Category: Population Transformation

DEMOCRAT CRIME SYNDICATES

Democrat crime syndicates prevail at the national, state, and local levels where the Democrat Party controls government. Discussion of and support for this statement requires the definition of crime, criminal, illegal, syndicate, and alien from the Merrium-Webster on-line dictionary. Crime is defined as “an illegal act for which someone can be punished by the government; criminal activity; a grave offense… against morality; [or] something reprehensible, foolish, or disgraceful.” The adjective criminal is defined as “relating to, involving, or being a crime; relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime; [or] guilty of crime.” As a noun criminal is defined as “one who has committed a crime; [or] a person who has been convicted of a crime.” As an adjective, Illegal is defined as “not according to or authorized by law.” The relevant meanings of syndicate are defined as “a group of persons or concerns who combine to carry out a particular transaction or project; [and] a loose association of racketeers in control of organized crime….” The relevant meaning of alien as an adjective is, “relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government;” and as a noun, “a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized and is still a subject or citizen of a foreign country.” In my opinion, these five words aptly describe the actions of Democrat Party controlled national, state, and local governments.

In addition to defining several of the terms used in this discussion, a couple sections of U.S. Code regarding immigration will help clarify this discussion. U.S. Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter I, Section 1101, (a) (3) – Definitions; states, “The term ‘alien’ means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.” Section 1101 (a) (13) states, “The terms “admission” and “admitted” mean, with respect to an alien, the lawful entry of the alien into the United States after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer.” The term “illegal” does not appear as a term defined in this section of the U.S. Code. U.S. Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII, Section 1325, (a) – Improper entry by alien; states.

“IMPROPER TIME OR PLACE; AVOIDANCE OF EXAMINATION OR INSPECTION; MISREPRESENTATION AND CONCEALMENT OF FACTS. Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall… be fined… or imprisoned….”

For “We the People,” this statute fails to describe the real legal nature of the statute’s meaning concerning violations of the statue.

When an “improper” act exposes the violator to fines and or imprisonment, the violator has committed an illegal act not an “improper” act. Merrium-Webster’s on-line dictionary for the definition of “improper” requires at least two steps to get to a word that describes any relationship to an act subject to fines and imprisonment, an illegal act. The steps are “improper,” the link to “incorrect,” and the link to “wrong.” Wrong is defined in part as, “an injurious, unfair, or unjust act; action or conduct inflicting harm without due provocation or just cause; and a violation or invasion of the legal rights of another [in this case the United States].” In addition, the word illegal does not yet appear as a synonym for any of these words. In contrast, the Merrium-Webster on-line dictionary defines the noun “illegal” as “not according to or authorized by law; [and] a person who enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry.” It is obvious, in my opinion, that the statute should start with “ILLEGAL TIME OR PLACE…” not “IMPROPER TIME OR PLACE….” In this regard, the statue deliberately avoided the term “illegal” because the progressive authors of the statute did not want “improper” aliens to have their first act when entering the United States to be defined as an illegal act. However, entries into the United Stares described in this statue are illegal acts by any definition that “We the People” would use to describe any other act punishable by fines and or imprisonment. People who enter the United States in violation of this statute are “illegal aliens” where “We the People” are concerned.

Where border security and immigration are concerned, Democrat Party controlled national, state, and local governments act as Democrat crime syndicates, in my opinion. When sanctuary laws or rules are established by state and local governments and the national government recognizes the sanctuary status of these governments, all three levels of government combine to act as Democrat crime syndicates. They are “a group of persons or concerns who combine to carry out a particular transaction or project [illegal immigration]; [and] a loose association of racketeers [government entities] in control of [the] organized crime [of illegal immigration]….” The combination of sanctuary government entities and the “open border” policies of the current Democrat Presidential administration enhances the idea that Democrat crime syndicates control border policy and immigration in our nation.

This invasion of illegal aliens is part of a long-term population transformation designed to change the demographics of our nation and increase the political power and influence of the Democrat Party. The most recent data shows that foreign-born workers are getting most of the jobs while native-born American employment is declining. Unfortunately, the Bureau of Labor Statistics does not distinguish between legal and illegal foreign-born workers but admits their data likely includes illegal immigrants. The chart below shows that the number of foreign-born members of the work force has increased at a greater rate than native born workers under the Biden Administration. This is highly correlated to the acceleration in illegal immigration. Since the current administration allow illegal aliens to be counted in the census, illegals increase the population count which increases representation in the U.S. House of Representatives and Electors in the Electoral college during Presidential elections increasing Democrat Party power over time.

Immigrants are more likely to be in the workforce than native-born citizens.

