The left is very close to having a governing majority due entirely to immigration. Despite the promise of the Trump campaign, there isn’t much standing in their way. Now, they’re just running out the clock. Soon, we will have admitted so many immigrants that it will be too late to do anything.
Although liberals pretend to have no idea where conservatives got the idea that immigration was designed to change the country and bring in new voters, they weren’t always so modest.
In a 1998 article for Cornell University’s Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Democratic political consultant Patrick Reddy exulted that the 1965 immigration act was “the Kennedy family’s greatest gift to the Democratic Party.” Changing the country’s demographics through immigration would be “George McGovern’s revenge,” liberal political strategist Ruy Teixeira announced 16 years ago — and then celebrated as a fait accompli upon Obama’s election in 2008.
The very reason the left loathes Trump is that he promised to stop their hostile takeover of our country. But instead of sticking it to his enemies by blocking their depraved agenda, he has fallen into their trap.
Obsessed with the Robert Mueller investigation, the president spends his days tweeting attacks on his attorney general, Jeff Sessions — the one member of Trump’s Cabinet making good on his campaign’s immigration promises.
It’s a win-win for the left. Either they drive Trump from office with an unending harassment campaign disguised as a legitimate investigation, or they keep him too distracted to thwart their plans to flood the country with foreigners.
The Swamp has succeeded beyond its wildest dreams. Trump seems to have completely forgotten about the one policy the left fears most.
Evidently, the media have decided Trump is no longer a threat to their inevitable conquest. The Washington Post cheerfully touts the “growing diversity” — i.e., non-whiteness — of Democrats’ nominees. (“Black and Latino Democratic nominees boost their ranks by merging insider organization and outside money,” Aug. 29.)
The New York Times is already doing a victory dance on the corpse of historical America. Recently, the newspaper hired a white male-hating bigot, Sarah Jeong, for its editorial board. In the past week alone, the Times has run articles with these headlines: “Who’s Afraid of a White Minority?” and “The Religion of Whiteness Becomes a Suicide Cult.”
The gleeful destruction of our country may be less annoying than the insults to our intelligence necessary to pull it off.
To keep the mass migration flowing, we get lies, half-truths, insults and cliches. The citizenship of anchor babies is a lie (see “Adios, America”); the humanitarian need of so-called “refugees” is a lie (see “Adios, America”); the lower crime rate and welfare consumption of immigrants is a lie (see “Adios, America”); the Trump administration’s policy of “separating children” from their parents at the border is a lie.
About 80 percent of the “children” are teenaged boys, many of them MS-13 gang members. Recently a child rapist tried to enter the country, claiming the rapee was his daughter. Don’t separate children from their rapists!
The left doesn’t care about child rape or human trafficking. They just want an end to America and its infernal white people.
“Children” captured at the border have to be released from custody after 20 days, pursuant to an ACLU-forged court order. Twenty days was the number the ACLU settled on after determining that it would be impossible to process the illegal border-crossers’ asylum claims within that time frame, so the kids and their alleged “parents” would have to be released into the country.
I could process the claims in 10 minutes. Anyone who shows up on our border after “fleeing” El Salvador, Guatemala or Honduras isn’t fleeing anything. There are about 20 countries closer to their homes than the United States — and they speak the same language.
Among the countries closer to them than the U.S. is Mexico.
You’d think that, just as a PR matter, Mexico would say, We’re currently involved in this PR thing with the U.S., so let’s be REALLY nice to any illegals coming into our country. … He beats you? Oh, that’s awful — of course, you can stay here!
But no. Mexico says, Screw off, illegals. We’ll help you get to the U.S., but that’s the end of our beneficence.
The whole border surge is a hoax, intended to overwhelm the system and get Democrats their last needed non-American voters.
When they’re busted on their lies, liberals turn to cliches. “Diversity is a strength!” After four decades of mass immigration from the Third World, I think we’re all set on diversity. Any more diversity would be like bringing snow to Eskimos. We’re drowning in diversity.
Even if diversity were ever desirable — as opposed to what it is, which is “undesirable” — surely it’s not the most important value to a country. At best, diversity is a luxury, adding “vibrancy,” as The New York Times is constantly telling us.
It’s like having a rule that men need to set aside a certain amount of money each week to wear carnations in their lapels. Carnations are nice, but when you’re unemployed and the carnations are wormy, would you make that Priority No. 1?
Similarly, “diversity” is a luxury we can’t afford in a time of massive income inequality, stagnating wages and a raging heroin epidemic — with 90 percent of the heroin coming from Mexico.
When the cliches fall flat, they just say, So you’re with Hitler!
You’re Hitler if you support Teddy Kennedy’s original claims about his 1965 immigration bill. At the time, he and his co-conspirators swore up and down that it would not alter the country’s ethnic composition one iota. Now, it’s “white supremacist” to say: “We liked our country the way it was.”
