely to pull the trigger on a black suspect than they are white or Hispanic suspects. WSU Study Next, mass incarceration. Again, police go where the crime is, not where it is not. Blacks in the United States (despite being a mere 12-13% (depends on the year and numbers of deaths vs births) of the entire population), commit a disproportionate amount of crime compared to any other race, Black males represent approximately 6-6.5% of their 12-13% of the population, and less than 1% of that 6-6.5% of the population commit over 51% of the ENTIRE nation's violent person crimes (e.g., murder, non-negligent manslaughter, robberies, rapes, etc.). So, it stands to reason, logically, that there would be more black males (and some black females) incarcerated than other races given their rate of criminality within the population across the nation. As such, their involvement with the criminal justice system has nothing to do with system racism and everything to do with a lack of impulse control, high rates of criminality, and a severe lack of personal responsibility and accountability. Educational inequality? The primary source of funding for local schools come from local and state governments, with only about 8% coming from the federal government. When a school is in a district where homes are dilapidated, where there is a high crime rate, and where there are homes losing value, that translates to less property taxes being collected. Why? The value of the homes tank and the assessor cannot justify high taxes on an undervalued home. As a result, that's less funding and bonds for local schools. Less funding means less resources. Less resources and liberal protections of the students' individuality cause friction with administrators and staff (teachers), whereby children show little to no respect for their educators let alone their elders. This is a cultural problem that begins in the home and has absolutely nothing to do with so-called systemic or institutionalized racism. The alleged echoing of the slave trade to present day is nothing more than excuse for failure, and it perpetuates the infamous victimhood mentality among those within the black community who continue to struggle day after day at the enrichment of race baiters like Al Sharpton, Elie Mystal, Joy Reid, Jesse Jackson, Jeffrey "Shaun" King, Patrisse Colurrs, and many others with money and status that continue their enrichment at the expense of black Americans in need. "Dr. Chavis shows us that the fight against the legacy of the transatlantic slave trade is not just about seeking justice for past wrongs but about dismantling the present systems of oppression that have evolved from it." Simply put, there are presently no "systems of oppression" in the United States of America. If you cannot achieve something great, that's all on you. Everything available to everyone, including blacks, is open to anyone can achieve whatever they put their minds to. Anything else is pure victimhood mentality, which is the actual "system of oppression" for black and brown people in America. Furthermore, Affirmative Action (AA) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs are the actual true "systems of oppression," constantly telling black and brown people they cannot and will not succeed in America unless they get this free handout and/or advancement despite lacking the actual requisite merit and/or experience to achieve it without it. Ironically, Chuck D. goes on to make this interesting claim: "This book doesn't pull punches. It dives deep into the atrocities of the transatlantic save trade and lays bare the enduring impact on Black America. It's a raw, unfiltered look at the roots of racism and the ongoing fight for justice. It's about time we face this history head-on, without sugar-coating or sanitized narratives." The transatlantic slave trade was not the root of racism, as racism has always existed. It is a naturally inherent (innate) belief system among all races of homo sapiens. It is the belief that one race is just superior to another, nothing more, nothing less. There is no black American alive today that was ever enslaved, nor were there any white (or black) person alive today that enslaved blacks. So, the idea that what happened in the early 1600s and ended in 1865 in North America still has any impact or relevance present day, 2025, or any decade prior, is patently absurd. To claim so is nothing more than the infamous victimhood mentality that is the true oppressive system among black Americans, caused by black Americans, at their expense. So, Chuck D. doesn't want history sugar-coated, fine. Then he better be prepared to accept and acknowledge the facts I will present herein, and subsequent blog posts created one chapter at a time. " We need this book because too many still don't get it. Too many still turn a blind eye to the realities of our past and present." Chuck D. is not wrong here. Unfortunately, what he is asserting is that everyone not black are the one's turning a blind eye to the realities of the past and present where black Americans are concerned. That couldn't be any further from the truth. Reality is it is black Americans are the ones who "still don't get it," and "turn a blind eye to the realities of" their past and present. So many black Americans believe in the argument how whites have been so bad with slavery, lynchings, and burning black towns (e.g., Tulsa race riots); they neglect to acknowledge that since those historical times, black Americans have been horrendously worse against their own, more than 3x-10x worse, that whatever they may believe whites were towards their ancestors and them. When black people on X, for example, bring up how bad white people were with lynchings, I kindly remind them that between 1860 - 1960, there were less than 3,500 blacks murdered, and less than 1,500 whites murdered. That's a span of 100 years, but yet in just one single year, 2023, for example, blacks murdered more than 4,500 other blacks. That is about the average murder rate between blacks for all prior years, some worse in the 1990s, going back to the 1960s (e.g., civil rights movement). And when one goes back in history and looks at all the riots either instigated by or made worse by black Americans, they have done far more property and financial damage than whites did with the historic arguments they bring up (e.g., black wall street, Tulsa, race riots, etc.). Fact is, black Americans are their own worst enemy. The utter irony in the first sentence of the last paragraph in the Forward by Chuck D. is unremarkable. " In the words of Public Enemy, "Fight the Power." Educate yourself, challenge the status quo, and never stop pushing for the equality and justice that our ancestors fought and died for." Problem is, people like Chuck D. refuse to educate himself, and would clearly misinform his followers/readers to be equally in denial as he was to actual factual history. His (and other black American ancestors) fought in the Civil War on BOTH sides. Yet more white soldiers died for the right of slaves to be free. A fact that many black Americans simply deny, because it does not go along with their fictitious narrative. Since the Civil War, a lot of programs and assistance were provided for the freemen and women of African descent who chose to remain in the United States rather than return to Africa, their homeland. The Republicans made sure blacks were not only freed under the 13th Amendment but also made American citizens by the 14th Amendment. The first 23 black senators in Congress were all Republican, because they recognized and acknowledged that the Democrat party was not a party for black Americans. And yet to this day, black Americans vote for the party that constantly and consistently oppresses them, the Democratic Party. For those black Americans that do so, they just cannot get off the historical and metaphorical slave driven Democratic plantation. In short, while a vast majority of black Americans have prospered and done well since the end of the Civil War, there is still a significant population that is being pandered to and controlled by the Democratic Party. It's this population that sheds a very dark and ominous cloud over the entire black American population due to its lack of impulse control, lack of personal responsibility and accountability, piss poor choices in life, criminality, overt racist attitudes and actions towards whites and Asians, and most of all their murderous tendencies not only towards whites and Asians, but even their own (intraracial violence) as well. [Draft V1] More posts, chapter by chapter, coming soon...