Unfortunately, the open border and invasion of illegal aliens also allows for the potential of criminal, terrorist, a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) operatives to enter our nation. Bethany Blankley’s on-line article, “Illegal border crossers total over 10 million since Biden inauguration,” demonstrates the magnitude of illegal alien border crossings during the Biden administration as follows:

“The number of people illegally entering the country surged after Biden and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas halted many preexisting border security policies, advanced sweeping parole and other policies to release the greatest number of illegal foreign nationals into the country, encouraged people from all over the world to use a phone app to enter the U.S., and facilitated U.S. entry application processes in foreign countries, among others.

Official U.S. Customs and Border Protection data includes 3,201,144 apprehensions in fiscal 2023; 2,766,582 in fiscal 2022; 1,956,519 in fiscal 2021; and 471,954 in the nine months Biden was in office in fiscal 2020. Combined, official apprehensions total 8,396,199.

They exclude gotaway data… obtained from a Border Patrol agent who provides it and other information on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation….

In fiscal 2021, there were at least 308,655 known, reported gotaways; in fiscal 2022, 606,150 were reported. According to preliminary data obtained by The Center Square, Border Patrol agents reported at least 769,174 gotaways at the southwest border alone….

However, even those are considered a best estimate because they exclude unknown and unreported gotaways…. Law enforcement officials have said they have no idea how many gotaways there are in the U.S., or who or where they are….

Since January 2021, total illegal border crossers apprehended nationwide were 8,396,198. Combined with at least 1,678,979 gotaways, the number increases to over 10 million (at least 10,075,177)….

Among them are 1,586 known, suspected terrorists (KSTs) who were apprehended in fiscal years 2020-2023….

They also apprehended the greatest number of criminal noncitizens in U.S. history, totaling nearly 50,000. This number excludes the tens of thousands of criminal noncitizens arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials and an unknown number arrested by local and state law enforcement officers.”

According to the above data, 0.6% of the illegal aliens apprehended by Border Patrol were known terrorists or criminals which means that at least 10,200 known “gotaways” were probably terrorists or criminals. However, the “gotaways” who got away did not want to be caught because they were probably terrorists or criminals. Thus, it is not unreasonable to conclude that most, not 0.6% but conservatively 50% or 850,000 of the “gotaways” were terrorists or criminals. Consequently, the Biden administration “[combined] to carry out a particular transaction or project [illegal immigration]… [with] a loose association of… organized [criminals]….” making this administration one of many Democrat crime syndicates operating in the United States today.

This activity indirectly supports and finances Mexican cartel activities in both the United States and Mexico. In Mexico, cartels control the flow of illegal aliens to our southern border, manufacture of illegal drugs including fentanyl, movement of these drugs throughout Mexico and the United States, human trafficking, prostitution, and other cartel activities in both nations. In addition, the illegal activities of Chinese Triad criminal organization’s human trafficking, prostitution, and illegal marijuana operation labor supplies and distribution of the illegal marijuana are facilitated by our open borders and failure to enforce immigration laws. During the Biden Administration, over 20,000 Chinese illegal aliens, mostly military aged men, have crossed our Southern border. These Chinese men were allowed to leave China with the approval, and probably support, of the CCP. Consequently, the collusion between Democrat Party led national, state, and local governments regarding the invasion of the United States by illegal aliens, including Mexican cartel, Central and South American gangs, Chinese Triad gang members, illegal drug and marijuana manufacture and sales, and human trafficking fits the definition of Democrat crime syndicates.

Where the Democrat Party controls state and local governments, prosecutors, and the judiciary, Democrat crime syndicates are generally the rule. In states or localities, like California, that allow ballot initiatives to institute changes to the law both the government and the voters collude to form Democrat crime syndicates. In these jurisdictions, governors, legislatures, mayors, county and city commissions, etc., reduce many “non-violent” felonies to misdemeanors, reduce or eliminate bail requirements for many crimes, including some violent assaults, drastically increase the value of theft crimes qualifying as felonies, and eliminate mandatory minimum sentencing and fines for many categories of crime.   In addition, many Democrat prosecutors refuse to prosecute cases allowing perpetrators to go free and uncharged. Actions of this nature result in crime statistics that show reductions in criminal activity.

“We the People” generally consider “squatters” as criminals. Unfortunately, most Democrat Party controlled jurisdictions consider “squatters” as violators of civil rather than criminal law. Consequently, “squatters” are categorized as renters not trespassers and given the same rights as actual tenants. Owners must pursue eviction in civil courts which can take months or years, and hundreds to thousands of dollars in legal fees, to remove the “squatters” from their property. Unfortunately, “squatters” often have no regard for the place where they “squat” causing hundreds even thousands of dollars in damage to the property. Often, “squatters” turn the property into illegal drug distribution centers, human trafficking distribution centers, or houses of prostitution. On the other hand, if the will of most of “We the People” in the United States was reflected in new landlord tenant laws, “squatters” would be treated as the criminal trespassers that they are, removed expeditiously as criminals, and fined or imprisoned appropriately. Therefore, such local and state governments controlled by the Democrat Party “[combine] to carry out a particular transaction or project [“squatter’s” rights]… [with] a loose association of… organized [criminal “squatters”]” making these jurisdictions Democrat crime syndicates.

