Category Archives: Constitution

We Live & Labor Under An Illiberal Administrative State. Is It Constitutional?

Constitution, Federalism, Government, libertarianism, Republicans

Libertarians have a healthy contempt for government agencies and department, most of which are not mentioned—and were not intended—by the Constitution. Republicans are responsible for the creation of quite a number of wealth-consuming, freedoms-gobbling agencies. Belatedly, they’ve discovered just how deeply crooked and dangerous is the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a fact Republicans were less inclined to admit under Genghis Bush.

So does the Constitution authorize all of the many law-making departments under which we labor? Over to Laurence M. Vance onThe Constitution versus the Executive-Branch Departments“:

It is apparent from reading Articles I and II of the Constitution that six of the current executive-branch departments have no constitutional justification whatsoever for their existence, four of them are apparently authorized by the Constitution, three of them might possibly be authorized by the Constitution, two of them should be combined with one of the other departments, and one is missing.

The Post Office Department that existed from 1792 until it became just the Postal Service in 1971 is clearly authorized by the Constitution in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 7, where Congress is given the power “to establish Post Offices and post Roads.” It certainly makes more sense to have a Post Office Department than some of the other cabinet-level departments that are clearly unconstitutional.

The departments of Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security should both be subsumed under the Department of Defense, since that is what they relate to. We had military veterans for 200 years before the Department of Veterans Affairs was created in 1989. There is no reason that legitimate functions of this department could not be handled within the Department of Defense, instead of a bloated federal bureaucracy that is second in size only to the Department of Defense itself.

The same is true of the Department of Homeland Security. In only 10 short years it has grown to become the third-largest federal department. What is the point of having a Homeland Security Department if we already have a Defense Department? Any legitimate functions of the Department of Homeland Security (and they would certainly not include FEMA or the TSA), could and should be part of the Department of Defense.

There are three executive-branch departments whose constitutionality is dubious at best.

The only possible constitutional justification for the Department of Commerce is two mentions in Article I of the Constitution of Congress regulating commerce (Section 8, Paragraph 3 and Section 9, Paragraph 6). But if a cabinet-level department is needed to do that, then what did the government do without a Department of Commerce until 1903? The truth is that the government had no need of a Commerce Department until it started regulating commerce in an unconstitutional way beginning with the establishment of the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887.

The Department of Transportation can only barely justify its existence by appealing to the previously mentioned phrase in Article I of the Constitution giving Congress the power “to establish Post Offices and post Roads.” But that means that the Department of Transportation should be limited to just “post Roads,” not mass transit and aviation. And of course, establishing “post Roads” could be done under the auspices of a Post Office Department.

The Department of the Interior is mainly concerned with federal lands. It now includes agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Reclamation — the largest wholesaler of water in the country and the second-largest producer of hydroelectric power. But if ever we needed a Department of the Interior it was when the United States acquired the Northwest Territory (present-day Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota) after the Revolutionary War and purchased Louisiana from France (all or part of 15 current U.S. states).

And since there is no reason for the U.S. government to own more than 25 percent of all the land in the United States (with ownership exceeding 50 percent in some states), and no constitutional authority for the government to have anything to do with fish and wildlife or supplying water and power, it would be more constitutional to have one of the Department of the Interior’s agencies — the Bureau of Indian Affairs — elevated to cabinet-level status and most of the other functions of the department eliminated. But of course, the State Department could handle U.S. relations with the Indian tribes without having a separate bureau or department.

The Department of Defense can be justified by appealing to several paragraphs in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Paragraph 11 gives Congress the power “to declare War.” Paragraph 12 gives Congress the power “to raise and support Armies.” Paragraph 13 gives Congress power “to provide and maintain a Navy.” Paragraph 14 authorizes Congress “to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” Paragraphs 15 and 16 authorize Congress to call forth, organize, arm, and discipline the Militia. What cannot be justified by the Constitution is a Department of Offense, which is what the Defense Department has become. All nondefense spending (foreign wars, foreign bases, foreign occupations, foreign interventions) should be eliminated and the department shrunk in size.

