Biden and his Communist/Socialist/"Brown is Better" Coalition continue to disintegrate America while we sit on our Sorry asses!

 

Biden Adviser Says There’s No Better System Than Communist China! ( Fuck the bastard... send him there!)

 

 

THE BIGGER PROBLEM?  SUPPORTERS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC DON'T HAVE THE BALLS TO TAKE THIS FUCKER OUT!

 

Biden Adviser CALLS For Communism

(TheRedWire.com) – Is there a movement among the elites in the US government to talk down the United States and prop up the Chinese Communist government? One has to wonder. On April 27, the Biden administration announced that Democratic donor Dominic Ng 

yes this "Chink Rat Bastard" was appointed to represent the US on the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council. Dominic’s pick is controversial, especially after some in the media exposed his ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and a video surfaced of him praising the authoritarian system of the CCP.

In 2018, Ng spoke at the Future of Asia Conference. He said there was nothing better than the Chinese authoritarian economic system despite the massive problems with the country’s banking system, which the government controls. That’s not all he said. Ng contrasted the US system with the Chinese and suggested the idea of a free market was flawed at best.

Dominic Ng Is a Consistent Defender of Controversial Beijing Economic Policies

Ng is the chairman of East West Bank, which lends heavily to Asian businesses. The Washington Free Beacon reported Ng endorsed several controversial CCP policies, including China’s infrastructure program, the Belt and Road initiative, and the CCP’s criticisms against the United States for joining their program over the years. Additionally, Ng recently criticized two pieces of legislation that would make the US more competitive with China. He’s also tied to the CCP through Chinese influence groups such as the Committee of 100 and the China United States Exchange Foundation (CUSEF).

Still, he landed a highly prestigious appointment by President Biden.

Perhaps his 2018 speech praising China’s authoritarian system over the US’s democratic one is symbolic of Ng’s views. The new member of the APEC said in the speech that while China’s banks have problems, the CCP’s authoritarian controls over the economy prevented a potential crash of the Chinese economy.

Ng then distinguished how China and the United States handle economic crises. He argued that, unlike the US, China’s ability to squash rumors, control the media narrative, and bury negative news at lightning speed enabled it to weather economic storms in a way that the US could not. He stated that the Chinese don’t wait to solve problems and will knock on doors and immediately end any rumors. Furthermore, Ng noted that Chinese officials would halt fund managers and publicly traded companies from harming the country.

The new Biden appointee added that the problem in the United States is that it takes years for the Department of Justice to investigate and the Security and Exchange Commission to implement corrective policies.

Ng then suggested the Chinese system was superior to the US because the US government can’t control businesses, the economy, and society in the land of the free.

Drivers of the Chinese Economy

According to Investopedia, China rose from extreme poverty over the last 60 years to become the world’s second-biggest influence economy. To do it, China became a major exporter of goods across the globe. Still, many criticize the CCP for manipulating its currency and refusing to punish its companies over intellectual property theft.

The authoritarian government also faces accusations of deep corruption, unfair dealings, and falsifying economic data to boost its economy.

What do you think? Does NG really think he can convince anyone that China’s economic system really better than the US’?

 I SAY TO ALL THE CONSERVATIVE TALKING HEADS AND THE RINO ASSHOLE POLITICIANS AND THE REST OF ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO WILL NOT CALL FOR REVOLUTION TO TAKE BACK AMERICA... "FUCK YOU ALL.. WE ARE HERE BECAUSE OF YOU!"

 

 

 

Slavery and Abortion Have More and More in Common We learned to live without slavery. So it will have to be with abortion or the elderly are next!

 

A NATION THAT  KILLS IT'S UNBORN WILL NOT STOP AT "PRENATAL GENOCIDE". THE ELDERLY ARE NEXT!

Can we learn to live without “abortion rights”? That’s the question we need to answer calmly and rationally in the furor erupting over the Supreme Court’s leaked draft opinion that concludes: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled.”

by RITA JOSEPH

It is a troubling part of the human condition that an unjust practice can be kept in place long after its injustice has been exposed.

We argue earnestly that because we have relied on it for so long, it is now an indispensable part of who we are and of how we live. We convince ourselves that we can’t change it.

Such is the case with our practice of abortion.

Such was the case with our practice of slavery.

We seem to have forgotten just how fervently American slaveowners believed that it was critically essential to the well-being of their families, their way of life and their whole social order that their “right” to practice slavery be maintained.

Yet slavery was abolished in the Thirteenth Amendment.

We did learn to live without slavery.

Congress shall have power … 

Encouraged by this, we might look to Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment which provides:

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Under the Thirteenth Amendment, Congress is empowered to prohibit and punish forms of private conduct mistreating persons as chattels.

The Thirteenth Amendment is self-executing.

This means that even without further action by Congress, the Thirteenth Amendment directly restricts conduct by private individuals who would mistreat human beings as “property.” 

Logically, such private individuals must include not just slave holders but also pregnant women “choosing” to have their “property” forcibly removed by their abortion “providers.”

