Thursday PM ~ TheFrontPageCover

TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Who Decides What the 
14th Amendment Means?
vqV0GV_jkhmDqmYO8RkGw5QKw4qZ-rwQCO0AClhp_CSfHwdhAl9_WU5TqDTmpO-wohasiKQkLEU8sFCuSbfmE7M9E7tdLc_rQqrYdSuNcFN6RNA-9MUJYY8Dypifri2opdHX2_8f1dAb1ZzUqS-v6Audtvlpdix9ESgkl_Q=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by Nate Jackson and Mark Alexander  
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Progress Down a Slope
5jcGYknmGcF2dfE17mnqjhBX8AC_4p9x0y1RS5coMBK8drkcu7zSClcMIlEZhHM89sIYtIk9X3HYbiB09bq7A4c6602Vx33N4m6a8hz9MebNmh4hvTE=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=300by Anthony J. DeBlasi
{americanthinker.com} ~ For the undecided or confused, the young, or anyone with scant knowledge of the past, it is important, I think, before voting... to see an A:B comparison between America before and after it changed during the past century. The following "thumbnail review" includes firsthand experience. Before the social revolution of the 1960s, it was typical and normal for men to respect women. It was typical and normal not "to go all the way" until marriage. It was typical and normal for married couples to stick together "for worse," too. It was typical and normal for children to grow up in two-parent families with a tradition of honesty and morality, fathers providing support, mothers providing childcare and guidance. Deliberate abortion, recognized as an act of killing innocent human life, was illegal. Killing for thrill, kids gunning one another down or murdering their parents, was unheard of. The list is long of the things that changed after the "liberation politics" of the second half of the 20th century. Whatever the reader's take on the "sea change" in America, it is hard to argue that the "liberation politics" of Progressives and "liberals" – AKA the left – has nothing to do with the current mindless violence, vulgarity, and discord in American society. The difference between before and after is great, by any measure. Yet our "liberal" leaders continue to insist that we must never go back to the "oppressive" 1940s and 1950s, adding the digressive cliché that "you can't turn back the clock," while ignoring the evidence that Americans were freer and better off then than they are today...
.
The New Jihad: More Threatening Than Ever
U171mZna9M47Z-PCm6iDOZ9oTg8DZWvqtU_o97Q-QZiHzqQVDP_Oip3hg3jglcGE9exUAxO2ZXOQ72sI-WCjLkdDSA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450by Guy Millière
{gatestoneinstitute.org} ~ When the Barcelona terror attack took place August 17, 2017, as horrible as it was 13 deaths, 130 injured, the jihadists did not consider it a success... They had a more lethal project. They wanted to drive vans packed with explosives into the of the Sagrada Familia basilica and two other tourist areas of the city. That, however, was the last major jihadist attack in a Western country. The Manchester attack had taken place two month earlier, on May 22, 2017; the attack in Nice, France, had taken place on July 14, 2016; and the in Orlando attack, in Florida, on June 12, 2016. The destruction of the Islamic State under President Donald J. Trump has not only deprived jihadists of what had become a rear base and training camp; it also deprived them of the idea that they could quickly defeat the West. Soon, awareness of the danger embodied by radical Islam faded in the United States and was largely erased in Europe. Knife attacks and the slaughter of passers-by in France or Britain were not treated by the mainstream media as more important than road accidents. Jihadist murderers were usually immediately defined by the authorities as mentally disturbed. In Europe, the names of the murderers were often hidden to avoid possibly firing up anti-Muslim "prejudices". What happens in other parts of the world rarely makes headlines and is usually treated as a local problem of no global importance. Stabbing Israelis and launching rockets and incendiary kites and balloons from Gaza into Israel are looked on as strictly part of "the Middle East conflict." Attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt are defined as an Egyptian problem. More than 1,800 Christians massacred in Nigeria are barely mentioned in the news. The death sentence for blasphemy in countries such as Pakistan are not mentioned at all...
.
Trump Cabinet Member Referred For Investigation
JmwCqZwjmzLSYcxzgzIz41xaKZJlOu0oSBv0WQScPkBjQtwrnCHd8Bn0JDcayyd1Sgca2NnutycJkG5spBv5zXT5Rn0_Iglcrtsm5L4PUiBvWv0mvAUhib8GUUgrrJtoZ-6hNwcIdeWMEwUP7ZUk4p93mTANEKiWlCWFay6A8miMu8l6kgLjdpVbu8mzVE7ZZTdwnf-iPTbXPT8LSw5STTcANJsguX71IAhiojhF=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by Tim Pearce
{dailycaller.com} ~ The Department of the Interior Inspector General (IG) has referred an ongoing probe of Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke to the Justice Department... for a potential criminal investigation, The Washington Post reports. The IG investigated Zinke for a 2008 land deal in Montana and for denying two tribes’ petition to build and operate a casino in Connecticut. It’s unclear which investigation was referred to the DOJ. The DOJ is looking into whether Zinke “used his office to help himself,” a senior White House official told WaPo. In 2008, a nonprofit Zinke started received a land donation from BNSF Railway in Zinke’s hometown of Whitefish, Montana. Zinke pledged to turn the land into a “children’s sledding park and community open space in a setting that recognizes the contributions of the railroad and the veterans to the community,” Zinke told Politico in a statement...  https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/30/zinke-justice-department-probe/
.
Registering to Vote Isn't Voter Suppression
xJsvcMoyXtUMEYEQDvn9ohuKGLd-aneeydjz03rTQ3PGJanQogHsEBg5YcGr8A1GBNZjC4STrekCB0CS462faRtsLvVCIYGF5tvOb7vNvkHX-sQvNemofQU=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by HANS A. VON SPAKOVSKY & ASHLEY VAUGHAN
{nationalreview.com} ~ As Election Day rapidly approaches, the radical Left is making yet another absurd claim... that requiring voter registration is a “voter suppression” tool. Registration is essential to assure the integrity of elections. It allows election officials to verify the eligibility and identity of voters. It also enables them to make sure they will have enough ballots in polling places that use paper ballots — and that’s the majority of jurisdictions across the U.S.  The Washington Times recently reported that the Texas dummycrats-Democratic party “asked non-citizens to register to vote, sending out applications to immigrants with the box on citizenship already checked ‘Yes.’” And Texas is not the only state where the accuracy and integrity of the voter-registration process is imperiled. To improve the accuracy of the state’s records, Georgia legislators last year passed a law requiring voter-registration-application information to match a “driver’s license, state ID card or Social Security record.” Inconsistencies can cause a voter’s registration to be flagged as “pending” while the discrepancy is investigated. Stacey Abrams, the dummycrats-Democratic candidate for governor, accuses the Republican candidate and current secretary of state, Brian Kemp, of “voter suppression” simply for complying with this law. But here’s the rub: A “pending” status does not bar anyone from voting. All they need do is “show a government photo ID that substantially matches the registration application.” Even if the voter’s information can’t be verified on the spot, the voter can cast a provisional ballot that will be counted once the registration information is verified by local election officials...
.
K-12: Walk Away
by Bruce Deitrick Price