The Department of Justice seems reasonable, since the federal crimes of counterfeiting, piracy, and treason are mentioned in the Constitution. However, given that Congress didn’t see the need for a Justice Department until 1870, that most federal crimes should just be state crimes, that the abuses of the FBI and federal prosecutors are well known, and that the Justice Department agencies of the DEA and the ATF shouldn’t even exist, the Justice Department should be scaled back considerably.

The Department of State seems to be the most logical department for a government to have. It was the first federal department established under the Constitution. Article 2, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution mentions making treaties with, and sending ambassadors to, other countries. The Department of State is one of the smallest executive-branch departments. However, it could be much smaller if U.S. foreign policy was not so interventionist.

The Department of the Treasury can also be justified by appealing to several paragraphs in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Paragraph 1 gives Congress the power “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” Paragraph 2 authorizes the Congress “To borrow Money on the credit of the United States.” Paragraph 5 gives Congress the power “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.” And then there is Section 9, Paragraph 7: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.” What cannot be justified by the Constitution is Congress’s creating the Federal Reserve System. Any legitimate functions of the Fed should be handled by the Treasury Department. The main problem with the Treasury Department, of course, is that it includes the IRS. Abolish it and the Treasury Department would be much more acceptable.

The departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Labor cannot be justified in any way by the Constitution. Where in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to have anything to do with agriculture, education, energy, health, housing, or labor? Much of the welfare state is maintained by these departments. The Department of Agriculture is responsible for WIC, SNAP (food stamps), and farm subsidies. The Department of Health and Human Services handles Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Department of Housing and Urban Development facilitates wealth redistribution by providing various kinds of housing assistance.

All of that means that if the Constitution is going to be followed, of the 15 cabinet-level executive-branch departments, only 7 can be justified in some way by the Constitution, and there really need to be only 4, or 5 if the Department of the Post Office is restored.

The problem is a simple one: Few previous congressional candidates or current members of Congress from either party have any desire to follow the Constitution in every respect or even the majority of the time.

Republicans are the worst because they talk about the Constitution the most. They have talked about eliminating the Department of Education since the days of Ronald Reagan, but they have never done anything but raise its budget. They criticize welfare, but won’t touch the biggest welfare programs in the federal budget — Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. They condemn Obamacare (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), but accept Bushcare (the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act).

The U.S. government is a monstrosity. From a libertarian perspective, the Constitution is an imperfect document. However, if the federal government actually followed its own Constitution, it would be a tremendous improvement over the bloated, expensive, intrusive, and authoritative government we have now.

UPDATED: Sexual Accusations: The “Final Solution” To A Swamp-Hating, Pesky Politician

Christianity, Constitution, Cultural Marxism, Feminism, Judaism & Jews, Law, Republicans

BY DR. BOYD CATHEY

Almost the entirety—at last count nearly forty—of the GOP senators in Washington DC, supposedly representing their constituents and the broader interests of the nation, have signed on and publicly endorsed Mitt Romney’s enunciated “new morality,” regarding Judge Roy Moore, a standard which Mitt stated in a tweet back on Friday, November 10:

Mitt Romney  ?@MittRomney  Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections. I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account is too serious to ignore. Moore is unfit for office and should step aside.”

Let’s look at that standard more closely: what it means is that basically any unsubstantiated, unproven accusation, especially sexual, must be believed: (1) if the accusation is deemed [by whom?] to be “serious,” and—by far, most importantly, (2) if the political calculation in our present Leftist/Marxist-dominated culture demands that it be embraced.

The first element and the key is “serious accusation.” In the case of Judge Moore, nearly all the Republican senators (I don’t include Democrats here, as it goes without saying that their perspective is largely political) have cited the “fact” that the charges are “serious,” and thus, even though no real proof has been adduced, automatically we are supposed “to believe the women,” to quote Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. In other words, the ancient Anglo-Saxon—and indeed Biblical—standard of “innocent until proven guilty” is summarily tossed out the window.

