Posted by Jimmy Minnish on March 14, 2019 under Links | Be the First to Comment

Image may contain: text that says 'Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Never gotten over the fact that Obama was able to send $1 7. Billion Dollars in CASH to Iran and nobody in Congress, the FBI or Justice called for an investigation!'

Despotic Democracy: For the People Act of 2019

Posted by Jimmy Minnish on March 10, 2019 under Links | Be the First to Comment

Despotism exhibited by Congress is a sign that America has already entered into a despotic tyranny that will end in the destruction of the Constitution along with our rights, liberty, freedom; that is unless we throw the Democrat socialists out

By Charles Wills —— Bio and ArchivesMarch 10, 2019

Cover Story | 1 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us13

Last Friday, the Democrat controlled house passed the partisan “For the People Act.”  Although the bill isn’t over 10,000 pages long, like the Affordable Care Act, it’s still equivalent to reading a large novel, and once again Congress had to pass it to find out what’s in it. Unlike novels, the plot isn’t obvious to the reader, and the bill is too long, complicated and disjointed to read and understand without doing exhaustive research. It’s filled with ambiguous language and complicated rules and regulations, as well as references to other rules and regulations..

Each section of the bill has to be singled out and read along with the other laws, rules and regulations that it references. It’s like reading a bill within a bill, within a bill and on and on. Among many “other things” in the bill, Section 1012 (Automatic registration of eligible individuals) requires states to gather the names of residents from all state, local and federal agencies and automatically register them to vote in federal elections – that is unless they formally decline. Section 1012 states: “If an individual does not decline registration, the individual will be registered to vote automatically.”

Obviously, the bill was designed to force voter registration, without making it obvious, in order to gather a database of individuals who normally do not vote or are otherwise ineligible; no doubt to provide Democrats with enough identities to swamp elections with phony absentee ballots, harvested ballots and ineligible votes. By reading the bill, one can only conclude that it’s all about having enough illegal aliens, morons, non voters, and dead people to provide enough phony ballots to keep them in power.

Moreover, according to Commoncause (, the Democrats first item of business after taking back congress is “a robust democracy reform package” that aims to give everyday people a bigger voice in politics. And John Sarbanes Democracy Reform Task Force site states, the people elected “a historic Democratic House majority driven by candidates who promised to repair our broken democracy.” How can democracy be broken in a Constitutional Republic? Notice that they always refer to America as our Democracy.

The truth of the matter is that Democrats and their accomplices are attempting to totally transform the government of the United States into something it was never meant to be – a socialist totalitarian democracy. However, historical records prove beyond any doubt that the United States was established as a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. In fact, our founders made it clear in our founding documents that America was founded as a Constitutional Republic, and they also made it clear in their speeches and correspondence that they opposed democracy as a form of government.

For example, in 1787, Thomas Jefferson stated: “We are now forming a republican government. Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments.” Furthermore, Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, declares: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” Their intent couldn’t have been any clearer.

In addition, not one of our founders ever referred to the United States as a democracy. They made it clear that democracy is detrimental to individual rights, liberty and freedom. We wouldn’t know that today if we listen to politicians and media talking heads who throw the phrase “our democracy” in our faces everyday. By doing this, they are misleading people into believing that America is a Democracy. If it is, that’s because politicians have undermined and circumvented the Constitution and expanded government beyond it’s constitutional limits.

Perhaps Democrat socialist believe the people will not notice the final transformation if they are convinced that America is already a democracy. It’s called conditioning people to accept what they wouldn’t normally accept. On top of that, many people are confused by the definitions of democracy and republic because they sound similar. MacMillan’s Modern Dictionary defines democracy as: “government by the people, or one in which supreme power is retained by them through representatives.” MacMillan’s defines a Republic as: “a commonwealth; government in which the supreme authority is vested in the people and the administration in officers elected by and representing the people.”

Right away, we can see that in a democracy supreme power is retained by the people through representatives. In other words, supreme power is actually in the hands of representatives who make, rewrite or eliminate laws according to the will of the supposed majority. That’s why it’s called mob rule. A democracy gives representatives the power to eliminate rights and laws according to the will of the majority, whether it is the will of the majority or not.

However, in a Constitutional Republic like the United States, supreme authority is vested in the people and “administered” by elected representatives, according to the rule of law that’s laid out in the Constitution. In a nutshell, supreme authority is granted to the people by the Constitution, and the authority to administer the law comes from the same Constitution that lays out the law. That is to say that, in a constitutional republic, the power of the majority and their representatives is limited by the Constitution – the rule of law.

On the other hand, there is no limit to power in a democratic (mob rule) form of government. Individual freedom and rights can be taken away by the supposed majority. But in the Constitutional Republic of the United States, those rights are god given and inalienable. Our rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, and that’s what democracy aims to destroy—the Constitution and our rights along with it. One only has to read what our founders said about democracy to understand the true nature of democracies.

Speaking at the ratification of the Constitution in New York, in 1788, Alexander Hamilton said, “It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.”

