Kamala Harris Is The Real Threat To Our Constitutional Republic: More Censorship, Amnesty & Bidenomics

lll

ick Cheney went from despised war criminal to the Left’s new bestie on Friday when the former Vice President announced he was voting for Kamala Harris. Cheney justified his decision by claiming “in our nation’s 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump.”

Cheney’s rhetoric ignores reality — both what Trump actually did when he was president and what the Harris-Walz ticket proposes to do. And it is the Democrat ticket’s policies that represent the actual threat to our constitutional republic. Here are three clear examples:

✪ Free Speech

Freedom of speech is so fundamental to our constitutional republic that the founding generation prohibited government infringement on that right in the First Amendment. However, since Donald Trump’s surprise victory in 2016 launched the censorship-industrial complex, the government has been moving aggressively to silence speech. And the consequences of government censorship can be devastating, as Americans learned in the context of Covid, when our government hid or minimized the dangers of vaccines, and deprived citizens of a fulsome debate over mandatory masking and school closures.

Donald Trump has promised to end the Federal Government’s efforts to censor speech, pledging last week to “sign an executive order banning any federal department or agency from colluding with any organization, business or person to censor, limit, categorize or impede the lawful speech of American citizens.” Trump further committed to “banning federal money from being used to label domestic speech as mis- or disinformation” and to firing federal bureaucrats responsible for domestic censorship activities. 

▶️ 23 Seconds

Conversely, “Harris’ track record shows she’s the enemy of our most fundamental liberty: free speech.” As Betsy McCaughey, the former lieutenant governor of New York, detailed in a recent article for the New York Post, “Harris chose as her deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty, formerly the White House director of digital strategy — the person who called the shots about what got censored under President Biden.” 

During her failed primary run in 2019, then-Sen. Harris also pressured Jack Dorsey, the then-CEO of Twitter, to deplatform Donald Trump. The California senator justified her call for a ban by claiming Trump “used his platform, being the president of the United States in a way that has been about inciting fear and potentially inciting harm against a witness to what might be a crime against our country and our democracy.”

With Twitter now X and owned by Elon Musk, a President Harris may not succeed in silencing her political opponents at that outlet — at least not directly. But Democrats are already positing solutions to the problem of Musk. For instance, Robert Reich, who served as the labor secretary under Bill Clinton, proposed the Federal Trade Commission sue Musk if the owner of X refuses to “take down lies that are likely to endanger individuals …”

And if Harris wins the White House, she’ll control the Federal Trade Commission and the priorities of that and the dozens of other federal agencies, making the risk to free speech rights a clear and present danger

✪ The Supreme Court 

A Harris presidency also threatens the separation of powers established by our Constitution. In Article III of the Constitution, the Founders sought to guarantee an independent judiciary by providing for lifetime appointments. Harris has previously spoken favorably of her then-running mate Joe Biden’s proposed “reforms” to the Supreme Court, which include establishing term limits for the justices. 

Before taking over at the top of the ticket for Democrats, Harris also reportedly told the New York Times she was “absolutely open to” packing the high court. Such “court packing” would consist of Congress first increasing the number of justices on the Supreme Court and then a President Harris appointing several new justices. 

As the constitution does not set the number of justices at nine, Democrat control of both Congress and the Executive Branch would allow for the Supreme Court to be reconstituted with members whose politics Harris favors. A court-packing plan, however, would destroy the independence of the judiciary on which our constitutional order depends.

✪ The Border

Our constitutional order also depends on a secure border, for no country can survive if it cannot — or will not — repeal an invasion. Yet, the Biden-Harris Administration has shown it has no regard for the citizens of this country, putting the interests of foreign aliens illegally entering the United States above those of Americans. 

The massive influx of illegal aliens threatens our country in multiple ways, from the physical violence inflicted by criminals to potential threats from terrorists who enter through our porous border, to disease and overrun health care systems, to the financial devastation caused by the flood of migrants. And Harris promises more of the same, while Trump instead has committed to securing the border and deporting those here illegally.

For all their talk of Trump being a threat to democracy, Americans already experienced a Trump Administration, and not only did our country not crumble, it thrived. In contrast, the Biden-Harris Administration wrought skyrocketing inflation, a flood of illegal immigration, and a world at war. And when it comes to policies, it is those that Harris supports that promise to wreck our constitutional republic — not Donald Trump’s pledges to secure the border, stop the attack on free speech, and leave the courts alone.

✪✪✪✪✪

Kamala Harris’s 2024 campaign is also promising amnesty for millions of illegals, the inflow of more migrants, and more government power over Americans’ private and public economies.