The fallacy of white privilege and how it is corroding society The myth of white privilege HARD TRUTH About why "white privilege" is a myth Truth about "white privilege" completely revealed in a single tweet Jussie Smollett hoax proves white privilege is a myth White privilege is a 'dangerous myth,' professor says Michael Savage: The Myth of White Privilege "White Privilege" is a Myth The myth of white privilege White privilege and the layers of false ideology that supports its concept Why white privilege is wrong White privilege is a myth The Myth of White Privilege Why I'll Never Apologize for White Male Privilege No need to plead guilty: The fashionable doctrine of ‘white privilege’ is fatally undermined by the facts I can go on and on linking great articles and educated (i.e. - objective) opinions clearly debunking the liberal myth of "white privilege," a term to replace the well-known "race card" often pulled by those in the black community (and white guilt liberals) to excuse the illicit behavior of black Americans. As of late, the black community has shown its true colors and in doing so, they have firmly established their "black privilege." The New Black Privilege We are so focused on white privilege, we forgot about black privilege The birth of black privilege Black Privilege Check your black privilege? That's a discussion worth having. Black Privilege? Black Guilt? I think I have them The reality of black male privilege For all the choices made, actions completed, things said and done...the following are examples of black Americans who are living proof of Black Privilege: Jussie Smollett = black privilege Joy-Ann Reid = black privilege Elie Mystal = black privilege Michael Eric Dyson = black privilege Nicole Hannah Jones = black privilege Jada Pinkett Smith = black privilege Will Smith = black privilege Al Sharpton = black privilege Jesse Jackson = black privilege Van Jones = black privilege Whoopi Goldberg = black privilege George Floyd = black privilege Jacob Wright = black privilege Benjamin Crump = black privilege Every black male that kills another black person = black privilege And every black person that make a hoax claim of a hate crime/racism (e.g., Jussie Smollett, Tawana Brawley, etc.) I mean, I can go on and on and on with example after example of blacks getting away with things said and done that no white person, or any other non-person of color (e.g., Jews) would be allowed to get away with. Anyone not black would just be castigated for being a "racist." The all too common "race card" being pulled to shut down any argument or proffering of the truth about a black person. A fact we see all the time in the immediate aftermath of a black male being shot and killed by the police. Take the recent incident in Akron, Ohio involving Jayland Walker who was wearing a ski mask and led police on a high-speed felonious case chase (in a vehicle sought by police for an earlier incident) while shooting at the police, leaping from the driver seat out the passenger door to run from police while the vehicle was still moving, refusing to obey commands to stop and comply (with officers deploying tasers without a successful result), then reaching for his waistband and turning towards please in a perceived threatening manner...he gets shot and rightly so. Yes, I said that. You reap what you sow when you do not comply with lawful commands and put law enforcement within the position to defend not only innocent lives around them (to include those sleeping in their beds within their homes), but also their own life and that of their fellow officers. Despite facts that clearly depict the black male being the criminal that they clearly are, assailing others, and more poignantly law enforcement officers, many on the left, both democratic blacks and white guilt liberals, simply jump to emotively driven ignorant subjective judgments without knowing any of the facts, or simply denying those concrete facts. The truth is too difficult for them to swallow, so they deny that reality for their emotively filled fantasy of anger, resentment and disdain for white people. People they should be grateful for the life they have; versus the life they likely would never have had to begin with. After all, only roughly 334,000 Africans were even brought to the shores of North America. The remaining 10.7 million that survived the Atlantic journey were taken to the Caribbean and South America. A glaring difference between Africans taken to North America and the other southern locations is the obvious fact that Africans and their decedents in north America have taken their freedom for granted. So much so that they cause more violent crime, steal, cheat and demand reparations whereas those African descendants in the Caribbean and South America do not. That is just a reality. A fact. Which is precisely why those from the aforementioned regions, even Africa (e.g., Nigerians), are far more successful academically and professionally than native born blacks. Think on that. Now the real question, can blacks be racist ? YES! Examples of black racism Americans believe blacks are more racist than Whites, Hispanics and Asians Why black people discriminate among ourselves: the toxic legacy of colorism 'The Very Real Racism' Within the Black Community Yes, Black People can be Racist Black-on-Black Racism: The Hazards of Implicit Bias And yet blacks claim America is the most racist country against blacks. According to this article , America ranks 12th on the top 12 countries alleged to be racist against blacks; India ranked number one. Just this past July 4, 2022, actress and comedian Leslie Jones took to social media to berate America not being free and it is returning to slavery. Former Officer Brandon breaks down and unpacks her asinine rant here . During his video he makes a really great point regarding the vast freedoms of America that make it possible for people like Jones to become very wealthy despite "having no talent." Tatum then recounts the richest black women in the world and America has 6 of them with Oprah topping the list, obviously. I will wager a bet that 9.9 out of 10 people reading this blog doesn't even know who the very first woman to become a self-made millionaire was... Madame C.J. Walker ; and she didn't make that money in 2000, 1990 or even 1960. She became a successful entrepreneur in the early 1900s, a time considered to be far more racist towards blacks than present day. America is also so free and provides a multitude of opportunities for anyone, even the poorest and most downtrodden like the humble beginnings of multimillionaire Chris Gardner, a tried-and-true rags to riches story. Yet despite all the freedom and opportunities that are out there that can make anyone in America very successful, it appears those who are successful complain the most about America and accuse it of restricting those freedoms, opportunities and rights of the people. Clearly that couldn't be any further from the truth, as Brandon Tatum so correctly articulated in the cited YouTube video. Over the past decade and beyond, any non-person of color could be fired, blacklisted, and ostracized for innocuous things said and/or done whereas if a person of color did the same thing would be either ignored or given a pat on the back for saying or doing so. This, by definition black privilege (or even Hispanic privilege), not white privilege. UPS Fired Worker on False Racism Claims, Attorney Says Man gets 'white woman' fired over alleged 'racist attack.' But the video does not show anything racist that happened The False Cry of Racism, When Racism Doesn't Exist 7 of the most ridiculous cries of racism ever made Media pushes false narrative of racism NY Times reveals the devastation after Smith College capitulated to a false claim of racism Leftists Claim Everything is Racist - Except for Actual Race Hatred Idaho Announcer Fired Over False Claims of Racism Another case of false racism...caught on video I could go on and on listing cases and example after example of how false claims of racism have been literally weaponized in America in order to not only shut down debate/discussion, but also businesses, personal lives, neighborhoods, towns and even entire cities - just look at the summer riots of 2020 . Despite the level of damage structurally, financially but also personally for hundreds of thousands of people, to include those who lost their lives, no one on the left, let along Congress, will simply not investigate the rioting to get to the actual truth. In fact, many politicians (and celebrities) supported the rioting by BLM and created funding sources to get anyone arrested out of jail , politicians like Kamalla Harris . Politicians are not the only problem either, celebrities are also a huge problem when it comes to weaponizing false claims of racism and using it against white America, especially white males. No white person would ever get away with what Jada Pinkett-Smith did in accusing the Academy/Oscars of "being too white" (i.e., lack of diversity). That is black privilege right there. But the fact that escapes her and everyone who supported this asinine nonsensical accusation is proportionality of the white and black population juxtaposed to one another. When there are more white actors, actresses, directors, so on and so forth...there will obviously be more nominees than the much fewer or absent roles filled by blacks. For example, if only 10 movies were made one year with only 2 having a black lead, 2 having a black director, and 2 with black makeup artists the odds of any one or more being nominated will be less than their white counterparts. That's not a lack of diversity, that's a lack of black professionals in those roles jumping forward to act in or direct those movies. That's not racism; that's just a lack of qualified people. Then we have MSM correspondents, commentators, and pundits who get away with saying things on television and on social media that no white person would less they want to be fired, ostracized and their lives ruined (which includes death threats from leftist fanatics). People like Elie Mystal , Joy Ann Reid , Nicole Hannah Jones , Van Jones , Al Sharpton , so on and so forth. This doesn't go without saying white guilt liberals are just as bad, if not more, like race baiter transracial Jeffrey "Shaun" King. I can go on and on with example after example of the flagrant black privilege being used to further divide this country on faux racial grounds, but why beat around the bush. In the end the answer to the question of whether or not white privilege is a fact or fiction, the obvious answer is it is truly pure fiction; but black privilege is very real and dangerous to any and all attempts of moving America forward towards racial harmony.