The Slave, as a Chattel, is fed or famished, covered or uncovered, sheltered or unsheltered, at the discretion or convenience of his Owner.  [William Goodall, The American slave code in theory and practice (1853)]

So too with a daughter or son today in the womb of her/his “owner.”

An “unwanted child” is treated as a chattel — personal “property” to be cherished or abused, protected or destroyed, as if the child is just another optional product subject to the owner’s will.

Duty of the Congress

Yet congressional assumption of responsibility for eliminating treatment of human beings as property is mandated in the Thirteenth Amendment.

Congress has the power and the implied duty to “enforce” this article by appropriate legislation.

Congress is to enact and enforce “appropriate” (i.e., just and adequate) legislation prohibiting private acts which mistreat a human being anywhere (including in her/his mother’s womb) as an animate item of property. Even the smallest human being is not permitted arbitrarily through the owner’s ‘choice’ to be destroyed by her abortion “provider.”

The Supreme Court has held that the Thirteenth Amendment enables Congress to remove “the badges and incidents” of slavery. In Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1968), Justice Potter Stewart, writing for the majority, found that

Congress has the power under the Thirteenth Amendment rationally to determine what are the badges and the incidents of slavery, and the authority to translate that determination into effective legislation.

Clearly, Congress has not just the authority but also the attendant duty to determine what constitute the badges and the incidents of slavery.

Congress has the duty to enact appropriate legislation to prohibit purposeful discrimination against vulnerable human beings entrapped in the power of others who “choose” to terminate the lives of their dependents rather than protect them.

‘Privacy’ rights — ‘a relic of slavery’?

So when “privacy” rights are awarded by a flawed Supreme Court decision to preclude from effective legislation discriminatory private acts by abortion providers that treat children in the womb as their mothers’ “property” to be destroyed at will, then is this not too a badge of slavery, an incidence of chattelhood? Is it not (to use in this ancillary context Justice Stewart’s term) “a relic of slavery”?

When the “private conduct” of pregnant women and their abortion “providers” herds unborn children in their millions into abortion clinics to be exterminated as part of the alleged “property rights” and “privacy rights” of their mothers, then isn’t this too a relic of slavery?

Relics of slavery are to be “abolished” not merely “regulated” by the states.

The Thirteenth Amendment instructs that slavery (essentially the right of property in a human being) shall not “exist in any part of the United States.”

The womb is a place

Anywhere and everywhere right across the United States, a child’s natural right to continue living and growing is to be protected. A child at home in her/his mother’s womb before birth has the same right not to be evicted as that same child at home in her/his mother’s house after birth.

The womb is a place. We may not practice lethal discrimination on innocent human beings on the grounds of where they temporarily must reside, through no fault of their own. A human being is entitled to full human rights — in jail in Iran, in a reeducation enclosure in Western China, in a sexual slavery brothel in North Africa, or in the womb of one’s mother

Place must not be used as grounds for discriminating between the rights of one human being and another.

A relic of slavery is not simply to be regulated by the States after the point of viability of the child in the womb on an “if we feel like it” basis. Maltreatment of “our Posterity” as property to be aborted at the discretion of their “owners” is to be abolished — absolutely.

We must learn to live without abortion

We must learn to live more carefully, more caringly — not just for “ourselves” but for “our Posterity.” The Constitution begins with the specific and purposeful dedication “to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

We must continue to expand and improve our pregnancy help programs so that no mother anywhere feels compelled to abort her little daughter or son.

We must also begin to bring serious change to the widespread immorality that has structured our lives towards making abortion so widespread. (Since Roe v. Wade (1973), over 63 million American children have been aborted.)

We must all, both men and women, discipline ourselves in our sexual enjoyment and practices, reserving them for faithful, genuinely loving and enduring marriages.

We must teach our children to live without abortion — to live chastely, to eschew pornography and sexual incontinence, to learn to love with tenderness and fidelity, and to generate deep love and respect for all God’s children.

"EARTH DAY" IS A FRAUD DAY! APRIL 22! ITS LENIN'S BIRTHDAY! SHARE THE FACTS WITH ALL YOUR LIBERAL ASSOCIATES AND OTHER USEFUL IDIOTS!

 HEY ALL YOU USEFUL POLITICALLY CORRECT LIBERAL MORONS WHO CHANT "HAPPY EARTH DAY" AND PARADE AROUND FEELING SELF RIGHTEOUS HERE ARE SOME FACTS FOR YOU!

 

THE FRAUD WHO WAS PART OF THE EARTH DAY BAND WAGON IS IRA EINHORN. READ UP.. AND BY THE WAY WHAT DAY IS EARTH DAY?? APRIL 22.   

April 22 is also Lenin's birthday --- coincidence?

READ ALL YOUR EARTH GURU!!! Lenin or Ira?? 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA !

If there was one certainty about Ira Einhorn, it’s that he loved the spotlight. The man once referred to in the press as a “burly philosopher” was active in the anti-war movement during the Vietnam years, ran for Mayor of Philadelphia in 1971, and took great pride in claiming that he was instrumental in launching the first Earth Day celebration in 1970.

 EARTH DAY MY ASS!