Let my offer an hypothesis that, given developments yesterday (November 15), could well apply. Let’s just suppose that, say, in a week it is determined that the so-called “proof” offered by extremist feminist attorney Gloria Allred—Judge Moore’s supposed signature in that 1977 yearbook which he purportedly signed Christmas 1977—let’s suppose that it is determined and proven to be as Moore’s attorneys insist, a forgery.  And perhaps additional details come out discrediting that suspicious pile of women who all of a sudden have appeared after forty years and numerous controversial Moore campaigns, to make charges. Will all those US senators, starting with Mitch McConnell and John McCain, come out and abjectly apologize for their character defamation and welcome the judge into their “club”?

The answer is a resounding “no,” and it is “no” precisely because the GOP senatorial club and the Neocon-dominated “conservative movement” and its “presstitutes” (AKA, prostituted journalists and pundits) never wanted Roy Moore to be senator in the first place. And they have done—and will do—their damnedest to stop him, using whatever methods available, including always the “final option,” sexual accusations.

We need only recall the scathing attacks of National Review Senior Editor, the pot-smoking, pot-bellied pseudo-historian, Jonah Goldberg, who stated the consistent view of the GOP Washington “swamp creatures.” Here is what he wrote long before any of these accusations surfaced: Judge Moore was, according to Goldberg, “nothing more than a bigoted, theocratic, and ignorant buffoon.”  The fact that Moore had dared to boldly declare that Biblical law was more important in his judicial philosophy than certain recent Supreme Court edicts, the fact that as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court he had refused to accept secularist Federal judicial decisions that he believed not only violated the original vision and inherent view of the Framers but also the very underpinning in the Christian faith of our constitutional system—his refusal to take down a plaque on public property commemorating the Ten Commandments as the basic foundation of our republic–these have earned him the undying enmity of the Establishment.

Just listen to vaunted Fox “legal expert” Greg Jarrett, who [November 15] pontificated that he had “lost all respect for Moore when he placed Biblical law above the Constitution”—that is, Moore had identified the very essential basis for the American republic in an understanding and application of Western Christianity, which, let us add, was indeed professed and expressed by the Founders and Framers, themselves!

Jarrett’s view is shared by the great majority of Inside-the-Beltway Republicans and Neoconservatives: Bushite Fox pundit Marc Thiessen also jumped in head first to offer the identical narrative—Thiessen, of course, is that same globalist who strongly endorsed Socialist Emmanuel Macron for President of France, while condemning Marine Le Pen as a “radical nationalist, far right populist, probably a racist.”  Notice the pattern?

Yesterday, Roy Moore’s legal team and several significant conservative online writers—those not yet bought-and-paid for by the Deep State, such as Gateway Pundit—came forward with substantial evidence that indicates that what we are watching is just another put-up job, another “high-tech lynching” involving a rather cavalier manipulation of the facts by the likes of the long time, disreputable feminist lawyer, Gloria Allred (and probably a few others behind the scenes). Allred has a history of massaging not just events but legal shenanigans that remind us of the antics of Al Sharpton (remember the Tawana Brawley case?) and the infamous Durham County, NC, District Attorney Mike Nifong in the “Duke Lacrosse Case” (for which Nifong was later disbarred and jailed).

An analysis of the handwriting/signature indicates broad discrepancies. Gateway Pundit and various analysts have noticed these and the apparent fact that there are enough dissimilarities to sharply question Allred’s and her client, Beverly Young Nelson’s claims. First, the lettering differs substantially at a number of major points. Additionally, at the time of the supposed incident, Moore was not “D.A.” as the signature indicates, yet that is what appears in the Yearbook

And why would a young girl, never before encountered, in a chance meeting, have Moore sign her 1977 Yearbook at Christmas time of that year? Yearbooks are issued near the end of a school calendar year—not around Christmas, seven months later. Might it have to do with Nelson’s original assertion about when the incident occurred and the need to “match it up” with and confirm that time frame?