"The Republican Party...and being a party of progress they determined to incorporate into the Constitution of the United States an amendment, that should define American citizenship - white and black, native and foreign born, in unmistakable terms, and for all time. That was the origin of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Let us look at the language of that amendment, "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." Mark you then: "all person," no matter what their color, black or white, blonde or brunette - no matter where born, native or naturalized: The Constitution says, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens thereof, and of the States wherein they reside." That is the affirmative part of the amendment." ... "Fellow-citizens, that amendment was passed in Congress by the Republican vote, with every Democratic vote opposed. It was passed in three-fourths of the State Legislatures, with every Republican vote in every Legislature in favor of it, and every Democratic vote in every Legislature opposed to it, and to this hour there has never been in any convention of the Democratic party, National, State, county, or district, a single declaration so far as I have seen agreeing to abide by and enforce that amendment." - pg. 141 "...in a Republic where suffrage is universal, we cannot permit a large immigration of people who are to be forbidden the elective franchise." - pg. 235 Political Discussions Legislative, Diplomatic and Popular , 1856-1886, James G. Blaine, printed 1887 . "This Amendment was proposed by Congress, June 16th, 1866, and was declared to be a part of the Constitution, July 21st, 1868, by a concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress. ... According to the opinion given by Mr. Justice Swayne, as already quoted, the emancipation of a slave removes the obstacle to his citizenship. Aliens become citizens by naturalization; slaves, by emancipation." - pg. 254 "The act passed Congress in April, 1866, known as the Civil Rights Bill, gave expression to this opinion. It declared all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, to be citizens of the United States." - pg. 255 "Citizens are either native-born or naturalized. Every person born in the country is, from time of birth, prima facie a citizen. An alien can become a citizen only by compliance with the rule of naturalization prescribed by Congress. ... In 1790, Congress passed an act requiring two years' residence before a foreigner could become a citizen. In 1795, the time was extended to five years, and in 1798 it was extended to fourteen years. But in 1802, it was reduced to five years, which is the time now required. ... "...a declaration, on oath, of his purpose to become a citizen of the United States, and to renounce all allegiance to any foreign prince or state;..." - pg. 88 "The children of persons duly naturalized, who were under twenty-one at the date of such naturalization, shall be considered citizens, if residing in the United States." - pg. 89 Andrews Manual to the Constitution - Revised Edition, Isreal Ward Andrews, D.D., L.L.D, printed 1887 Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment | The Heritage Foundation KEY TAKEAWAYS Critics claim that anyone born in the United States is automatically a U.S. citizen, even if their parents are here illegally. Its original meaning refers to the political allegiance of an individual and the jurisdiction that a foreign government has over that individual. Birthright citizenship has been implemented by executive fiat, not because it is required by federal law or the Constitution. "The 14th Amendment doesn’t say that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens. It says that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. That second, critical, conditional phrase is conveniently ignored or misinterpreted by advocates of “birthright” citizenship. Critics erroneously believe that anyone present in the United States has “subjected” himself “to the jurisdiction” of the United States, which would extend citizenship to the children of tourists, diplomats, and illegal aliens alike. But that is not what that qualifying phrase means. Its original meaning refers to the political allegiance of an individual and the jurisdiction that a foreign government has over that individual. The fact that a tourist or illegal alien is subject to our laws and our courts if they violate our laws does not place them within the political “jurisdiction” of the United States as that phrase was defined by the framers of the 14th Amendment. This amendment’s language was derived from the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which provided that “[a]ll persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power” would be considered citizens. Sen. Lyman Trumbull, a key figure in the adoption of the 14th Amendment, said that “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. included not owing allegiance to any other country." (emphasis added) Trump Renews Pledge to End Birthright Citizenship for Children of Immigrants | National News | U.S. News (usnews.com) "Most legal scholars say such a move would directly contradict the 14th Amendment, which 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.” ~ Those legal scholars would be wrong, as equally as wrong as previous lower court and SCOTUS decisions have been in the distant past (many before the 14th was even passed), as outlined in this article: Supreme Court set clear precedent on birthright citizenship | The Hill The fact remains that the US Government (via democrats/liberals) have been purposely misinterpreting the 14th in created an illegitimate "birthright citizenship" whereas illegal aliens are concerned. The legislative intent, discussions, and final agreements between the states in passing and ratification of said amendment make it crystal clear. Whoever becomes the next POTUS, I do hope they end this corruption where illegal aliens and their popping out anchor babies are concerned. They have no right to citizenship without going through the naturalization process. NOTE : the two cited books at the beginning of this post cannot be linked to online (at least I did not look), because I own the books. The ―originalist argument is that the legislative debates and (to a lesser extent) the overall history of American citizenship and political theory show a ―clear intent‖ that birthright citizenship should extend only to children of American citizens and perhaps of lawful permanent residents, but not reach the children of foreign nationals temporarily resident in the United States, whether legally or illegally. The historical background cited by Dean Eastman is that sketched by Professors Schuck and Smith in their work on the theory of citizenship in Anglo-American legal theory. The thesis of this work, and of subsequent work relied upon by restrictionists, is that modern, as opposed to feudal, citizenship requires consent of the citizen and a willingness to subject herself to the complete dominance of the nation. Thus, children of temporary sojourners—and, for that matter, any persons retaining citizenship in more than one country at the same time—cannot be viewed as fulfilling the conditions for citizenship under a proper modern definition. In particular, the authors suggest that children of illegal immigrants did not at the time of Framing, do not now, and should not fall within the meaning of ―subject to the jurisdiction.‖ This is because the children carry at birth the taint of their parents‘ criminality: ―The parents of such children are, by definition, individuals whose presence within the jurisdiction of the United States is prohibited by law. They [the parents] are manifestly individuals, therefore, to whom the society has explicitly and self-consciously decided to deny membership. The Citizenship Clause: A "Legislative History" Additional research papers: A Critical Guide t A Critical Guide to Using the Legislative o Using the Legislative History Of The F y Of The Fourteenth Amendment to Determine The Amendment's Original Meaning

BACKGROUND: " Aimee Stephens was a funeral home employee who had presented herself as male up until 2013. On July 31, 2013, she wrote to her employer, the Harris Funeral Homes group, so that they could be prepared for her decision to undergo gender reassignment surgery, telling them that after a vacation, she planned to return dressed in female attire that otherwise followed the employee handbook. She was fired shortly after the letter was sent, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission helped to represent Stephens in court. The District Court ruled for the funeral homes, stating Title VII did not cover transgender people and that as a religious organization under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act , the company had a right to dismiss Stephens for non-conformity. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, concluding Title VII did include protection for transgender people, which Harris Funeral Homes petitioned the Supreme Court to review. About a month before the Supreme Court decision, Stephens died from health complications. Representation of her case continued through her estate . The case was heard on October 8, 2019, alongside two other cases, Bostock v. Clayton County and Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda which dealt with Title VII protection related to sexual orientation. The Court ruled in a 6–3 decision under Bostock but covering all three cases on June 15, 2020, that Title VII protection extends to gay and transgender people. [2] " ~ R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - Wikipedia PURPOSE OF RESEARCHING LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND INTENT: Legislative Intent - Legislative History - Research Guides at Emory University Libraries "Legislative intent is the term that the courts have given to their analysis of the historical documents originally generated when the statute in question was under consideration in the Legislature—state or Federal. Whenever the interpretation of a legislative enactment becomes an issue in a case, the courts will commonly resort to the Rules of Statutory Construction to determine the proper application of the statutory language to the facts at hand. " "The Court determines the Legislature’s intention by examining the problem faced by the Legislature when it considered the bill that enacted the language in question, the public policy issues that the problem raised and the drafting solutions that emerged during legislative consideration of the bill." ~ What Is Legislative Intent | Legislative Intent (legintent.com) LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH: The Supreme Court was founded in part to balance the executive and legislative branches of government, and it can help prevent the legislative branch from overstepping its legal obligations by measuring the laws they pass against the U.S. Constitution . "For the Democrats, the courts have long been seen as a bulwark for liberal causes. But this presumption also appears vulnerable. If the courts weaken legal protections related to affirmative action, abortion, and civil liberties, the judiciary’s liberal allies may become alienated as well. In the context of this increased political pressure and scrutiny, being more articulate and clear-thinking about the acceptable contours of judicial power and the judiciary’s role, and the terms under which we can fairly criticize judges and justices, seems essential. To the extent we value a neutral, independent, and effective judiciary, further exploration of legislating