CLIMATE CHANGE LIARS.. 50 YEARS OF HOAXES. ARE SCIENTISTS REALLY STUPID OR JUST PAID LACKEYS?

Wrong Wrong and Wrong AGAIN

: 50 Years of Failed "Eco-pocalyptic" Predictions

 Read my blog about global Warming linked below! 

https://john-gaultier.blogspot.com/2019/10/climate-change-liars-50-years-of-hoaxes.html

 

 

NOW READ THE FACTS!

The year was 1970. That was a long time before the rise of conservative talk radio, Cable TV and Internet alternatives. The Big Three national TV networks of CBS, ABC & NBC absolutely dominated viewership; and newspapers such as The New York Slimes and The Washington Compost -- whose subversive propaganda was presented in a more subtle manner back then -- commanded the attention and respect of even many Republican Americans. Therefore, when it came time for the Globalists to "flood the zone" with wall-to-wall propaganda for this or that event of the day, few people were mentally equipped to counter it. For that reason, the big propaganda push for the first "Earth Day" went by with scarcely a word of criticism or analysis. After all, aren't we all in favor of clean air and water?

Doing the honors as National Master-of-Ceremonies for the Globalist Scam was none other than the closet lifelong One-Worlder dubbed "the most trusted man in America" -- the CBS Anchorman and Council on Foreign Relations member, Walter Cronkite. Here's a but a small whiff of the devious bullshit which the vile charlatan hurled at an unsuspecting public during his special broadcast:

"The gravity of the message of Earth Day came through -- Act or Die."

Walter Cronkite emceed the stupid hype of the original Earth Day, in 1970 with Ira Einhorn as the MC.

At that time, the "threat" to the "ecology" was vaguely defined as "pollution." Leftist students staged disruptive "die-ins" in makeshift coffins at some of the nation's airports; and predictably screamed "police brutality" when the Boys in Blue came to clear them out. Hippy scum and other assorted dupes marched peacefully in major cities like New York, Chicago & Los Angeles. But it wasn't until about 10 year later that the more specific climate bogeymen of "Acid Rain," "Ozone Depletion," and "Greenhouse Effect" were foisted upon the public --- with the "Greenhouse Effect," ™ later dubbed "Global Warming" ™ and later dubbed again as "Climate Change" ™ -- then becoming the dominant scare-hoax which endures to this day.

The "we must act" hype over the manufactured event was parlayed into the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, later that same year. Though President Richard Nixon was pressured into going along with the EPA's establishment and powerless to stop it (here), he later claimed that he never wanted the agency to become the tyrannical regulatory monster that it soon began to grow into. Then, as it is today, the regulatory and tax objectives of "Earth Day" remain the same:

* Grind down middle class living standards
* Control individual behavior and ultimately, movement
* Increase "revenue" for the state
* Empower the state to control private enterprise
* Transfer national sovereignty to globalist agencies

It's all about, and has always been about, The New World Order -- One World Government. But don't take the word of us "conspiracy theorists," ™ -- you can hear "the agenda" straight from the mouth of the aforementioned "most trusted man in America" himself. We'll show it to you after these images.

1. With Democrats in control of both the Congress and Senate; and big media unopposed -- the Republican Nixon was maneuvered into signing the EPA into law. // 2. The Greening of the Reds. // 3. April 22 is also Lenin's birthday --- coincidence?

 

 

 

The Earth Day Fraud  Became Known As ‘The Unicorn Killer’  A MURDERER!

But it was a grisly murder, not his activism or his intellect, that eventually made the man known as “The Unicorn Killer” a household name around the world. His bizarre story was one filled with enough twists and turns that made it feel like the work of a Hollywood screenwriter.

Ira Einhorn was born in Philadelphia in 1940 to a middle-class Jewish family and he later studied and taught at the University of Pennsylvania. Throughout the 1960s, Einhorn became a leading voice in the counterculture movement and has been referred to as “Philadelphia's answer to Abbie Hoffman and Allen Ginsberg.” The Village Voice called Einhorn "indisputably Philadelphia's head hippie," and the city’s “number one freak." He was charismatic and influential, with a wide range of friends and associates from all walks of life.

Einhorn was one of the founders of Earth Day. That narrative has been in the public consciousness for decades, due in part to a famous photo of Einhorn onstage at the podium at the first Earth Day event in Philadelphia on April 22, 1970.

Ira Einhorn at the April 1970 Earth Day celebration in Philadelphia [AP Photo/Temple University]

Because of his status in the local environmental community, he was allowed to take the stage, which turned into a 30-minute episode in which Einhorn got the useful idiot masses to cheer him on. .

Two of the original leaders of Earth Day in Philadelphia later wrote, “Much to our dismay, we now find that Einhorn … has been taking credit for initiating or organizing Earth Day. He is not telling the truth. Einhorn, given a small role on the stage at Earth Day, grabbed the microphone and refused to give up the podium for 30 minutes, thinking he would get some free television publicity. We just waited until he had completed his 'act' and then got on to the serious business at hand: the keynote speech of U.S. Sen. Edmund Muskie, author of the landmark Clean Air Act of 1970.