Has anyone ever criticized a black, brown, beige, yellow, red or green nation for wanting to preserve its ethnicity? No, only a white majority is pure evil that must be extirpated.
When facing your new overlords, remember: When there was 10 seconds left on the clock, we decided to get rid of Jeff Sessions for keeping Trump’s promises on immigration, rather than using his office to protect the president from a Russian investigation so stupid that no one outside of the Swamp cares about it.
Character assassination, false testimony, performance protests aimed at securing retweets instead of reconciliation, and more have all been trained on the Alabama senator.
As Sessions mentioned in his testimony, the offense was reported by local black complainants whose absentee ballots were being intercepted and voted without their consent.
To understand the obscene dishonesty used to reframe this matter against Sessions, we must sample the misleading statements that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and its allies have used to retell the story.
Last week, former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick penned a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, doubting Sessions’ ability to fairly protect the rights of minorities given his previous decision to prosecute the absentee ballot harvesters. Patrick portrayed the ballot harvesting as a benign tool to enfranchise the historically disenfranchised. A reasonable person who hears that claim repeatedly might fall for it. But there is a larger problem: It is simply untrue.
Contrary to what the NAACP and its friends may say, the right to vote exists with the individual, not the political machine that forces “assistance” on voters without their input. Arguing that the decision to prosecute voter fraud is itself a disqualifying offense when seeking the job of attorney general demonstrates just how perverse the modern left has become with respect to the rule of law. The left’s highlighting of this one case demonstrates that the institutional left is afraid. It is afraid it may soon lose enormous power because the Sessions Department of Justice will no longer participate in its radical racialist agenda.
For years going back before the Obama era, the Justice Department has served as a reliable signal caller to increasingly leftward actors that utilize racialized interpretations of law—particularly election policy—to ensure future political victories for Democrats.
As I wrote in my book, “Injustice,” the Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder wasted no time in performing a course change that ignored the enforcement of federal requirements for maintaining voter rolls. It also later zeroed in on state voter ID laws with such zealotry that it started losing cases—such as in South Carolina. The Justice Department used the trappings of civil rights enforcement to advance the cause of the Democratic Party. Indeed, some academics writing about the Voting Rights Act have explicitly called for such partisan enforcement at Department of Justice. Michigan law professor Ellen Katz, for example, made this view plain in a law review article titled “Democrats at DOJ: Why Partisan Use of the Voting Rights Act Might Not Be So Bad After All.”
The mess that Sessions must clean up doesn’t end with naked partisanship in civil rights enforcement. It also reaches a racialist interpretation of civil rights, which protects some and neglects to protect others.
A Department of Justice inspector general report released in 2013 noted that there was open hostility among staff toward pursuing voting rights cases against black voters, especially where whites were harmed. (I pursued such cases in Noxubee County, Mississippi.) The inspector general investigation also revealed that management-level officers “did not believe the Voting Section should pursue cases on behalf of white victims.” We now see this attitude manifest in the inaction against the violent, racially motivated attacks against Donald Trump voters, despite civil rights laws clearly being implicated.
This is the Justice Department that Sessions will inherit. But unlike his predecessors, the Alabaman’s record directly contrasts with much of the established culture there.
Nonprofit allies have grown comfortable knowing there are colleagues in the Justice Department who are happy to race-test a case before pursuing a civil rights violation. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund and others can count on a friendly brief flown in from Washington, D.C., when targeting an election integrity reform in a politically valuable state. They can even benefit from the department’s voice in telling a court to exclude parties dedicated to voter ID laws from joining the table of interveners in a case.
The financial incentive of certain organizations to maintain a Sessions-free status quo is also an important consideration. The groups allied with President Barack Obama’s Justice Department are more than email lists and press releases—these are giant edifices working to undermine the electoral system, which have become increasingly beholden to the largest progressive financiers.
The combined payroll of just a handful of leading organizations’ chief officers—to include the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Council of La Raza, and the National Action Network—is measured in the many millions, not thousands.
The professional struggle for racialized enforcement of voting rights has become an incredible vehicle for wealth creation inside the civil rights industry. Civil rights—genuine equality before law—has taken the back seat to power and wealth.
Attorneys general come and go. Every career Department of Justice veteran knows that. But what the establishment left knows even better is that a sea change in law enforcement priorities—like what Sessions promises—can be devastating to grand political designs and personal bank accounts alike. With that in mind, it’s no wonder that a former governor and assistant attorney general for civil rights like Patrick would hint that Sessions’ decision to prosecute a voter fraud case in the 1980s was a discriminatory act of voter intimidation.
If such a political act moves the needle slightly closer to a “no” vote, it will have been a necessary endeavor for the establishment left. But it will be just one more of its shameful acts.