from the bench can help us to examine the preconditions and limits of this efficacy." ~ Microsoft Word - LCB_11_1_art9_Peabody.doc (lclark.edu) JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: "The practice in the judiciary of protecting or expanding individual rights through decisions that depart from established precedent or are independent of or in opposition to supposed constitutional or legislative intent." ~ Judicial activism Definition & Meaning | Merriam-Webster Legal TEXTUALIST JURISPRUDENCE: "Textualism is a formalist theory in which the interpretation of the law is primarily based on the ordinary meaning of the legal text , where no consideration is given to non-textual sources , such as intention of the law when passed , the problem it was intended to remedy , or significant questions regarding the justice or rectitude of the law. [1] " ~ Textualism - Wikipedia CASE INFORMATION VIA LEGAL INFORMATION INSTITUTE: R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | LII Supreme Court Bulletin | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu) ISSUES: Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination against transgender individuals, either as a form of sex discrimination or as impermissible “sex stereotyping” under Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins ? MY ARGUMENT AGAINST THE RULING GIVEN BY GORSUCH : Justice Gorsuch violated the intent and purpose of legislative history and likewise the rules of statutory construction when he evaluated the case of transgender Aimee Stephens. In effect, he legislated from the bench via judicial activism. He essentially created law where no law existed within the original crafting, intent and purpose of Title VII within the Civil Rights Act of 1964 where gender identity and sex stereotypes are concerned. The arguments presented by Stephens are patently illogical. Stephens argued that Title VII "specifically" prohibited transgender discrimination [because] it barred employers from terminating their employees “because of [an] individual’s . . . sex.” Stephens further argued that by terminating someone because they are not conforming with their employer’s view of how that person’s “biological sex” ought to present itself, the employer is using that person’s “sex” as it was determined at birth in order to purposely discriminate against them. When one looks at the legislative history of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, "specifically" Title VII, there is absolutely no language or debate involving transgender, gender identity and/or sexual orientation rights given the glaring fact that none were even an issue in 1964 where legal protections were concerned. Issues meaning neither was seen as apparent then as they theoretically are present-day where legal protections were necessarily needing addressed by said Act in 1964. The origins of gender identity did not appear to take a foothold in law until the early 1970s , which had more to do with hermaphroditism and transsexualism than actual transgenderism. The introduction of the dichotomy between anatomical sex and gender identity, then commonly referred to as the psychopathological condition of gender identity disorder, was not introduced into the APAs Diagnostic Statistical Manual until the Third version in 1980, 16 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As such, there is absolutely no measure by which Stephen's argument that Title VII " specifically " prohibits transgender discrimination in employment, or any other area of employment law either. And what one's perception is of what another's sex "ought" to present themselves as is legally irrelevant. To argue such is to also argue how one "ought" to behave when employed, take for example lawfully vs unlawfully; kind or unkind; professionally or unprofessionally. Each measure is a commonsense expectation of behavior, and for a biological man to present himself as a man for nearly two decades as a man, only to one day abruptly claim they are not what they were born as and wish to live their personal fantasy as the opposite sex is a shock to commonsense and the laws governing fraud. You apply as a man, are hired as a man, work as a man, conduct yourself as a man and then inform your employer you will be coming to work as a woman in appearance and wish to be treated as a biological woman is fraud under the law. An employer is not obligated to facilitate your fraudulent behavior. The Funeral Home had every legal right to terminate employment with Stephens. For Justice Gorsuch to find legal justification for acceptance of transgenderism in Title VII flies in the face of both legislative intent and unquestionably demonstrates judicial activism. Stephens then argues that should the Court exclude transgender discrimination from Title VII, it would add to the only codified exception to Title VII's protections. This exception being the bona fide occupational qualifications exception that HOOTERS prevailed in regarding being sued by male applicants denied employment as waiters. Hooters maintained it was on the right side of the law in asserting a “bona fide occupational qualification” based on the essence of its business model. Hooters states that the “Hooters Girl” is the foundation of its business. Which is precisely why Hooters is allowed to continue this business model. It is also another reason why we see no male centerfolds in Playboy, but rather that of Playgirl, and no female centerfolds in the latter magazine. Stephens continues to argue, and with emphasizes, that it mattered not if Congress understood Title VII to encompass transgender discrimination during its 1964 enactment having no bearing on how the Court should determine the statute’s meaning and application present day of that case. This inherently flies in the intent and purpose of the Court to include legislative history in the laws intent and purpose behind its creating and passing in correcting wrongs that have subsequently been made illegal. Ignoring that history of legislative intent and making up terms, intent and meaning of a historical law to fit a present-day issue far removed from the historical law is nothing but judicial activism (i.e., legislating from the bench). And that is EXACTLY what Justice Gorsuch did. This argument of Stephens is a patent false equivalency fallacy: "Stephens analogizes an employer’s decision to fire employees for their transgender status to the impermissible act of terminating employees because they changed religions." Religion is "specifically" referenced in Title VII, transgenderism is not. Therefore, there is no equal comparison, period. Sex stereotypes do not come into legal argument in this case either, despite the arguments Stephens made employing it. Stephens was born a man. He applied as a man. He was hired as a man. He worked as a man until such day without warning he informed the Funeral Home he wanted to be employed as a woman when in fact he is/was not a woman. That is an act of fraud, but also a change in employment terms that an employee has no authority to make. Only the employer can change terms of employment conditions, not an employee. Therefore, the funeral home terminating Stephens had nothing to do with a sex stereotype as he was not being discriminated as a biological female employee, but rather that of the obvious: a biological male employee making unrealistic expectations upon his employer to change the terms of his employment with the employer for which he had no legal authority to affect or force upon the employer. IMO, Justice Gorsuch legislated from the bench via judicial activism and read into Title VII that which was simply not there, nor supported by the legislative history, intent and purpose of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Prove me wrong.

Ever since January 20, 2020, America has been going down the path of directed self-destruction from within by the majority that has become so complacent & apathetic that it allows the minority to run amuck with carte blanche to destroy everything it touches with wanton ignorance and unadulterated violence. Let me begin with the 2020 election, which we all know deep down was defrauded (stolen) by the left & Democrats. Going to sleep seeing Trump winning by a near landslide, then waking up and Biden receiving 81,000 million plus votes was utterly dumbfounding. But the most egregious act was the involvement of the CIA with more than 50 former intelligence agents signing off on an official letter purposely discrediting albeit truth about Hunter Biden's laptop and the incriminating evidence it contained, not only about Hunter himself, but his father, then Senator Biden, Vice President Biden, and now President Biden. This suppression of the laptop during an election was prima facie election interference and a directed effort to help get Biden elected. The same argument the corrupted progressive prosecutors, MSM, leftist pundits, and race baiting grifters have been using relentlessly against President Trump regarding the NDA his lawyer facilitated with former Porn star, Stormy Daniels. Yet no one has applied the same judicial logic towards the former intelligence officials signing off on an unofficial and unsubstantiated (non-investigated) letter declaring Hunter's laptop basically null and void. The two tiers of justice, double standards being applied, fictitious charges were filed against President Trump for that NDA his lawyer bought and paid for with his own money after re-mortgaging his own home, then billing his client for "legal services." Yet somehow Alvin Bragg managed to concoct 34 mysterious criminal charges out of that single transaction that no one even knows or understands let alone can articulate. Even far left liberal Vox admits that this trial was purely politically driven and not legally justified. Then there are the absurd claims that President Trump planned, conspired, and executed the events that took place at the Capital on January 6, 2020. Adding insult to injury were the closed-door Democrat ran hearings regarding J6, as it has been coined, and the restriction of valuable video & audio evidence from the public. Public information being denied to the public, why? Clearly the Democrats had a lot to hide, and since the release of much (if not all) of the video & audio evidence to Tucker Carlson , among others, it became clear that J6 was not all that the left and Democrats kept puffing it up to be. Notwithstanding, the United States Supreme Court has heard a case on the trumped-up charges (pun intended) of obstruction against hundreds of J6 defendants and overruled the lower courts on same. Therefore, it stands to reason that most if not all J6 defendants under that inappropriately applied obstruction charge will have their convictions reversed and freed. After all, Nancy Pelosi admitted on video she took responsibility for not having the National Guard present at the Capital on January 6th. Then when Biden took office one of the very first acts that he did within a month in office was to sign an Executive Order (EO) reversing everything President Trump did in protecting the sovereignty of the United States boarders . Ever since then, Biden and his co-conspirator Mayorkas has allowed over 11,000,000 illegal aliens from ALL OVER THE WORLD from countries that HATE America to "invade" our sovereign nation. That, alone, is bonafide TREASON ! Now as a result of Biden's treasonous act on our Northern but most of all on our Southern border, American citizens and legal residents are being violently, brutally raped, murdered by violent illegal immigrant criminals from all over the world. There are countless