Earth Day was the brainchild of Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, a staunch environmentalist who hoped to provide unity to the grassroots environmental movement and increase ecological awareness.

Beyond the activism and the boisterous public persona, there was a darker side to Ira Einhorn. He was a womanizer whose domineering personality would sometimes erupt into violence. On at least two occasions prior to 1977, the hippie guru attacked women who rejected him. In one case he strangled a woman until she was unconscious. In another, he hit a woman over the head with a bottle. In his journal, Einhorn wrote, "Violence always marks the end of a relationship."

By 1977, Einhorn had been in a relationship with a 30-year-old woman from Texas named Holly Maddux for five years. By all accounts, Einhorn dominated Maddux and, eventually, the young woman had enough. Maddux worked up the courage to leave Einhorn, who was furious about her decision.

In September 1977, Einhorn lured Maddux back to his Philadelphia apartment by threatening to throw all of her belongings into the street if she did not come retrieve them. Maddux returned to the apartment, the two were seen at a movie the following night, and then Maddux vanished. Einhorn denied any involvement in Maddux’s disappearance, telling anyone who asked that the woman had gone to a nearby food co-op and never returned.

The Maddux family hired a private investigator to look into the matter. Over the next few months, Einhorn’s downstairs neighbor complained of terrible smells and dark liquid leaking into their apartment. Neighbors also remembered hearing screams and thumps around the time of Maddux’s disappearance.

Holly Maddux [Getty Images]

Einhorn, in the meantime, enjoyed a fellowship for a semester at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. Finally, armed with a search warrant based on the evidence provided by the investigator the Maddux family had hired, the police searched Einhorn’s apartment on March 29, 1979, and found Holly Maddux’s partially mummified body in a trunk in the bedroom closet.

Maddux’s skull had been fractured in at least six places by a blunt object. After 18 months, her decomposed corpse weighed only 37 pounds. The trunk had been packed with styrofoam, air fresheners, and newspapers. It was later revealed that after Maddux’s disappearance, Einhorn asked two teenage girls he had been seeing to help him dump a trunk into the Schuylkill River — the girls flatly refused.

Philadelphia police arrested Ira Einhorn and his bail was set at $40,000. At his bail hearing, respected community members took the stand in his defense, arguing that he wasn’t capable of committing such a ghastly crime. A wealthy socialite from Montreal paid Einhorn’s bail and a trial date was set for the spring of 1981.

In January 1981, Einhorn, fearing that his freedom was at stake, fled to Ireland and assumed a false name. There was a sighting of the fugitive in 1986 but for all intents and purposes, Ira Einhorn had disappeared somewhere in Europe. In 1993, Philadelphia’s District Attorney decided to try Einhorn for murder in absentia.

Einhorn’s attorney argued that Holly Maddux’s body had been planted in his client’s apartment. It took a jury only two hours to find Einhorn guilty, and the judge handed down a life sentence.

The years dragged on and it appeared, to the anguish of the Maddux family, that Einhorn would never be found and justice would never be served. But some investigators never gave up, including the Philadelphia District Attorney's fugitive-and-extradition chief, Richard DiBenedetto, who hunted Einhorn doggedly for 16 years.

DiBenedetto’s persistence paid off and, in June 1997, Einhorn was arrested in the countryside in southwest France, living in a farmhouse under the name of “Eugene Mallon” with a Swedish wife. His French neighbors believed he was a writer. The hunt for Ira Einhorn was over, but the extradition process back to the United States would prove to be long and arduous.

Although Einhorn had not been sentenced to death in absentia in 1993, his lawyers argued that he would face the death penalty if he were extradited to the United States. Legal proceedings dragged on for several years until Einhorn was finally sent back to the U.S. in July 2001. It was the first time in 20 years he had been on American soil. No longer able to hide under an assumed name while living a charmed life in the south of France, Einhorn now had to face the music.

The following video shows Einhorn after losing his extradition battle, ranting to journalists after attempting to dramatically slit his throat. Warning — his injury looks gruesome, although it was apparently not actually that serious, and he was able to walk himself to the ambulance.

Einhorn, now dubbed “The Unicorn Killer” (Einhorn means “unicorn” in German) by the press, stood trial in Philadelphia. He took the stand and claimed that the CIA had murdered Holly Maddux and planted her body in his apartment because he knew too much about about paranormal military research.

In October 2002, Ira Einhorn was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison without parole. The presiding judge called Einhorn ''an intellectual dilettante who preyed on the uninitiated, uninformed, unsuspecting, and inexperienced.''

Today, the 78-year-old man who charmed the counterculture and the mainstream alike and who managed to avoid authorities for 16 years sits in a prison cell in Pennsylvania, knowing he will never again be the toast of the town or the center of attention.

 

The Supreme Court Is Not The Final Say On The Constitution. We Must fight to make sure that the left does not use the Court to Make Laws.