Join the fray. All of the America ‘s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

IMMIGRATION: PLANNED POPULATION TRANSFORMATION

 

Many considered the 1965 Immigration Act to be an extension of the Civil Rights and Voter Rights legislation of the Johnson Administration granting immigration civil rights to the world by eliminating regional quotas, a major population transformation. Although some Republicans supported the 1965 Immigration Act in its initial form, the Democrat Party promoted the bill in the legislature giving assurances that the bill would not adversely influence our nation, economy, and culture. As this discussion will show, that claim was utterly false; and the Democrat Party knew it. When he signed the bill into law, President Lyndon Johnson said, “This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives.” Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-MA.) reassured his colleagues and the nation with the following:

“First, our cities will not be flooded with immigrants. Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset. [The bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia. In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”

Senator Hiram Fong (R-HI) testified that Our cultural pattern will never be changed as far as America is concerned.” In an October 4, 1965 article on the immigration bill, The Washington Post author wrote,

“The most important change [is that] preference categories give first consideration to relatives of American citizens instead of to specially skilled persons. This insured that the new immigration pattern would not stray radically from the old one.”

Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), testified as follows: “The preferences established by this proposal are not entirely dissimilar from those which underlie the national origins quotas of existing law.” With hindsight as twenty-twenty, it seems fair to ask whether the supporters of the 1965 Immigration Act were actually honest about their claims that the new immigration policy would not alter the culture and ethnic composition of our nation or result in a population transformation.

Some opponents and legislators asked critical questions painting a less rosy picture of the potential outcome. William Miller of New York wrote:

‘The number of immigrants next year will increase threefold and in subsequent years will increase even more.’ He asked, ‘Shall we, instead, look at this situation realistically and begin solving our own unemployment problems before we start tackling the world’s?'”

Myra C. Hacker, Vice President of the New Jersey Coalition, testified in the Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing:

“We should remember that [the bill will] lower our wage and living standards [and] disrupt our cultural patterns. Whatever may be our benevolent intent toward many people, [the bill] fails to give due consideration to the economic needs, the cultural traditions, and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States.”

A shadow of people and an american flag

In his 1982 book America in Search of Itself, Theodore White contradicted President Johnson’s signing-day assurance that it was not a revolutionary bill, writing that the bill was revolutionary and probably the most thoughtless of the many acts of the Great Society. In reality, critics were correct and the assurances that the Act would not upset the ethnic mix of our society, a major population transformation, were not justified as noted by the data on the changes in foreign-born population associated with the Act.

The 1965 Immigration Act ushered in a new era of mass immigration in which the country origins of immigrants changed radically. The European economy stabilized resulting in fewer European immigrants. Mass entry of people from Asia and Latin America and emphasis on family reunification ensured that these groups could bring in their relatives, freezing out potential immigrants from Europe and from other developing nations because of limits on total immigration numbers. Unfortunately, twice as many immigrants as native-born Americans did not have high school diplomas in the mid-1990’s. This population transformation contributed to downward wage pressure and a growing pool of blue-collar workers competing for a shrinking number of well-paying jobs. This issue is compounded by increasing levels of illegal immigrants who also compete for these jobs.

Data from the US Census Bureau showing the region of birth of the foreign-born population of the United States is informative regarding the cultural population transformation of the United States. From 1850-1960, Europeans and Canadians averaged approximately 95% of the foreign-born population. Southern and Eastern Europeans were greatly underrepresented in the US foreign-born population prior to 1960. In 1960, Europeans and Canadians comprised 75% which was a reduction of more than 15% of the foreign-born population compared to the previous 90 years. In 1970 this group comprised 61.7%; 1980, 39.0%; and in 1990 Europeans and Canadians comprised 26.9% of the US foreign-born population which was less than one third of the 1960 level and slightly more than one fourth of the 1850-1960 level. In contrast, Hispanics comprised an average of only 2.8% of the foreign-born population from 1850-1960. In 1960, the composition was 9.4%; in 1970, 19.4%; 1980, 33.1%; and 1990, 44.3% nearly 16 times the 1850-1960 average of the US foreign-born population. Asians comprised an average of only 1.7% of the US foreign-born population from 1850-1960. In 1960, the composition was 5.1%; 1970, 8.9%: 1980, 19.3%; and 1990, 26.3% which was more than 15 times the 1850-1960 average of the foreign-born population. In 1990, people from Africa and Oceania composed less than 2.5% of the US foreign-born population. By 2050, the racial and ethnic composition of the US population is expected to be 47% White, 29% Hispanic, 14% Black, and 9% Asian. According to this projection, the composition of whites will decline; the composition blacks will be stable; and the composition of Hispanics and Asians will increase. Although conservative pundits and other intellectuals agree, progressives always start immigration discussions with the phrase, We are a nation of immigrants, or We are all descendants of immigrants. What they fail to say is that, prior to the 1965 Immigration Act, we were a nation of European and Canadian immigrants; and after 1965, we became and nation of Asian and Hispanic immigrants.