official reports of such acts reported across the nation, easily found by any simple internet search. Next is the destruction of the nation's youth through the social contagion of transgender and gender ideologies, namely in females (young girls). In the prior years before pharmaceutical businesses took a foothold on medicating everyone needlessly, targeting the youth was one direct way to screw up the population in order to make them dependent on their false promises using their fabricated drugs to magically change their gender. Puberty blockers were never meant for healthy young boys and girls, only those going through hyper-puberty. Those incidences were far, few, and between and yet everyone on the left swears by their efficacy even though they have never been used on healthy children or young adults in mass for actual medical purposes. No, the usage the transgender and gender ideology demand children be given free and clear access to pharmaceuticals without a care in the world of what it would do to them long term. Puberty blockers: "... a long-term study by the United Kingdom’s leading facility for treating gender-dysphoric children found otherwise. Contrary to common beliefs about puberty-blocking drugs, the majority of children who take them do not resume puberty." Study: Effects of puberty-blockers can last a lifetime | WORLD ( wng.org ) Any an all so-called "science" that the left claims in support of transgender & gender ideology is patently flawed. It takes years, decades in fact to actually know the end result of any particular treatment, especially chemical (pharmaceutical). Then there is the psychological damage on top of the pharmaceutical damage. The of untreated depression, generalized anxiety disorder, panic attacks, and so forth. These are the forgoing reasons why most "confused" by the indoctrination of transgender and gender ideology have such a pronounced high rate of suicidality. A tragedy that is easily preventable if society would just endorse and enforce reality upon the fictional world that the corrupt social media (SM) influenced by the Chinese Communist Party peddles on TikTok, among other SM platforms. The well-known pundit and social commentator, Matt Walsh, has produced a defining documentary that literally and figuratively debunks the entire transgender & gender ideologies with "What is a Woman." A documentary that to this day, has not been debunked on any level or measure. Matt even went on the syndicated Dr Phil show with a few brainwashed guests and demolishes ALL OF THEM!!! These ideological efforts are clearly intended to break down and destroy potential soldiers within America who would actually defend America if and when America was ever invaded. You know the movie with Patrick Swayze, ' Red Dawn '? Does anyone present day actually believe there would be high school kids and/or young adults that would do as Patrick's character and the 'Wolverines' did in this movie? Of course not. Not when we have men like this: No, America would lose any potential invasion by China, among other countries. Oh, and wait, what about this transgender clown: Fake tits flashed on the United States White House lawn for fucks sake. Really????? Oh, and let's not forget about the homosexual sex not only within government offices , but we have a gay man in charge of transportation that hasn't done shit but take vacations and "maternity" leave. He only steps in front of the camera to explain away an infrastructure disaster involving boats, planes, trains and/or automobiles. This transgender and gender ideology is pure nonsense and the clear antithesis of what mother nature intended. Then there is the real issue of transgender violence due to the dire effects of the ideology pushing this nonsense through false psychology and false pharmaceutics altering their young minds and their emotions is clear. The violence is undeniable . How Many Mass Shootings Have Been Carried Out by Transgender People? - Newsweek Rise in Mass Shootings by Transgenders: Two Theories | National Review Despite the transgender ideology, another big issue America faces is divisive race relations. Trump did not exacerbate it, Obama did. And it did not help when thug Treyvon Martin was killed by George Zimmerman. Obama saying "if Treyvon was my son" bullshit. Treyvon got exactly what he dissevered; exactly what Karma had laid out for him. End of story. Nor did it help when Micheal Brown was killed by a police officer defending himself against Brown. Even Obama's DOJ cleared Officer Wilson. Michael Brown was just yet another young black thug that America has been all too familiar with. Then comes George Floyd, a career of drug addicted violent criminal who busted into a pregnant woman's home and shoved a gun to her pregnant belly. Yet "Saint Floyd" has been honored with busts, statues and park benches with his likeness on it, not to mention the endless murals across the nation. The celebration of a career criminal who died of a heart attack complicated by a fatal dose of meth-fentanyl mixed drugs, COVID19, all of which was brought on and exacerbated by excited delirium. The autopsy report made this clear, but all anyone saw, and all the left & democrats pushed was the knee on the back of the neck. The autopsy report also made it clear that there were no life-threatening injuries to the structures of Floyd's neck. The report also disclosed that under different circumstances, like finding Floyd dead in his home with the same autopsy results, it would be determined he died of an overdose. Yet the nation bought the lies sold by the corrupt left and democrat officials in Minneapolis, turning their backs on law enforcement, especially those involved who ended up being charged, convicted and sentenced for Floyd's death when neither caused his death. The documentary The Fall of Minneapolis paints a crystal-clear picture how law enforcement was stabbed in the back and proves Floyd was not killed by Officer Chauvin, or any other officer for that matter. Officer Derek Chauvin, like many defendants who are railroaded by the system into accepting plea agreements at their expense, Chauvin was forced to take a plea to his detriment for a crime he never committed. The left and Democrats just will not let any potential incident that can be twisted to drive a wedge between white and black people in America. However, whenever actual incidents where black criminals attack Asians, Hispanics and especially white people, they ignore it like the plague. The MSM, may or may not report on it, but if they do it is once with no follow-ups and typically local news vs national. Fact is blacks have committed the most homicides since the 1960s, a 2023 report finds . Yet no one on the left, democrats, or the MSM will ever report on this let alone admit it because it just doesn't fit their divisive race baiting narrative that is strictly anti-white in intent and purpose. Facts: "The analysis shows that Black men have had the highest rate of homicide victimization since 1960. That year, the homicide rate for Black men was 42 per 100,000 people. By 1970, it was 78 per 100,000." "From 1980 to 1999, the rate hovered around 54 per 100,000 people before declining from 2000 to 2019 to around 35 per 100,000. In 2021, the number went back up to 54. To put it in perspective, the homicide rate for white males has never gone above 8.4 per 100,000 since 1960, according to the study." 50 years of homicide data shows the weight lands on Black people ( yahoo.com ) Systemic Racism in Crime: Do Blacks Commit More Crimes Than Whites? | Online Library of Liberty ( libertyfund.org ) U.S. DOJ Statistics on Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Perpetrators | Prison Legal News FactCheck: do black Americans commit more crime? – Channel 4 News Let's just face reality, black Americans, or black people in general, simply commit more violent person crimes than any other race. Worse is the fact that blacks victimize other blacks (intraracial violence) at a staggering rate of more than 90%. What a lot of people on the left argue against evidence proving the violent criminality of blacks in America is by using raw numbers claiming whites commit more violent crimes. Using raw numbers is an implicit logical fallacy, because it does not take into account statistical proportionality and per capita data. Blacks have been an up and down 12-14% of the total population while whites have ben between 64-74% of the population. So by raw numbers, yeah, more whites than blacks mean more crimes are committed by more whites; but that just is not the case as the data bears out where statistical proportionality and per capita clear shows/illustrates. FBI — Table 43 for 2019 Another undeniable fact that the left and democrats hate to acknowledge is the level of black on white crimes. Blacks kill 2x as many whites than the inverse, but they say nothing and argue (rather brainwash black Americans) that whites are hunting black men in the streets day in and day out, which is just not true. It is the other way around, and the sad reality of how and why is as follows: "Today, after a civil-rights revolution (culminating in the election of the nation's first African-American president) and $15 trillion spent on a feckless war on poverty (the official poverty rate hasn't budged), more than 70 percent of black babies are born out of wedlock. Consequently, unemployment and poverty remain far higher for blacks than for the rest of Americans. More disturbing, however, is the elephant in the living room that no one in the public eye seems interesting in addressing — appalling levels of crime committed by young African-American males." Black-on-white crime in America ( startribune.com ) $15 Trillion! That was your "reparations" for slavery right there, and every dime of it was squandered as any $1 given to black communities across this nation always is due to a lack of personal responsibility and accountability for one's choices, decisions and actions. Here is another reality, as previously mentioned: " T he narrative that blacks are at elevated risk for “existing while black” is true, but not because whites are killing them. Their assailants are other blacks, which means that these black victims are of no interest to the race activists and to their media and political allies." On Race and Crime, a Counterfactual Narrative | City Journal ( city-journal.org ) The facts are undeniable, blacks are killing their own and they have no one to blame but themselves for their own lack of self-respect for their own community members. Another issue that is being pushed to the forefront of all political activist demonstrations across the country is black people demanding "reparations" for slavery . An institution that ended in 1865 and not a single living black American alive today was never a slave, and no white person alive today was ever a slave holder. While many argue that the financial value of the slaves in 1860 (five years before the end of slavery) was around $3 billion, that value was destroyed post-Civil Rights of the 1960s when black Americans stopped being resourceful, becoming educated, and black women marrying the government with free taxpayer money that increased with each child she gave birth to so long as the father of each one was not in the home. That was Lyndon B. Johnson's (LBJ) plan, to have every "Negro" voting democrat for the rest of their natural born lives. The fact is government money (i.e., taxpayer money) has been doled out to the black community across various programs in an effort to "lift them up" to an equal playing field as their white counterparts. Those funds were all but abused