ITS TIME PATRIOTS STOPPED THE IRRATIONAL 9 PERSON BODY FROM BECOMING THE FINAL ARBITERS OF THE CONSTITUTION 

By BENJAMIN R. DIERKER

Americans have been told a lie about the constitutional balance of power. Despite activist assertions to the contrary, the Supreme Court is not a supreme constitutional council with the sole and final say on legal matters. We have accepted a larger than life picture of the judiciary, and it is slowly destroying individual liberty and the constitutional order laid down by the founders.

The Constitution outlines the role of the courts, but for some time they have been operating beyond their proper function. We must change how we see them, understand their appropriate role, and stop allowing the growth of power. Each new interpretation of plain text that widens the judiciary’s authority is a dangerous violation of the separation of powers. If executive overreach concerns you, judicial overreach doubly should.

To correct a few common misconceptions, the judiciary’s rulings are not the supreme law of the land, even rulings from the Supreme Court. The judiciary is not the only or even final arbiter on the Constitution. And the judiciary is not a truly co-equal branch of government.

Court Opinions Are Not Supreme Law

Article VI of the Constitution describes what qualifies as the law of the land.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…

The only national laws are the Constitution, congressional law, and treaties. Conspicuously missing are Supreme Court decisions. While the court is known for deciding the constitutionality of laws, its decisions are not themselves laws. In the strictest sense, the opinions rendered by the Supreme Court are binding only on the parties before it.

The Supreme Court is just that, a court. It was established to adjudicate cases and controversies before it. Courts cannot make general pronouncements of law; they exist to settle disputes.

In fact, the Supreme Court is prohibited from issuing advisory opinions or ruling on laws that do not arise through litigation. Justices are not consultant scholars but arbiters in the limited setting of a legal case, not general legal or public policy matters. Courts issue their rulings in the form of judicial opinions, laying out the holding and the rationale.

Holdings are decision on legal issues, and the commentary around it is history, legal reasoning, or dicta. Sometimes dicta matters and sometimes it is pontification. That is, not all of an opinion is legally binding, and what is binding is a settlement of a particular, and often limited, legal issue.

Supreme Court opinions are commonly viewed as the law of the land because they often involve decisions on the constitutionality of government actions. We assume when the high court rules, it is articulating what the Constitution says. The Constitution is the supreme law, but it is also a plain text. That text is the law, the ruling is not. As Justice Story said of judicial opinions in Swift v. Tyson, “They are, at most, only evidence of what the laws are, and are not, of themselves, laws.”

Further, if the Supreme Court rules one way, it is likely to rule that way again, so continuing to push a law or policy that contradicted a previous decision may be futile. The precedent the court sets effectively prevents the same issue from arising, because lower courts will rule in accordance with that precedent.

Still, what the Court produces is not law, but a determination on how it interpreted an existing law for the purpose of settling a specific case or controversy. When the same issues and facts arise, they can be settled based on that precedent. These rulings are legitimate and important, but are not the final word on policy matters for the whole country.

Supreme Court Not Final Arbiter

For all its power and influence, the Supreme Court is still just a court. It cannot decide which laws to rule on, because it can only make decisions about the case before it. It cannot revisit old cases unless new parties bring a similar issue before it. It cannot make unsolicited rulings nor advise on constitutionality to the President or Congress. Despite our modern picture, the court sits in judgment of cases. It is not a philosophical reservoir of wisdom.

It is not even the exclusive entity with the power to interpret the Constitution. Madison wrote in Federalist 49, “The several departments being perfectly co-ordinate by the terms of their common commission, none of them, it is evident, can pretend to an exclusive or superior right of settling the boundaries between their respective powers.” Thomas Jefferson further noted in a letter to William Jarvis, “to consider judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions…would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

It is clear from the Constitution itself and the founders’ writing that each branch can and must interpret the Constitution and its own powers. Jefferson also explained why the courts deal in constitutional interpretation the most, writing: “judges certainly have more frequent occasion to act on constitutional questions, because…the great mass of the system of law, constitute their particular department.” It happens to be their work, but that does not grant them exclusive or ultimate power over it.

When legislating, Congress debates whether prospective legislation is constitutional, and the president makes a similar determination about whether to sign or veto. In unilateral action, the president interprets his authority and the constitutional framework. Article II Section I requires the president to swear an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” How else can he do this without interpreting it? Indeed, his loyalty is to the Constitution itself, not necessarily the opinions of the Court or certain laws of Congress.

Because each branch relies on the others to carry out their directives, the judiciary cannot enforce its rulings. That is up to the executive. When the judiciary rules, the president may have a different view and theoretically choose not to legitimize quasi-legislative action by not enforcing the court’s decision. The prudence of this depends on the circumstances, and while institutional legitimacy is best served by following court orders, objectively illegitimate ruling may demand rejection. Consider Dred Scott or Plessy v. Ferguson.

The Supreme Court Is Not Co-Equal

The three branches of government are often described as co-equal, each with powers that check and balance perfectly. They are equal in constitutional legitimacy, but not in power. The American judiciary was initially conceived to be the least powerful. The Constitution even describes it last and shortest among branches.

The courts are not intended to legislate, execute, craft, or decide policy.