Finally, Nelson (through Allred) has stated that the incident took place in the parking lot behind the “Olde Hickory House” restaurant in Gadsden. But the restaurant never was called that, and there was no parking lot behind the restaurant.

These revelations, alone call into question not only Nelson’s account, but, more darkly and possibly nefariously, the role of zealous feminist attorney, activist and ambulance chaser, Gloria Allred.

But, irrespective of real guilt or innocence, what this says about our political climate, generally, and about the character (or lack thereof) and mindset of the Republican establishment, in  particular, speaks volumes about the success and virtual dominance of the cultural Marxist mentality and intellectual template that now, in addition to being fully and openly embraced by Democrats, Hollywood, academia and our educational system, has been tacitly accepted by those who supposedly oppose the contagion. Like their denominated foes on the “farther Left,” they—the GOP establishment and Neocons, too, have integrated that Progressive mentality, that world view, into their thinking and their praxis. And with the case of the hated Judge Moore, it shows.

And, so, they have sanctified and given their blessing to Mitt the Twit’s new template and standard, and, if I may quote what I wrote on November 14, it goes like this (in two parts):

“Any time an outspoken traditional conservative Christian candidate for public office is accused of sexual misconduct by the Mainstream Media or its political minions, especially if he openly opposes the Republican establishment, Republicans must believe the accuser, no need to have any proof; the very fact that the accusation is made in such a context is enough to disqualify the candidate and result in the vociferous demand that he be forced to step down.”

And the corollary:

“Any time a Democrat or Leftist political leader is accused of sexual misconduct, especially by talk radio or so-called ‘right wing’ punditry, Democrats and the Mainstream Media must circle the wagons and defend him, downplay the charges, rationalize his behavior, or, if too extreme even by their lax standards, then regretfully part with him and suggest that he get ‘counseling’.”

This is where we are in the America of 2017. This is the moral standard now demanded of Republicans, and this, as it is in fact a total and cowardly surrender, means the eventual defeat and end of the congressional GOP as supposed defenders of the old republic and anything it stood or stands for. Yes, they—many of them—will continue in office, using the same moniker to identify themselves, but their “opposition” to the Progressivist Revolution will be simple shadow boxing, groveling at the trough of the Deep State, emasculated and impotent to prevent further decay and decline—and condemned before their constituents and before history as the enabling and brainwashed cowards that they are.

Dr. Boyd D. Cathey

==================================================================

~ DR. BOYD D. CATHEY is an Unz Review columnist, as well as a Barely a Blog contributor, whose work is easily located on this site under the “BAB’s A List” search category. Dr. Cathey earned an MA in history at the University of Virginia (as a Thomas Jefferson Fellow), and as a Richard M Weaver Fellow earned his doctorate in history and political philosophy at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. After additional studies in theology and philosophy in Switzerland, he taught in Argentina and Connecticut before returning to North Carolina. He was State Registrar of the North Carolina State Archives before retiring in 2011. He writes for The Unz Review, The Abbeville Institute, Confederate Veteran magazine, The Remnant, and other publications in the United States and Europe on a variety of topics, including politics, social and religious questions, film, and music.

From Roy Moore’s Twitter Account: “Bring it, Mitch.”

Judge Roy Moore Vs. “Mitt the Twit,” The Republican Establishment & The Deep State Capital Of The Globe

Conservatism, Constitution, Democrats, Elections, Law, Neoconservatism, Republicans, Sex

“When accusation of sexual abuse is all the proof you need: ‘I believe these women,’ Establishment Republicans keep intoning. These opportunists know it’s political suicide to ask for due process for an accused or question any woman accuser.”—ILANA MERCER, 14 Nov., 2017

BY DR. BOYD CATHEY

Remember that keystone of American law and the basis of our Constitutional legal system: “all men are automatically guilty when accused, whether they are convicted later on or not.”  Say what? You don’t remember that fundamental pillar of Anglo-American jurisprudence? You don’t recall that Biblical injunction?