and squandered over the decades to present day, 2024. It matters not how much money is thrown at the black community, they will just waste it and then demand more. Here is one of many recent examples: Mom given $10,800 in taxpayer-funded program for poor families spent most of it on luxury Miami trip: ‘I wanted to blow it’ ( msn.com ) And then there are black people who get into positions of power and further squander taxpayer money to their sole selfish benefit: Small-Town Illinois Mayor Accused of Spending Taxpayer Funds on Vegas Trip, Lavish Expenses Accumulating $7M In Debt ( atlantablackstar.com ) Americans on the whole just do not agree with reparations for slavery: Why most Americans oppose reparations for slavery : NPR Bottom line, reparations for slavery when less than 1.6% of Americans owned slaves, many of which were freed blacks (around 3,000) owning more than 12k slaves, were also involved. Then the obvious factor is no one alive today was ever a slave, let alone a slaver owner. There were obvious errors and mistakes made on both sides, yet no one alive today is to blame let alone is financially responsible for what ended in 1865. A recent issue attacking American's first amendment rights of freedom of speech has been addressed by the United States Supreme Court, and it was a very disappointing decision to say in the least. This was a convoluted case, but on its surface appeared rather clear cut; but I will let this author who provides an opinion analysis and argument analysis explain it. Just too much to add herein. Next is the clear weaponization of the law and federal agencies against anyone who opposes the democratic party, individually or on the party on the whole, regardless of class or professional position. The Real Weaponization of the DOJ - The Atlantic Does the DOJ target more Republicans than Democrats? Here’s the data | CNN Politics Will Democrats Regret Weaponizing the Judiciary? - POLITICO Magazine New GOP 'Weaponization' Panel Stirs Debate Among Democrats | TIME House committee on ‘weaponization’ of government kicks off with airing of grievances ( nbcnews.com ) Trump indictment: Republicans say Biden is 'weaponizing' DOJ ( nbcnews.com ) Scalise: House GOP Will Target Democrat Weaponization of Government | Congressman Steve Scalise The Legacy of Obama and Biden: Weaponizing Federal Agencies ( townhall.com ) Thankfully there is some good news amongst all the targeting of those who oppose the left and the Democratic party and its policies. Pro-Life Activist Arrested by FBI Acquitted on Federal Charges ( yahoo.com ) Then there is the rather large elephant in the room, George Soros. Follow the money: Follow the Money: Mapping Soros Prosecutor Funding - LELDF ( policedefense.org ) The Soros backlash: How the nation has turned against soft-on-crime prosecutors ( msn.com ) How George Soros funded progressive DAs behind US crime surge ( nypost.com ) When police departments hands are tied and they do not arrest criminal offenders, they never go before a DA for charging. Those not charged, don't face consequences and are given carte blanche to commit their crimes. And when the police know they must arrest a criminal for a violent crime, for a Soros backed DA to dismiss charges and let them walk, or a leftist SJW or Soros backed judge lets them walk on dismal bail amounts, it drives a knife in the back of law enforcement creating resentment towards the Criminal Justice System they support on the streets. Soros prosecutors are murdering criminal justice reform - Washington Examiner Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg to stop seeking prison in some cases ( nypost.com ) Recall, Remove & Replace Every Last Soros Prosecutor ( senate.gov ) Another Soros-backed district attorney destroying a great American city - Washington Examiner Texas victims' families slam Soros-backed Austin DA Jose Garza for letting killers and rapists walk free: 'How can you be pro-criminal!' | Daily Mail Online Soros-Backed DA’s Office Gave Free Consultations To Migrants Charged With Violent Crimes, Docs Show – IJR I could go on and on and on how Soros funded DAs are screwing America at the expense of American lives The LIST of problems America faces that many are in denial about and let happen is way too long: ~ 2020 BLM Burn Loot Murder riots where NO ONE has been sufficiently charged and sentences compared to the treatment of the tiny riot on J6 and the efforts to silence those arrested & held without trial (violation of Habeus Corpus) ~ Not a single name on Epstein's client list has ever been made public, arrested, charged and convicted ~ No one is above the law???? Obama, Clintons and Bidens clearly are ~ Racist and personal attacks upon white males and Christians accused falsely of racism and nationalism ~ 2020 defund the police and legalize narcotics created chaos and homelessness in addition to increased crime in the streets across America ~ Black Privilege ~ LGBTQ+ privilege ~ Destruction & degradation of television and movie industry with woke agendas ruining classic trilogies, genres and franchisees ~ Corrupt politicians working hard to destroy the US Constitution ~ Climate Hoax & gross anti-natural sources for energy like natural gas with the push to get rid of gasoline engines for EVs which are more expensive and corrosive to the environment than combustion engines ~ The DemoKKKrats and left are anti-Bill of Rights, namely the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments ~ Inflation still on the rise All of this has been going on since the very 1st day Sleepy Joe Child/Hair sniffing pedophile senile Biden took office. Is this what some people really want to continue vs the prosperous world we had under Donald Trump?

Since Roe v Wade was decided, everyone learned how and why SCOTUS ruled in favor of allowing women to obtain an abortion. That decision hinged on women's right to privacy . Despite the precedence standing for nearly 50 years, SCOTUS got it wrong. There is no right to "privacy" in the 14th Amendment . However, there is a clause within that amendment that directly applies to " personal liberty ." " Liberty is the right of a person to do as they please, assuming their actions do not violate any laws or infringe on the rights of others. What is personal liberty? Personal liberty's definition is the right of individuals to be free of arbitrary restraint or bondage. In short, personal liberty allows people to live as they choose without interference from others unless it is for a good, legally-established reason." The legal definition of liberty is the right a person has to behave as they like, subject only to interference for appropriate government reasons (such as the protection of other citizens' liberties)." A pregnancy is not [a] person with all the rights, privileges and equal protection of the laws bestowed upon actual persons upon their birth. The pregnant girl/woman is [a] person. A pregnancy is not [a] person. It's even codified into law, the definition of what [a] person, human being, child and individual shall be understood to mean, is as follows: 1 U.S. Code § 8 - “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant (a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development. (b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or "extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion. (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section. (Added Pub. L. 107–207, § 2(a), Aug. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 926.) What the 14th Amendment does in fact state regarding the legal rights, privileges and equal protections of the law for persons is ... that they are only bestowed upon [a] person once they are either born or naturalized. Since this topic involves abortion, being born is the only legal standard clearly demarcated within the 14th Amendment that establishes those rights, privileges and equal protection of the law upon a person. States restricting or outlawing abortion is an "unjustified intrusion on personal security." If children are protected from "wrongfully or excessively administered corporal punishment, whether or not such interest was protected by statute," then girls and women impregnated, either against their will, willingly, or ignorantly are likewise protected in their preserved liberty from deprivation of their personal liberty without due process for the very same reasons cited in Ingraham v. Wright. "The Court also appeared to have expanded the notion of “liberty” to include the right to be free of official stigmatization, and found that such threatened stigmatization could in and of itself require due process. 4 Thus, in Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 5 the Court invalidated a statutory scheme in which persons could be labeled “excessive drinkers,” without any opportunity for a hearing and rebuttal, and could then be barred from places where alcohol was served. The Court, without discussing the source of the entitlement, noted that the governmental action impugned the individual’s reputation, honor, and integrity." 6 The very same application could, and can still be, directly applied to pregnant girls and women who are neither wed or ready, for whatever reason they provide, for a pregnancy and the 18 years of legal responsibility they have upon birth of their child. They do not deserve stigmatization let alone ostracization for merely being pregnant, and/or choosing to have an abortion precisely because they are not ready to become a responsible mother. The fact remains that the pregnant girl or woman is [a] person, who possesses "personal liberty," and is endowed with all the rights, privileges and equal protections of the law. A pregnancy has none of these things. None. So how can anyone argue that which has no protections = to that of an actual person with agency and personal liberty, has far more protections that she? It's insane. It's absurd. It's illogical. It is illegal. It's unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn't cover a lot of things, but they are implied. Personal Liberty rights does cover abortion, and I showed how by the very language used in its definition and the law. Example: right to travel, it is not expressly written thereof in the US Constitution , but it is implied AND has been ruled a right of personal liberty, one's freedom of movement. Kent v Dulles (1958) Example: Right to marry other races (interracial marriage) isn't expressly written in the US Constitution either, but via the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause (EPC), it was inferred/implied via personal liberty rights that people had the right to marry outside of their own race. Loving v Virginia (1967) Need I go on with more examples? SCOTUS screwed the pooch claiming there was a right of privacy implied within the 14th, when there was not. What they needed to do was infer upon personal liberty, the freedom to live and do as they please, especially with their own body, that doesn't violate law or impede a legally legit social or governmental purpose. Had they ruled in Roe v Wade as they did in Lawrence v Texas (2003), overturning Texas' 'anti-sodomy law,' " furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual, " and the law violated the same EPC of the 14th. The obvious conclusion here is that SCOTUS should have defaulted to personal liberty, which is in the Constitution as well as state and federal statutory law. Personal liberty is sacrosanct. That liberty, that freedom needs to be restored for all girls and women faced with life altering circumstances that pregnancy thrusts upon them. It's her body, it's her life, it's her choice. Period.