The courts are not intended to legislate, execute, craft, or decide policy. They are meant to provide citizens an avenue for recourse to reconcile wrongs for which they have causes of action. Explaining the role of the judiciary, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78 that the judiciary would possess “neither force nor will, but merely judgment.” He goes on to say, “It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power…”

The judiciary holds one small but distinct power. If the Framers were not so keen on separation of powers, the judicial power may have been included with the legislature or executive. Rather than this, they placed the small power in its own branch, not to empower judges over legislators or citizens, but to prevent abuse of justice by the other branches. It is independent because the small authority is important, not because the duty requires or instills great power.

When written and ratified, the Constitution only called for a judiciary made up of one supreme court, on which only one chief justice was required. It was not conceived as a large or powerful branch of government, but an institutional check on the others compactly maintaining the judicial power of the United States.

Of course the judiciary is larger today, and its growth has mostly been legitimate by deliberate congressional action. But the minimal scale and scope of the constitutionally mandated judiciary shows it was never conceived of as a body laying down the law of the land on policy position and impacting the entire country.

Growth through acquiesce should be viewed with great skepticism as a violation of separation of powers. And certainly growth through packing the Supreme Court with additional justices should be abhorrent to liberty-loving Americans.

The Courts Should Be Respected, Not Praised

It is past time to clarify what the American judiciary is and how it was intended to operate. The courts are legitimate and necessary, but are not meant to create or shape policy. They were designed to settle disputes, and that means ruling for the parties before them.

Rulings from the Supreme Court should not affect the whole country–and certainly not rulings from district courts.

The national obsession with the Supreme Court, and accompanying acceptance of its power grab, is anti-republican. If we continue down this road, our politics will grow uglier as fights to replace justices become further embittered, and our law will be held captive by an oligarchy.

We have grown to view the court as a body of philosopher kings rather than civil servants who settle specific arguments. Rulings from the Supreme Court should not affect the whole country–and certainly not rulings from district courts.

You don’t go to the courts to solve general matters; for that, you go to the legislature. You go to the court to resolve particular disputes. For the health of the nation and the rule of law, it is critical that we stop using courts as weapons to shape law and view them as avenues of recourse to resolve limited cases and controversies.

_________________________________________________

ONLY PATRIOTS CAN CHANGE THE TRAJECTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT. 

REVOLUTION AND AMEND THE CONSTITION TO LIMIT THE POWER OF THE SHITHOLE THAT IS WASHINGTON DC

YOU SHOULD BE WORRIED: This is China's blueprint for global dominance. They will kick America's Ass with the aid of the domestic enemies of the Republic embedded in our Government, Media and businesses!

By the time China's ambitions of displacing the U.S. as the dominant global power were widely understood, Beijing's success had already begun to feel inevitable. Stupid Joe Biden and the Leftist Democrat Party that props him up will be happy to be #2 in the world behind China and get the "Kick Backs" from their China Masters and live a comfy life style while destroying the fabric of our "Constitutional Republic". If they have the money they don't really care what happens to America.

Remember there are a few things they have to do before they can implement this plan.

1. Take away our ability to fight back ( Take away our Guns)

2. Take away our ability to communicate. ( Censor Social Media and Control the News!)

3. Make it too expensive and complicated to travel. ( Expensive Gasoline, Mask Mandates, Vaccination Passports)

 

Make no mistake they are well on their way while we are sleeping!

 

China is the #2 Nation in the World. The leadership of China want their nation to become # 1 Nation in the World. In 1990 they developed a 50 Year Plan to become the number 1 Nation. They have worked toward this end for 27 years. They have progressed economically by adopting capitalism to their economic system. 

Politically they have remained wedded to their Communist roots. They have a system that has adopted the four class system as a part of their political model. This of course means that they do not adhere to the classical Communist model that believed that Communism would develop into a one class workers state, But they still adhere to the oligarchical model of rule which precludes any true democracy. 

They take on and defeat Russia on the modern battlefield with Tactical Nuclear Battlefield Weapons. They take over all of Russia from the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. They did this for the natural resources of that area and to populate the area with millions of their own population. Their have increased the size of China by doubling its area under their direct control. 

They did this primarily to show the United States that they are not afraid of Nuclear Weapons and also to show that they will resort to War when necessary in their Quest to #`1 status in the World. They want to eventually rule the Pacific Ocean and be the arbiter of all trade within that areas. It is a direct challenge to the United States. They hope to achieve they ends through trade on the new 'Silk Road' they are building from China thru Pakistan to Iran to Moscow to Germany to the Netherlands and then through France to Venice on the Adriatic Sea. 

 They will then take over the Mediterranean Sea to the Suez canal and the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean. They will form bases on Sri Lanka and other areas to block India from trade routes necessary for their prosperity. They want to isolate India and hinder their progress into the foreseeable future. 

They believe they can supplant the United States as the richest nation and the #1 Nation of the World. This the first 27 years of the 50 Year Plan. The future favors those who plan for their success.

Why it matters: The Chinese Communist Party has exploited America's desire to "sleep through difficulties," writes Jonathan Ward in the new book, "China's Vision of Victory." He contends that the outcome of the battle for global supremacy remains to be determined, but that the U.S. must quickly and dramatically change course in order to prevail.