Those promises also show how she and her White House allies use immigration to manipulate Americans’ wages, housing and economy for the benefit of her investor and progressive allies.

Late on September 7, her website was updated with her campaign promises, including a section on migration:

As President, she will bring back the February 2024 bipartisan border security bill and sign it into law. At the same time, she knows that our immigration system is broken and needs comprehensive reform that includes strong border security and an earned pathway to citizenship.

“Earned pathway to citizenship” is a euphemism for a mass amnesty of at least 15 million illegal foreign migrants, giving them the legal authority to compete for Americans’ jobs and to vote in Americans’ elections.

Donald Trump’s pick for Vice President, J.D. Vance, slammed the Harris platform of more amnesty and more migration:

What she won’t tell you is that the February bill also codifies catch-and-release, allows up to 1.8 million illegals to enter before the border could be closed, gives billions of taxpayer dollars to the same NGOs that are driving the invasion and expands the executive parole powers used by Biden [to import quasi-legal migrants] instead of limiting them. The bill’s author Sen. Murphy put it best when he admitted that, under his bill, “the border never closes.”

I think all of that is totally unacceptable when our nation is facing a historic border crisis, which is why I and my Republican colleagues opposed it.

If Harris was serious about raising border security, Vance added, “Kamala Harris should have instead pushed for a standalone vote on new border agents and scanners.”

Harris is also promising to hire a small number of extra guards for the border. However, these guards will have little impact because her immigration policy also promises to welcome many more migrants via legally contested loopholes in the border.

The February bill that she promises to sign “would merely codify the illegal actions that this administration — including herself — has already undertaken,” said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies. “Of course, she would sign that bill: Her colleagues in the administration wrote the thing.”

The giveaway bill would have allowed officials to provide fast-track citizenship at the border, grant work permits to millions of illegal migrants per year, and allow employers to fly in cheap foreign workers instead of hiring better-paid Americans. In effect, it would allow the second branch of government, the president’s Executives, to import as many foreign workers, renters, and consumers as it deemed best, with the advice of lobbyists, of course, and regardless of what Americans prefer.

Since 2021, Biden and his deputies have imported roughly 10 million legal and illegal migrants migrants. Those migrants have absorbed nearly all of the extra lower-wage jobs created by Biden’s deficit spending, which muffled wage-related inflation amid Congress’ deficit spending. That combination of deficit spending, more migration, and more low-wage jobs is the core of Bidenomics.

“These newly arrived immigrants are the main reason the U.S. economy has defied pessimistic forecasts, with 200,000 jobs added a month, real growth in gross domestic product at 3% in the past year, and an inflation rate that has fallen dramatically in the past few years,” a former Obama economic advisor — Jason Furman — wrote in the Wall Street Journal in June 2024.

But the Bidenomics’ combination of migration and government spending has also boosted the deficit, spiked the cost of housing, flatlined wages, and depressed per-person productivity,  The Bidenomics drop in wealth-generating productivity has even been recognized by Obama’s advisor, Furman.

Biden’s immigration chief is Alejandro Mayorkas, a Cuban-born, pro-migration zealot. He runs the Department of Homeland Security and drafted most of the February 2024 bill that Harris is promising to sign in 2025.

Mayorkas is powerful because he is backed by much of Wall Street, and Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us advocacy group for West Coast consumer-economy investors. He is also strongly supported by many progressive leaders  — including President Barack Obama — and by officials who filled top jobs in Biden’s Administration.

Zuckerberg’s West Coast investors have also backed Harris’ national rise since her career in California.

lll

In 2021, Biden briefly tried to override Mayorkas’s policies by giving Harris a large role in migration policy. But Harris declined the request and instead supported Mayorkas by focussing on the vague issue of the “root causes” of migration from Central America.

Their support for more migration is a core element of Bidenomics. In a balanced economy, unemployment is low and the supply of labor is tight. The result is a constant push and pull on a level playing field between employers and customers, employees and their communities. This give-and-take is worked out as employers decide how much to pay in wages, and how much to invest in labor-saving machinery, and as employees decide whether to keep their jobs or move to a better-paying job in a different city. In May 2021, Biden explained his support for this very popular goal of a tight labor market:

Rising wages aren’t a bug, they’re a feature.  We want to get — we want to get something economists call “full employment.”  Instead of workers competing with each other for jobs that are scarce, we want employees to compete with each other to attract workers.  We want the companies to compete to attract workers … Companies like McDonald’s, Home Depot, Bank of America, and others — what do they have to do?  They have to raise wages to attract workers.  That’s the way it’s supposed to be.

But Mayorkas and Harris have very powerful backers and very different views about wages and labor than did Biden — and their views created Bidenomics, even as Biden feebly protested the Mayorkas migration.