It should have come to no surprise that the George Soros funded Georgia Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who ran on charging former President Donald Trump on fraud related charges involving the 2020 election in GA, ends up being a fraud herself. Georgia whistleblowers lining up to testify against Fulton County DA Fani Willis, state lawmaker says "Republican state Sen. Bill Cowsert opened a meeting of the Senate Special Committee on investigations with a bombshell revelation that multiple whistleblowers from the Fulton County's DA's office have come forward to testify against their boss. He said they allege Willis misused state and federal funds -- allegations that come after the embattled DA admitted to having a relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade that critics have called "improper." Fani Willis called ‘embarrassment’ by Georgia residents after admission of ‘personal relationship’ with Trump prosecutor Nathan Wade: ‘What the hell is going on?’ "Willis has now admitted to having a “personal relationship” with Nathan Wade, who stands accused of spending some of the $654,000 he has earned for his work on the Trump case on lavish gifts and vacations with his boss, court records show. “What the hell is going on? I know you guys write the checks. She is an embarrassment to the board and to the citizens footing the bill,” Kevin Muldowny testified at a Fulton County Board of Commissioners public hearing . “Fani is doing exactly what Fani wants; whether it’s carrying on an adulterous relationship with an underqualified stud she hired or ignoring a direct request from a sitting commissioner for a full audit .” Fani Willis Impeachment Moves One Step Closer "In an interview with Fox News , attorney and legal analyst Phil Holloway said the accusations against Willis could result in Trump's Georgia election interference case being dismissed . "If it can be proven she violated the Constitution in the way of substitute due process claims, that she was fundamentally unfair in how she carried out her prosecutorial duties, then that could result in a dismissal [of the case]," he told anchor Harris Faulkner. "It would be a question if she gets recused, then her whole office has to be recused. If she's got a conflict of interest, everybody who works for her has that same conflict of interest. So the prosecuting attorney's counsel here in Georgia or the attorney general's office may have to sort out who in the state of Georgia, if anyone, wants this." A Reality Check on the Fani Willis Scandal "In a recent appearance before Big Bethel AME Church in Atlanta, Willis barely addressed the substance of the allegations -- more on those shortly -- but chose instead to frame them largely as a racially motivated attack." Even Jessica Tarlov, the liberal Democrat on 'The Five' calls out Willis for her "race-card" moving being out of line. Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis reports racist threats over Trump case "A Georgie prosecutor has reported receiving racist threats and abuse as she decides wh3ether to charge former President Donald Trump." She pulled the so-called infamous 'race-card' before even filing the charges, and yet everyone knew that is the platform that she ran on. Why Nathan Wade, under fire for alleged affair with Fani Willis, is facing new scrutiny " Accusations that Wade mishandled the jail-deaths investigation in 2020 are adding to questions about Willis’s judgment in hiring him for the sensitive assignment of investigating the former president and alleged co-defendants in their alleged effort to overturn Georgia’s presidential election that year."

Let's cut to the chase... As of late, most mass shooters are #POC (people of color), namely black men. Look at the above image. 2021. What do you see? What do you NOT see? Look at the above image. 2022. Just a small sampling. All black men. Did you hear of any one or more of them? Did the MSM cover them? Of course not. And even if any one or more were accounted for in the media, the story came and went as fast as a jet plane flying over your head. *POOF* Gone! FACT: A little less than half of the 6% black male population (3%) commit over 50% of the entire nation's #murders and non-negligent manslaughters. Not #whites. Not #Hispanics. #Blackmales. FACT: Black males murder more whites than vice versa. The rate of murders by blacks with white victims is staggering and flies in the face of the left's and MSM assertion otherwise. FACT: The only race second to blacks who commit the most mass shootings are #Asians. Not whites. Not Hispanics. But the #MSM and leftist #whiteguilt #liberals, along with braindead #democrats, will protest endlessly that white people are the problem and none other, thereby #denying the well documented fact-based truth is that proportionally, black males are the true mass murderers in this country, not whites. Yet despite every incident where a white male (cop or otherwise) kills a black person, the #left and #whiteguilt #liberals go bat shit crazy falsely accusing #whitemales of the #hate in this country, when in fact, black people are the most #racist among any group in this country. And not only against just whites, but Asians as well. And when black males commit mass shootings against Asians, it is not classified as a #hatecrime. Go figure. Classic #doublestandard all the way around. What is worse, even more sinister is when blacks attack/kill Asians, it is blamed on #whitesupremacy. "When it comes to mass murderers, almost all of which are men, white men are actually underrepresented and black men overrepresented when compared to their percentages of the American male population." - Larry Elder "Non-Hispanic whites don't seem to commit mass shootings at greater than their share of the population. The groups that appear overrepresented are blacks and Asians." - Eugene Volokh But these facts are too inconvenient for the left, the democrats trying to score political points with "no tragedy left unexploited" for their personal gain; as well as for the #racebaiting #charlatans like #AlSharpton, #LeeMerrit, #BenjaminCrump, #fraud #ShaunKing, et al. The moment someone posts the aforementioned fact based truths to various social media platforms like #Facebook, #Instagram and even #Twitter, those users get immediately suspended for #hateful conduct rule violations. Meanwhile blacks and white guilt liberals are allowed to post incendiary blatantly fallacious #racist and #bigoted attacks upon #innocent white Americans with absolutely NO repercussion or consequences of any kind. History is replete with horrid example after another of the heinous barbarity of black males they enact upon innocent white men, women and children. Because of Non-Stop Black Violence in Whitest Part of Chicago (Millennium Park), Black Lesbian Mayor Declares Curfew to Try and Keep Tourist District Alive... "On December 7, 1993, a Jamaican immigrant named Colin Ferguson opened fire in a Long Island Rail Road commuter car, killing six and wounding nineteen. In hand-written notes carried in his pocket, Mr. Ferguson made undeniably clear his motive for murdering a bunch of white strangers: revenge for the racism he saw lurking behind every disappointment in his life." ARCHIVE: Black on White Crime The brutal reality of black on white crime The rise of black on white violence ARCHIVE: Videos of Black on White Violence Black Crime: Facing Down the Elephant in the Room Interracial Violence in America - 2018 Incidents Black Violence Against Whites: A Recent History (Truly horrific crimes at the hands of black males) Proportionality While whites are the predominate racial population in this country, proportionally, blacks are overrepresented in violent person crimes (e.g., murder, non-negligent manslaughter, robberies, etc.), to include #massshootings Larry Elder: Inconvenient fact about about mass killings Bottom line is the FACT that white privilege, white supremacy, white violence, white hate is NOT the violence problem America faces; it is black privilege, black supremacy, black violence, and black hate for whites and Asians. Bureau of Justice Statistics FBI Uniform Crime Reporting National Crime Victimization Survey 2019 UCR Table 43 - Murder and Non Negligent Manslaughter by Race Brooklyn Subway Shooter and the Consequences of BLACK SUPREMACY FBI Ranks 'Black Identity Extremism' as a Bigger Threat than Al Qaeda, White Supremacists American has a crime and mental health problem, NOT a white supremacy problem Why you SHOULD NOT support black supremacists At White Supremacy Hearing, Candace Owens says Black on Black Crime, Lack of Masculinity Are the Real Issues Black on White Murder: AKA Black Supremacy The Color of Crime: Blacks kill more Whites UPDATES 2023: Harlem fish store worker charged in fatal stabbing, victim also charged with robbery, burglary, assault - ABC7 New York (abc7ny.com) South Carolina woman killed in Kroger parking lot spit at suspect prior to shooting: police | Fox News Black Murders Eight Whites; Media Blame Whites | National Review Black Man Goes On Shooting Spree To Kill White Men (blackenterprise.com) 9-year-old girl, TV news reporter Dylan Lyons among 3 killed in Orlando shootings; suspect Keith Melvin Moses arrested - CBS News NEW UPDATE 2024: 50 years of homicide data shows black males bear the burden