In 2000, sociologist Christopher Jencks predicted that the US population will grow to 500 million by 2050 if our immigration policies do not change. After evaluating congressional politics, Jencks concluded that congress did not want to appear to be racist and their leaders would not direct change. Consequently, Jerry Kammer, in his 2015 concluding remarks, included a dire analysis of our national future by Theodore White concerning of the potential impact of the 1965 Immigration Act and its population transformation,

‘Only one other great republic has ever experienced such a change in the texture of its people ” the Roman Republic.’ He then observed that ‘Rome could not pass on the heritage of its past to the people of its future’ and ultimately unraveled so badly that it ‘could no longer govern itself. ‘

Kammer also included this contrarian and optimistic quote from a 1965 Immigration Act, 50th anniversary book, A Nation of Nations (2015) by Tom Gjelten, which disregards the lesson of Roman Empire history,

While immigration ‘may swamp us, it may, if we seize the opportunity, mean the impregnation of our national life with a new brilliancy. It is only in the half century after 1965, with a population connected to every corner of the globe, that the country has finally begun to demonstrate the exceptionalism it has long claimed for itself.’

One Amazon reviewer of A Nation of Nations wrote,

“While Gjelten doesn’t make statements about assimilation with current tides of immigrant groups, he suggest[s] that these groups who differ more widely culturally than past [European immigrants] will ultimately accept the national ethos and fit in well.”

Apparently, like most US progressives, Gjelten and the reviewer believes that we can do things better than the Romans, the Soviet Communists, the Maoists, and the Cuban Communists, and achieve an internal globalist culture of new brilliancy and exceptionalism in the United States.

Without the benefit of actually reading his book, it appears that Gjelten does not believe that our Constitution and Bill of Rights are exceptional guidelines for governance or that turning the tide of victory in both World War I and World War II were exceptional events in world history. It does not appear that he considered our Industrial Revolution, railroads, interstate highway system, technical revolution, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter to be brilliant contributions making the United States the greatest economic power in history. As a true progressive globalist, Gjelten apparently believes that until the United States looks like the rest of the world, a population transformation, we cannot be either brilliant or exceptional. None of the reviews or excerpts answer the question posed by White, [With] such a change in the texture of [our] people, will the United States of America be able to govern itself? The cultural and racial diversity created by the 1965 Immigration Act has not resulted in a political and social environment of greater stability. Our educational, cultural, and political elites discourage acceptance of our national ethos, our Judeo-Christian heritage, Constitutional capitalism, and individual freedom. The progressive elites consider and communicate that this national ethos is offensive to the rest of the world, especially the regions of origin for most of today’s immigrants.  Under these circumstances, how can we expect these immigrants to fit in well? Under the current circumstances in which we are losing our national ethos, my fear is that the admonition of John Jay portends a dire outcome for the United States of America, Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance this great experiment will then be surely doomed. This component of the fundamental transformation of the United States of America could help ensure that our nation will wither away. Phrased alternatively, our Founder’s nation will cease to exist.

Border security is a critical component of immigration policy. Secure borders ensure that nations have control over immigration into each country. Without secure borders and immigration policies that immediately detain or expel illegal immigrants, all immigration has the potential of becoming legal immigration which is the goal for progressive open border advocates. In this situation, citizenship and related voting rights would be meaningless; the wealthy and unscrupulous could import voters to gain control of any jurisdiction; or politicians could promise immigrants free benefits for their votes. Criminals, revolutionaries, insurgents, and freeloaders as well as unskilled and skilled workers, artisans, entrepreneurs, technicians, and highly educated professionals could flow in and out of countries. With this level of population transformation, all pretexts of economic, political, legal system, and numerical population stability and predictability would be eliminated. Determination of population-based representation in our republic, as in the US House of Representatives, would not be fair with the fluid population possible without immigration control and border security.  This would be a fundamental transformation of the United States of America; and our Founder’s nation could wither away.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.