In addition, James Madison stated: “Democracies have been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death.” The expansion of government, and the oppression of people is the hallmark of democracies. If history is any indication, the things we can be assured that democracy will bring are tyranny, oppression, despotism and eventually a violent end.

Finally, in the words of the Greek philosopher Aristotle, “Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotism.” The despotism exhibited by Congress is a sign that America has already entered into a despotic tyranny that will end in the destruction of the Constitution along with our rights, liberty and freedom; that is unless we throw the Democrat socialists out on their ears and restore the Republic. The signs are clear, and we have been warned.



Posted by Jimmy Minnish on under Links | Be the First to Comment

8:37 PM 03/09/2019 | POLITICSKevin Daley | Supreme Court Reporter 2521

  • President Donald Trump has tapped seven of Justice Clarence Thomas’s former clerks for appeals court nominations since taking office.
  • An eighth former Thomas clerk, Neomi Rao, will likely be confirmed in the near future. 
  • The justice actively mentors his closely knit network of acolytes. 

One credential in particular has been a boon to candidates President Donald Trump considers for judicial appointments: a clerkship with Justice Clarence Thomas.

As of this writing, the president has appointed seven Thomas clerks to the federal appeals courts, while an eighth is expected in the near future. As such, Thomas’s legal approach — sometimes branded unusual or idiosyncratic — can claim adherents among a new generation of judges.

“At this point, Justice Thomas is clearly the leading intellectual force on the conservative side of the bench,” said Carrie Severino, a former Thomas clerk who leads the Judicial Crisis Network, an advocacy group that supports Trump’s efforts to recast the judicial branch.

“His principled approach to the law is very much in the ascendency and those are the kind of judges that this president has pledged for the courts,” Severino added.

Thomas generally hires law clerks who share his originalist judicial philosophy. Among the Supreme Court’s conservatives, he is somewhat unique in that respect: former Justice Antonin Scalia periodically hired liberal “counter clerks” to sharpen his work, while the hiring practices of other conservatives like Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh appears slightly more varied.

“I’m not going to hire clerks who have profound disagreements with me,” Thomas said during a 1999 lecture at the National Center for Policy Analysis. “Someone said that it’s like trying to train a pig. It wastes your time, and it aggravates the pig.”

As such, the Thomas chambers are an incubator for elite conservative legal talent, producing a pool of candidates for executive and judicial appointments in Republican administrations.

The Thomas clerk who most recently took the bench is Judge Allison Rushing, who was confirmed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed her nomination.

The six other Thomas clerks confirmed to the federal appeals courts under Trump include Judge Allison Eid, who took Justice Neil Gorsuch’s seat on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Jim Ho for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge David Stras for the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Eric Miller for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Greg Maggs for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and Judge Greg Katsas for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Thomas, who has served on the court for over 25 years and will turn 71 in June, may well be succeeded by one of his own clerks. Eid and Stras are on the president’s list of possible nominees for the Supreme Court. Judge Margaret Ryan of the Armed Forces appeals court, a Thomas clerk whom former President George W. Bush appointed, is also listed.

Neomi Rao, who clerked for Thomas in the 2001 term, is currently awaiting confirmation to the D.C. Circuit. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell teed up a cloture vote on her nomination Thursday, meaning a final confirmation vote will likely come next week. (RELATED: Masterpiece Cakeshop And Colorado Call Truce In Harassment, Discrimination Dispute)

Social conservatives met Rao’s nomination with skepticism, prompting several Republican lawmakers to consult privately with Thomas, though the substance of those discussions has not been made public.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg leave the White House following a ceremony where Neil Gorsuch was administered the judicial oath on April 10, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Justices Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg leave the White House following a ceremony where Neil Gorsuch was administered the judicial oath on April 10, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Thomas’s own thinking has already appeared in the written work of his proteges. Ho’s first opinion on the 5th Circuit was a dissent from the court’s refusal to review a decision upholding a $350 limit on campaign donations for Austin City Council races in Texas. Ho opened with a reference to a Thomas opinion that accused the courts of elevating certain constitutional protections over others. Additional Thomas citations recur throughout the opinion.

Severino said Thomas actively embraces his mentorship role, regularly holding court with former clerks and dispensing advice on professional matters. Among the other justices, reunions with clerks are common but generally infrequent. For example, retired Justice Anthony Kennedy convened clerk reunions once every few years.

“Justice Thomas is an exceptional mentor,” Severino told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “He is someone that doesn’t just view his clerks as a great source of bright young labor for a year, but really as almost members of his family. He takes on a role in helping them and advising them on their careers.”

Perhaps most importantly, the justice also encourages his alumni to assist one another as a mutually supportive network. Recalling his own bitter confirmation, he hopes his acolytes will never want for allies.

“He encourages his clerks to get out of Dodge as fast as they can,” Severino told TheDCNF. “But for those of us who stay [in Washington], he wants to make sure that there’s always someone who will have your back in what can be a very dog-eat-dog town.”