14th Amendment, Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." Nowhere in that Section does it include the Office of the President of the United States of America (i.e., The Executive Branch), let's get that straight right from the onset. First key legal term in that criteria is "shall": Shall is an imperative command, usually indicating that certain actions are mandatory, and not permissive. Second key term here is "engaged": involved in activity; involved especially in a hostile encounter Third key term, and its legal definition thereof is, "insurrection": A rebellion of citizens or subjects of a country against its government. Rebellion: The taking up arms traitorously against the government and in another, and perhaps a more correct sense, rebellion signifies the forcible opposition and resistance to the laws and process lawfully issued. The final legal term (phrase) in that criteria is "giving aid and comfort to the enemy": SECTION 3. Clause 1. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court. What does Aid and Comfort to the Enemy mean? "The two branches of treason, "levying war," and "adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort," are distinct, and do not embody synonymous actions." "The term 'enemies,' as used in the second clause, according to its settled meaning, at the time the Constitution was adopted, applies only to the subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us. It does not embrace rebels in insurrection against their own government." "...whereas giving aid and comfort is generally committed in connection with a war waged against the United States by a foreign power." President Donald J. Trump did NOT (shall have) directly engage in an armed insurrection "in a hostile encounter" against the United States Constitution for which he gave oath to support. Equally, President Donald J. Trump did NOT give aid and comfort to the enemy since there was no enemy (a foreign power) to give aid and comfort to on January 6, 2020. More importantly, the United States Government via the F.B.I. emphatically declared that J6 was NOT an insurrection. Nor was President Donald J. Trump charged with inciting a riot and/or directly engaging in said riot that was facilitated by FBI agents placed within the J6 crowd and Capitol Police who aided in the breach of the Capitol. "The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials." No insurrection, as such no rebellion either. No enemies (agents of a foreign power) were present at the events of J6 either. Therefore, no enemies for anyone to give aid and comfort thereto. The 14th Amendment, Section 3, does not apply where President Donald J. Trump is concerned. And the following should go without saying, since 14/3 was specifically written after the Civil War to bar/forbid anyone in the Confederacy from holding any office (specifically named therein) that "engaged in" OR "gave aid and comfort" to the enemy during said Civil War. 14/3 has absolutely no relevance to any era thereafter. But more importantly is Section 5 of this Amendment: Section 5 The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Congress, not the judiciary or any Secretary of State has the authority to enforce Section 3 of this Amendment, let alone any other provision therein. And Congress, through an impeachment proceeding, acquitted President Trump of inciting an insurrection. Donald J. Trump can and will likely serve another term as POTUS. March 4, 2024 UPDATE: SCOTUS rules unanimously 9-0 against the Colorado Supreme Court improperly using the 14th Amendment, Section 3 to remove former President Donald J. Trump from the ballot. "The justices unanimously overturned a Dec. 19 decision by Colorado's top court to kick the former president off the state's Tuesday Republican primary ballot after finding that the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment disqualified him from again holding public office. The Colorado court had found that Trump took part in an insurrection for inciting and supporting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters. The justices determined that only Congress can enforce the constitutional provision against federal officeholders and candidates." And let me remind everyone, there was NO insurrection. Even the FBI admitted same; but more importantly, no one to this date has ever been charged and convicted for criminal insurrection. There is a reason for that, obviously.

Ever since the asinine reaction to the death of George Floyd, the call to defund the police and rescind cash bail has undoubtedly resulted in nothing short of an obvious increase in crime across the entire nation (namely liberal democratic ran cities). Biden's crime crisis is so dangerous, that even Democrats in Congress are not safe. What about you? A list of crime spikes in cities that defunded the police Los Angeles: The city cut $150 million from its LAPD budget last July. As of late November 2020, LA recorded 300 homicides. Killings were reportedly up 25% since 2019, and shootings were up more than 32% Shootings in South LA rose 742% in the first two weeks of January. We’re Underfunding the Police Improving our criminal-justice system means spending the requisite money to address America’s horrific and long-standing problem with criminal violence. 'Defund Police' Fueled crime in mid-sized cities. Did Defunding Police Cause Oakland's "Crime Wave?" Los Angeles has been officially designated a ‘third world country’ status according to a public audit of the crumbling city. Newsom grapples with his 'third world country' At least 13 cities are defunding their police force “This experience should be a lesson to state and local leaders about the real costs of irresponsible proposals to defund the police,” wrote U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr of Best’s resignation." As violent crime leaps, liberal cities rethink cutting police budgets "City councils in Oakland and Portland, Oregon, among other cities across America, approved budgets that cut police funding. That trend has reversed. Portland and Oakland increased police funding to hire more officers. The Los Angeles Police Department’s budget will get a 12% boost. Last month Ms. Breed vowed to “take steps to be more aggressive with law enforcement” and “less tolerant of all the bullshit that has destroyed our city”. Why such a stark reversal, and what does it mean for the future of criminal-justice reform?" Illegal Immigrants attack NYC Police in broad daylight "‘Violence — of any kind, and no less against our officers — is unacceptable and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,’ a representative of Mayor Adams tells the Sun." DA lets migrants who attacked NYC Officers go despite video evidence claiming video isn't enough "Controversy surrounding the case has heaped pressure on Bragg after it was revealed that only one of the 14 migrant youths accused of attacking the officers near Times Square last weekend remained in custody on Rikers Island, while the others were released without bond." Illegals who fled NYC after beating down cops may have gotten taxpayer-funded getaway: report "At least four of the criminal illegal alien thugs who recently beat up two New York City police officers have likely fled to California with taxpayer funds after being released without bail. Cops believe the group could have hopped on a bus bound for California on Wednesday after giving phony names to a church-affiliated nonprofit group that helps migrants get rides out of the city,” the New York Post reported, citing law enforcement sources. But where did the nonprofit get the tickets/vouchers for the illegals to flee the city? From the city itself, it appears." The city paid for criminals to flee the jurisdiction. That is aiding and abetting right there. NYC is complicit in criminal activity, and those officers assaulted should sue the city for everything in its coffers. Everything. The Origins of ‘Defund the Police’ The academic theories that have given rise to the new movement are dangerously flawed. This article doesn't even mention the historical lack of funding for police in NYC, specifically for Times Square in the 70s and 80s. Talk about repeating history post-2020 Burn Loot Murder riots. I bet one, maybe two people reading this blog will even know what I am talking about here. The Torso Killer. Richard Cottingham was capable of murdering women between NYC and New Jersey for two reasons: (1) lack of policing, and (2) lack of communication between police departments. The deeper history of "defund": How the "get tough" polices of the '70s and '80s led to disaster Worth the read. Too much information to breakdown here. It is scholarly. Bottom line, claiming policing and criminal justice is racist is self-defeating. Blacks and browns commit a disproportionate amount of crime given their small % of the overall % of the total population. Fact is that black and brown people commit so much crime in disproportionate numbers to the % of their population juxtaposed to that of the total population, but people are too scared to address that reality for fear of being labeled a racist. Well, I say fuck them. Minorities in America are the problem, especially those who will not assimilate and conform to American cultural values, norms, and law and order. The Democrats do not care about keeping America, America. They just want to remain in power, as evidenced by senile Joe Biden and his policies on illegal immigration that have now turned into illegal legalization of those illegal immigrants falsely claiming "asylum." America is dead if former President Donald Trump doesn't win the 2024 election. Even then, if he does, the alphabet mafia and other mental basket cases, namely those on the Democratic Plantation (ignorant black folk, Negroes, N***ers) have already announced they will be attacking Conservatives as a result. Be warned. Be aware. Be prepared. Post November 7th 2024 is a wake up call.