{americanthinker.com} ~ When Brandon Straka founded the WalkAway movement in May, hardly anyone imagined that several hundred thousand longtime dummycrats-Democrats could turn against the party of their family and friends... Although it's a big, difficult decision, many Walkaways made videos aggressively explaining their decisions. They often conclude: "I'll never vote dummycrats-Democrat the rest of my life."  What made these people walk away with such passion? Certainly, Trump's success and charisma explain a lot. The "lying media" are also a major factor.  One woman attended a crowded Trump rally. When she reached home a half-hour later, CNN was showing a half-empty stadium where she had been standing. She knew that the place had been jammed. At that moment, she walked away from CNN. Perhaps the most important factor is that leaders on the left, for many decades, became increasingly socialist/communist in their perspectives. The rank and file are more sophisticated now and realize that their party bosses walked away from them long ago. So here's the picture that Straka has brought into focus. Namely, lots of people are mad as hell and determined not to take it anymore. We need this exact same spirit in K-12. You're mad as hell and refuse to continue the same destructive relationship. You know what the schools are doing to children: keeping them ignorant and illiterate. You hate this. You don't want it being done in your name. Or with your taxes...  https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/k12_walk_away.html
.
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
. 
Who Decides What the 14th Amendment Means?
vqV0GV_jkhmDqmYO8RkGw5QKw4qZ-rwQCO0AClhp_CSfHwdhAl9_WU5TqDTmpO-wohasiKQkLEU8sFCuSbfmE7M9E7tdLc_rQqrYdSuNcFN6RNA-9MUJYY8Dypifri2opdHX2_8f1dAb1ZzUqS-v6Audtvlpdix9ESgkl_Q=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by Nate Jackson and Mark Alexander:  If you want to understand what the Constitution means, read The Federalist Papers. In those essays, the Constitution’s primary author, James Madison, as well as leading defenders Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, explain what the Founders meant in the legal document that established our government. Likewise, if you want to understand what the 14th Amendment means, revisit the words of its authors. Specifically, let’s look at the clause “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which is being debated after President Donald Trump’s proposal to eliminate by executive order birthright citizenship for babies born to illegal aliens in America.

Michigan Sen. Jacob Howard, who sponsored Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (the Citizenship Clause), noted in 1866 that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was “simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already.” He stated further, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, [or] who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers [emphasis added].”
               In 1873, the Supreme Court concluded (albeit in nonbinding comments indirectly related to the case) that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was meant to exclude the children of “ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign states born within the United States [emphasis added].”
               However, in 1898’s Wong Kim Ark decision, the Court ruled that a man born in the U.S. to Chinese-immigrant parents was a citizen, as were “all children here born of resident aliens.” That still doesn’t settle the question of illegal aliens.
               Essentially, what this debate is about is what all contemporary constitutional debates are about — whether the Constitution is to be understood as our Founders and subsequent authors of amendments intended it to be understood (Rule of Law), or, as dummycrats-Democrats insist, however the political majority du jour wants to interpret it to comport with its contemporary political agenda (rule of men). As Thomas Jefferson warned, the latter means one thing: “The Constitution … is a mere thing of wax in the hands of [those who will] twist and shape into any form they please.”
               Unfortunately, not a few Republicans and other conservatives insist that Trump’s interpretation is unconstitutional, but we believe this is because they  fundamentally misread the 14th Amendment and its authors. To be sure, whether Trump has the authority to, by executive order, undo decades of precedent is another matter — one he intends for the courts to help decide.
               Undoing this unconstitutional damage will require all three branches, however. It is necessary for Congress to pass a law reestablishing the originalist interpretation of the 14th Amendment, because the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) of 1952 also establishes in U.S. Code what “jurisdiction” means, and, arguably, that includes children born to illegals — at least by the interpretation of the State Department. Sen. Lindsey Graham, who recently found his spine in the Brett Kavanaugh debacle, has introduced a bill to set the record straight.
               Even Harry dinky-Reid was right about this in 1993.  Bottom line: The 14th Amendment was proposed and ratified because of concern that a future Congress might alter the 1866 Civil Rights Act granting citizenship to slaves. Ironically, the argument for birthright citizenship for children born to illegals grossly alters the meaning of the 14th Amendment — and it’s a case study of how dummycrats-Democrats erode the plain language of our Constitution.

~The Patriot Post  

https://patriotpost.us/articles/59198?mailing_id=3829&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3829&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center