If you don’t, then you just aren’t swimming in the same constitutionally grimy and corrupt Deep State waters as those paragons of political and constitutional “virtue” who have denounced Judge Roy Moore and demanded he step aside in the Alabama Senate race: Republican Senators John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Cory Gardiner (Colorado), Bob Corker (Tennessee), Jeff Flake (Arizona), and, of course, that “profile in courage” and ultimate compromiser with the far Left, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and at least thirty other GOP senators who have now decided that you are guilty whenever you are accused of moral turpitude, no matter that charges have not and probably cannot be proved—and that  you may well be  innocent. And no matter that the accusations involve supposed events that occurred forty years ago. And no matter that the man accused has been in the controversial very public square for forty years, happily married for thirty-three years, involved in numerous extremely contentious campaigns—all of which could have been occasions for those charges to surface, and, if such events were true, should have surfaced.

That epitome of sublime intelligence—no doubt a candidate for a future seat on the United States Supreme Court—Mitt Romney, laid down the new marker for judgment. He came out on his high haunches, in all his offended honor and pronounced in a tweet on November 10:

Mitt Romney @MittRomney  Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections. I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account is too serious to ignore. Moore is unfit for office and should step aside9:55 AM – Nov 10, 2017

Got that? The new standard—especially when dealing with a hard core, traditionalist conservative like Judge Moore who is an avowed enemy of the Deep State and the Washington “swamp.” I’ll bet you that oil well in my backyard that Mitt wouldn’t say that if Luther Strange had won the Republican primary and the same controversy surrounded him. But, then, maybe I just don’t fathom the “new” system of constitutional legal protections? Maybe I just think that base and crassly amoral politics drives this controversy?

Mitt the Twit—that’s my nickname for him—got a leg up on all the GOP “swamp pack.” In a sense, he set the bar—and it wasn’t very high at all; in fact, it was so low that even John McCain had trouble getting lower. Both he and Mitt jumped in early, with only the sketchiest of details. But now that another lady—a former waitress who recalls something from 1977—has jumped in with additional lurid details (guided by that extreme feminist attorney Gloria Allred), the Republican establishment stampede has become a race to reach a microphone to denounce Judge Moore and demand he step aside—There is in this free fall no GOP “Katy-bar-the-door” (a colorful phrase that goes back to one Catherine Douglas who attempted to save the life of King James I of Scotland 600 years ago!).

There are, indeed, two issues here, and they are questions that the Establishment GOP has conveniently confused, or perhaps never understood at all.

First, there is the question of Judge Moore’s culpability in anything that may have taken place in 1977 or 1979. Moore has consistently and strongly denied the accusations, and has threatened legal action against The Washington Post, which had already strongly endorsed Moore’s Democrat opponent, Doug Jones. The Post, after Moore’s impressive victory in the GOP primary, assigned some of its most skillful and zealous reporters to “get some dirt” on Moore. Nothing new about that praxis; the Post and The New York Times, CNN, and other Mainstream Media do that and have done that each time a real candidate arises who might challenge their hegemony and power. Before these revelations Moore was headed for a signal victory in the December 12 election….Very simply, that had to be stopped.

They tried it with Trump, unsuccessfully—recall those women who, as if on cue, suddenly appeared last October, to denounce him for the same purported activities that Judge Moore is now being accused of? The timing, the sponsorship, the unreliability of the accusers did not alter voters’ minds, did not convince them…and, you know what, we have heard absolutely nothing, not a word, from any of those Trump accusers since the November 2016 election. You would think, wouldn’t you, that if there were anything to those charges that the accusations and the accusers would still be in the news, especially with the virulent and  unhinged hatred of President Trump. But, no—which is additional and abundant confirmation that they were, from the very beginning, politically motivated.