• The longstanding U.S. strategy of engaging economically while hedging against China's rise militarily was a mistake of historic proportions, essentially "putting wind at the back" of a burgeoning rival, Ward told me in an interview.
• In his book, Ward traces China's vision of global preeminence back decades. He says President Xi Jinping merely "took the mask off" in recent years.
• Ward, whose research included poring over since-closed Communist Party archives, adds that "the greatest thing China’s given us is a very clear image of what they’re going to do.”

The big picture: “The objective is dominance in global affairs on a longer-term time frame," Ward told me. "So, ideologically the idea is to restore their position — restore because they say they used to be the world’s supreme power and now they’re going to return to that — by the year 2049, which is the centennial of the founding of the People’s Republic of China."

• To that end, China is endeavoring to "produce national champions in every sector" and dominate emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and 5G networks.
• The Belt and Road network of ports, roads and railways, meanwhile, is intended to impose the "coercive force of the Chinese economy... to build strategic beachheads" around the world. "In the 19th century we'd understand that as empire building," Ward says.
• Ward says China's government is mobilizing its economy, its military and its citizens toward the mission of "national rejuvenation." He describes it as "the most comprehensive effort assembled in human history towards a very singular goal.”

The bottom line: “Essentially it's full steam ahead on pretty much every human activity, from space to seabed, with the objective of becoming the world’s leader in all of these things. And with that, you build a foundation of power that is absolutely beyond what can be achieved by any other nation."

• “I think it’s easy to understand their strategy. What’s hard is that it’s a good strategy.”

But, but, but: Ward emphasizes in his book that the U.S. "retains enormous advantages in terms of economic and military power, a global alliance system, and leadership in the innumerable institutions built under the Pax Americana."

• He says the consensus that China will replace the U.S. as the world's largest economy is premised on the continuation of the status quo. Ward argues that "we have to start thinking the unthinkable" now, in terms of unwinding economic ties to China and shifting supply chains to politically friendly countries.
• “These are tough things but this is where great minds should be applied," Ward told me. "How do we retain these economic advantages, the technological advantages, the military advantages. Let’s face it, we’re the ones who’ve already won. We’re just giving it away."
• Ward argues that the contests that will define China's success or failure are underway now, and will be decided over the next ten years.

Zoom out: “A contest between the United States and China will be a close-run thing," Ward writes. "However, a contest between China and the democratic world will be impossible for China.”

• “In many ways Chinese global strategy is actually focused on Europe," he told me. China knew the U.S. would eventually wake up to its "problem in the Pacific," but "Europe is a world away from the security questions in Asia.”
• “If you’re going to have problems with the U.S., where do you go next? To Europe. That’s where they can harvest technology, it’s where they can harvest education, it’s where they can build their technological advantages. You have to do that by engaging with somebody who’s higher up the value chain, so if they’re going to see that erode in the United States they have to double down on it in Europe."
• "That’s the Chinese approach. And they have to convince the Europeans they’re benign. ... What you have to think about in Europe is, what would it mean for your superpower partner to be defeated by authoritarian China?"

Ward says the solution is "the democratic world consolidating, integrating, pushing back, cutting China off from the things that will enable the continued rise toward their vision of power."

What to watch: "What will it mean for the prevailing norms in international relations to be decided by an authoritarian state where freedoms of speech, press, and assembly are extinguished for its citizens and those under its power?” Ward writes that if we lose the next decade, we'll soon find out.

• I asked him where the U.S. will find the political will needed to truly embrace this challenge. He said to watch out for "Sputnik moments."
•  
•  
•  
• WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!

Here’s how China became the world’s No. 2 economy and how it plans on being No. 1

FUTURE SHOCK 

China to be world’s top superpower in just 10 YEARS as it overtakes America’s military and economic might, experts warn

CHINA will blast the United States off the top spot to become the world's top economic and military power within the next decade, experts have said.

As the ruling Communist Party marked the 100th birthday this week, President Xi Jinping, 68, said foreign forces attempting to bully China will "get their heads bashed" as he threw down a gauntlet to the West.

9

China celebrated the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party on ThursdayCredit: EPA

9

President Xi Jinping warned that foreign forces attempting to bully the nation will 'get their heads bashed'Credit: Alamy

And the giant nation is on course to overtake the United States and become the biggest economic powerhouse, Professor Kerry Brown, of the Lau China Institute at King's College London, told The Sun Online.

"Economically, barring total disaster for China, it will be the largest economy some time in the next decade," Professor Brown told The Sun.

"It will be a superpower with Chinese characteristics, meaning it will want a major space for its own ambitions, but it won't want to take on leadership of the rest of the world.

"Relations look set to be pretty frosty for the future. It does not desire to become the West, or have the West become like it."

It comes as China has boasted its success in tackling Covid - despite Western doubts over its claims amid allegations of a cover up - while the US has struggled with the world's worst outbreak.

With a fierce speech in Tiananmen Square on Thursday, President Xi said the people of China would never allow any foreign force to "bully, oppress, or subjugate" them.