Harris and Mayorkas see the White House “as having plenary total power over immigration, rather than Congress,” said Krikorian:

The Executives over the past several decades have come to dominate foreign policy, where Congress no longer declares war, and the President has basically taken the War Power away from Congress … Obama laid the groundwork for [the Executive] is to turn immigration into a unilateral presidential policy rather than something that Congress has control of.

Mayorkas’ clout in the White House made him the nation’s “labor czar,” said Krikorian, adding:

That is a phenomenal level of power to give to the federal government period, regardless of whether it’s one guy or not. Even the President shouldn’t have that power … [But Harris’] campaign supports that.

His power was acknowledged by Biden’s first labor secretary: “The issue of immigration is how do we make sure that companies and businesses have the opportunity to employ people,” Labor Secretary Marty Walsh told Fox Business in December 2022.

But that power also gives Mayorkas the ability to create or dissipate the tight labor markets that allow Americans to win higher wages from profit-seeking employers, the power to push up or press down housing prices, and the power to pressure companies into raising or lowering corporate investment in labor-saving, productivity-boosting workplace technology.

It also gives him the power to decide if investors, Americans, or foreigners should gain or lose wealth in the next decade: “We are building an immigration system that is designed to ensure due process, respect human dignity, and promote equity,” Mayorkas tweeted in August 2021, as he sketched out his plans for easy asylum rules that would encourage a mass migration of poor job-seekers into Americans’ homeland.

He is now exercising unprecedented power in Springfield, Ohio, where his Bidenomics policy is shifting wealth and wages from 60,000 ordinary Americans over to his imported and government-funded population of 20,000 Haitian migrants.

In August, the local Springfield News-Sun newspaper reported how a national food-services company was able to hire illegal migrants — dubbed “New Americans” — via a special program that excluded Americans who expect higher wages. “Kindred is basically a program which we hire new Americans, so all the people who are refugees, asylum seekers or literally anybody could be a part of this program as long as they’re new Americans, they’re new to the country,” company recruiter Mehr Un Nisa Jahed told a roomful of migrants, according to the newspaper’s report.

Mayorkas’ policy is also fracturing many American communities, such as Springfield, Ohio, where his migrants have brought chaotic diversity, car accidents, huge hospital bills, education expenses, Nazis, and many bitter arguments about the behavior of the Haitians.

Mayorkas’ Bideomics economic policy is also ruthless towards the migrants’ countries. For example, Mayorkas’ Haitian migrants include a large slice of the island’s most educated Haitians and trained workers whose extraction starves the island’s communities of vital police and college graduates.

Unfortunately for Harris and Mayorkas, their easy migration policy is also very unpopular among Americans. It is also so popular among foreigners that they have had great political difficulty in scheduling and managing the rush of migrants into the United States.

Moreover, Donald Trump is building his 2024 campaign on the chaos and crimes caused by Mayorkas’ migration.  “This is one of those areas where he does channel the emotions of much of the public,” said Krikorian. “His emotions are focused on illegal border jumpers … that’s what motivates him more, and that’s why he’s actually a lot better than other Republican politicians on the issue of enforcement.”

However, both Harris and Trump are ignoring the policy alternative to large-scale migration.

The alternative policy of shared high-tech growth and trade was outlined in April by Larry Fink, the founder of the $7 trillion BlackRock investment firm on Wall Street:

We always used to think a shrinking population is a cause for negative [economic] growth. But in my conversations with the leadership of these large, developed countries such as China, and Japan that have xenophobic anti-immigration policies, they don’t allow anybody to come in — so they have shrinking demographics — these countries will rapidly develop robotics and AI and technology …

“If a promise of all that transforms productivity, which most of us think it will — we’ll be able to elevate the standard living in countries, the standard of living for individuals, even with shrinking populations,” said Fink.✪

▶️ 1 Hour 38 Minutes 38 Seconds

▶️ 1 Hour 17 Minutes 49 Seconds

▶️ 51 Minutes 56 Seconds

▶️ 5 Minutes 43 Seconds

▶️ 9 Minutes 31 Seconds

▶️ 1 Hour 36 Minutes 23 Seconds ⭐️ wtd

▶️ 9 Minutes 04 Seconds

▶️ 10 Minutes 5 Seconds

▶️ 21 Minutes47 Seconds

▶️ 9 Minutes 45 Seconds

▶️ 34 Minutes 411 Seconds

▶️ 16 Minutes 11 Seconds

▶️ 30 Minutes 57 Seconds

▶️ 4 Minutes 38 Seconds ⭐️ wtd