Some background: Judge Roy Moore is a solid, unbought, “drain the swamps,” stop illegal immigration, pro-life, traditional Christian conservative, and that will just never do in the Deep State capital of the globe. After defeating interim Senator Luther Strange, the favored candidate of Mitch McConnell, the US Senate Majority Leader and the Deep State establishment, Moore was leading overwhelmingly in the Alabama polls and destined to become the next Senator from that state.

How better to stop him than to “discover” some sexual misconduct from forty years ago—in other words, something that would be beyond the statute of limitations and would not, therefore, have to go to court where real proof would be required. And the advantage in making such accusations is that they are like mud; no matter whether true or not, they stick, and the stain and stench remain even if the person accused is completely innocent.

Examine past Republican candidates for president: how many have been and were accused of some sexual peccadillo? The latest is the 93 year old George H. W. Bush, but I seem to recall that from Gerald Ford on, accusations have surfaced especially right before elections…only to recede into the mists of political forgetfulness afterwards. And, yet, those presidents who actually did violate the marital vow or commit acts of moral turpitude—think here of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and, most egregiously, Bill Clinton—get a pass, even while flaunting their actions publicly and notoriously. And they are protected and lionized by the dominant Mainstream Media and the Democrats, who circle the wagons to defend one of their own.

Second, and in many ways much more serious, is the attitude of the majority of Republicans in the United States Senate who now, in fact, have created and established a new standard, a new template, in political judgment. And it goes like this, in two parts:

“Any time an outspoken traditional conservative Christian candidate for public office is accused of sexual misconduct by the Mainstream Media or its political minions, especially if he openly opposes the Republican establishment, Republicans must believe the accuser, no need to have any proof; the very fact that the accusation is made in such a context is enough to disqualify the candidate and result in the vociferous demand that he be forced to step down.”

And the corollary:

“Any time a Democrat or Leftist political leader is accused of sexual misconduct, especially by talk radio or so-called ‘right wing’ punditry, Democrats and the Mainstream Media must circle the wagons and defend him, downplay the charges, rationalize his behavior, or, if too extreme even by their lax standards, then regretfully part with him and suggest that he get ‘counseling’.”

Is this not what we are seeing with the accusations surrounding Judge Roy Moore? Here is a man who has been highly controversial politically for nearly four decades, who has both spoken and acted publicly upon his deeply Christian principles, to the point of having the Federal judiciary step in—and nary a word, nary an accuser came forth, until a month before the senatorial election when miraculously one was “found” by one of the foremost organs of the Deep State managerial swamp and one of his most zealous opponents—and, again miraculously, within the period when no other candidate could be added to the ballot, and Judge Moore’s name could not be removed.

The message underlying this scenario? Got to stop Moore—A George Soros-supported, pro-abortion Democrat, Doug Jones, is the way to go. Better to have an establishment Left-leaning, don’t-rock-the-boat Democrat than a fearlessly traditional conservative “make America great” Republican who would not fit into the “along the Potomac club,” who really believes his campaign rhetoric (and his past indicates that he does). And this in deepest, profoundly Red Alabama! Talk about thwarting the will of the people! Ain’t modern American democracy great! And this is what we—or rather, John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Bill Kristol, and the Neoconservatives–want to export and “impose” of the rest of the world.

That is what most of our Republican US senators believe, and that is why Steve Bannon’s pledge to do his damnedest to defeat them is not only rational but imperative.