And meanwhile, his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin also taunted the US this week and said the US's dominance as the world's number one superpower is "over".

"Anyone who dares try to do that will have their heads bashed bloody against the Great Wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people," he said, sparking applause from an audience of 70,000 gathered in the massive square in central Beijing.

Xi said the nation "must accelerate the modernisation of national defense and the armed forces" in order to "safeguard its sovereignty, security and development, elevating them to world-class standards".

But China's rapid military modernisation has fuelled growing concern among its Asian neighbours and in the West.

[China will] get the upper hand, both economically and militarily, on bilateral terms

Professor Ashok Swain

The People's Liberation Army now has the world's second-largest annual budget after the US armed forces and has been adding sophisticated new aircraft, showcased in a flyover at the start of the centenary ceremony featuring a squadron of China's J-20 stealth fighters.

The country is enmeshed in a deepening rivalry with the United States for global power status and has seen recent clashes with India along their disputed border.

And China's ambitions show no sign of dampening.

Ashok Swain, professor of peace and conflict research at Sweden's Uppsala University, believes China will "get the upper hand, both economically and militarily, on bilateral terms" in the next decade.

9

Chinese citizens celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Communist PartyCredit: Reuters

9

The distinctive red hammer and sickle flags are waved for the Communist PartyCredit: Getty

9

The Communist Party have total control of ChinaCredit: Reuters

"The US is spending on its military at least three times more than China, but China is spending more and more every year to modernise its military and develop new weapons," the 56-year-old told The Sun.

"China, under Xi Jinping, has become very different from what it was expected to be ten years ago when the Chinese Communist Party was celebrating its 90th anniversary.

"There is no hope anymore of regular transition of power or some openness in the political system.

"Xi now has total control of the country, party, and military."

Robert Sutter of George Washington University's Elliot School of International Affairs warned that Xi is "setting up China for a protracted struggle with the US".

"In foreign affairs it involves growth of wealth and power, with China unencumbered as it pursues its very self-centered policy goals at the expense of others and of the prevailing world order," Sutter said.

New data has revealed how the Communist Party ranks swelled by 2.43 million in 2020 - the largest annual gain since Xi became president in 2013 - to 95.15 million members now.

9

Chinese soldiers sit at attentions during the celebrations in Tiananmen SquareCredit: Alamy

Xi has eliminated limits on his time in office and he is expected to begin a third five-year term as party leader next year.

But his dangerous concentration of power and his silencing of opposition forces could lead to problems, Professor Shaun Breslin from Warwick University warned.

"One of the potential dangers of becoming too good at silencing opposition and critical voices is that you can lose sight of how much opposition and criticism there really is," the professor of politics and international studies told The Sun Online.

"What I think is clear is that the longer he rules, and the more he concentrates power on himself, then the harder its going to be to have an orderly and stable succession to the next leader - whenever that comes."  

Professor Brown said Xi's position appears to be secure for now - but warns he could face "massive challenges" in the future.

9

China has the world's largest population - with 1.4billionCredit: Reuters

"Based on the evidence of the last decade since he came to power in 2012, he looks secure and dominant," he said.

"It doesn't seem like he is going any place soon. But he is in his seventies from this year, and can't carry on forever." 

He added: "The party's younger leaders are different - their outlook marked by a strong sense of confidence, but also an awareness that the party needs to deliver material goods to Chinese people, and have answers to the country's vast environmental and inequality issues. 

"These are the key themes that will decide whether Xi and the Party are secure. if they run out of answers to these issues, like everyone else, they will be facing massive challenges.

"The youth of China have huge burdens. The population is ageing fast. This generation will need to be the ones that face that issue."

9

Military jets fly over the central business district in Beijing to mark the centenaryCredit: Getty

Elsewhere, China has established a solid foothold in Africa, pumping billions of pounds into infrastructure projects and bolstering its influence under its massive Belt and Road Initiative.

"In most parts of Sub-Saharan, China has already displaced the US and has become the primary influencer," Professor Swain said.

He added: "China is fast becoming a major power player in the Middle East. The US troops' withdrawal from Afghanistan allows China to influence Afghanistan policy in the years to come.

"Even in Israel, China’s influence has expanded rapidly.

"In the coming years, the potential flashpoints will be Iran and Ethiopia. China is already openly engaged in recruiting these two countries as allies while the US is doing everything to retain its influences."  

But Professor Breslin pointed to growing concerns over "debt dependence" and the possibility of developing countries becoming trapped in a difficult relationship with China.

9

Experts say Xi's position in power appears to be secure for nowCredit: Alamy

And China's relationship will Russia could be problematic, Professor Breslin said.

"Its partnership with Russia suffers from several contradictions, and their competition for influence in Central Asia can be pretty problematic for their relations soon," he said.

Thursday's centenary celebrations began with a flyby of fighter jets and helicopters observed by the nation's leaders, seated at the southern ramparts of the Forbidden City.

A 3,000-strong chorus sang seven socialist songs during the event.

The party's official narrative glosses over past mistakes or current controversies, emphasising development, stability and efficiency - including boasting its apparent controlling Covid at home, despite doubts from the West.

•  
•