One hundred years ago, right after the conclusion of the First World War (1919), the superb Irish poet, William Butler Yeats authored a poem, “The Second Coming”—a kind of meditation on the disastrous fracturing and destruction of the old, pre-war order of stability and rule of law, the abolition of 1000 year old nations and the creation of new and violent ones, and the rejection of those hallowed traditions and Western beliefs that undergirded and annealed our civilization. The modern age Yeats characterized as one where, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are filled with passionate intensity.” He saw what the Progressive Revolution had wrought, and prophesied in Biblical terms the terror of a demonic age in which evil—a “rough beast”—was transformed into good, and the faith in a “rocking Cradle in Bethlehem” was extinguished. Our society tells us: “No right, no wrong, it’s only the goal that counts, not the means to get there.” Compare that to St. Augustine: “Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.”

Our self-proclaimed defenders in and out of Congress, in their desire to retain their power and continue in positions of authority and dominance at all costs, implicitly reject the admonition of St. Augustine and embrace Yeats’ “rough beast.” Anyone who stands in the way must be attacked and defamed, no matter if the accusations against him are unproven or untrue. This, then, is the unforgivable crime, the unpardonable sin that the Mitt Romneys, John McCains, and Mitch McConnells are in engaged in.

National Review senior editor David French remains, along with his confrere Bill Kristol, one of the most intransigent NeverTrumpers/Trump haters. French pretends to lecture Evangelicals and condemn them for supporting Moore. Of course, this is the same David  French also despises all those millions of “deplorables” who voted for Trump and who thankfully would never be caught dead at his Manhattan cocktail parties or consorting with his condescending elitist friends.

David French, Jonah Goldberg, and the Neocon journalistic flagship National Review, plus various worried Neocon pundits (including on Fox), have once again fallen in line with the narrative of their Deep State friends on the far Left. What, pray tell, is the difference between them?

The Marxist group Media Matters has long engaged in attacks on Roy Moore, and is now transforming that attack into an attack on Sean Hannity and an attempt to get him off the airwaves. Although I am not a huge fan of Hannity, you see, there is always an ulterior strategy and desired results from any Deep-State attack; in the past, there was the assurance that most of us would not notice the linkage. But times have changed, and we do notice.

Judge Moore’s wife, Kayla, has come out swinging in support of her husband. Married happily for 33 years, always with him, she has never noticed any indication whatsoever of what the accusers suggest.

******

~ DR. BOYD D. CATHEY is an Unz Review columnist, as well as a Barely a Blog contributor, whose work is easily located on this site under the “BAB’s A List” search category. Dr. Cathey earned an MA in history at the University of Virginia (as a Thomas Jefferson Fellow), and as a Richard M Weaver Fellow earned his doctorate in history and political philosophy at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. After additional studies in theology and philosophy in Switzerland, he taught in Argentina and Connecticut before returning to North Carolina. He was State Registrar of the North Carolina State Archives before retiring in 2011. He writes for The Unz Review, The Abbeville Institute, Confederate Veteran magazine, The Remnant, and other publications in the United States and Europe on a variety of topics, including politics, social and religious questions, film, and music.

UPDATED (12/6): Abortion, Colonoscopy, A Facelift? US Constitution Guarantees It … To The World

Constitution, Federalism, IMMIGRATION, Law, Morality

The US doesn’t even bother to pose as a constitutional republic. It doesn’t have to. Few Americans know what a constitutional republic even means.

And so, an illegal alien crosses over into the US, demands and gets an abortion. The only aspect the clodhopper media debates is for or against the interloper’s so-called reproductive rights. These, it would appear, are to be universally upheld (although abortion is illegal in the illegal alien’s homeland).

In the old constitutional republic, the government had a constitutionally limited lien on the property of citizens. In the American global democracy, the world may arrive in America and demand any taxpayer-covered medical procedure.

So make haste. Bring us your huddled masses. We, the tired masses of America, will work to fulfill any of their dreams. Abortion, colonoscopy, a facelift? It is now within the American Dream to come to America and demand these.

… Brigitte Amiri, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union who is representing the teenager  …  urged the court not to set aside its obligation to protect the teen’s constitutional right to abortion just because she may eventually obtain a sponsor, and said the government is not acting in the teen’s best interest.

UPDATE  (12/6): Chain migration: