Op-ed:

Citizenship: The Cornerstone of Our Republic

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots / Right Side Patriots Radio 

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google

 

...So as I write this, President Trump's “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections“ executive order seems to be facing court challenges and delays revolving around the all-important word “citizens”...meaning the Constitution's stated words, as written, continue to be challenged by liberal judges with a decidedly anti-America/anti-Trump agenda. Better to them to make a mockery of the Constitution...one of the greatest documents to freedom ever written...then it is for them to abide by its words.

And while our “Founders and Framers” did design our Constitution in order to “establish a more perfect union, ensure justice, promote domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote general welfare, and to secure liberty,” they also made it very clear that being an “American citizen” was not just needed in establishing a government based upon both “popular sovereignty” and the “consent of the governed,” but that “citizenship” itself was to be an integral part of who were are as a nation. Read entire article here.

Op-ed:

Citizenship: The Cornerstone of Our Republic

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots / Right Side Patriots Radio 

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google

During his 2024 presidential campaign, then presidential candidate Donald J. Trump did promise that if elected he would, on “day one,” start setting into motion the largest deportation of illegal aliens in U.S. history, as in criminal folks still trying to cross our border illegally as well as those already illegally residing in our country. Thankfully, not only was Trump elected president but the promise he made was kept and continues to be kept to this day.

Score one for now President Trump, his agenda, and of course the MAGA movement.

So as pride in our beloved America continues to grow...as American exceptionalism reemerges thanks in part to this one man...we must not become complacent as to Trump's accomplishments for the 2026 mid-term elections are not as far off as one might think. And with the House being especially vulnerable to a possible switch in party control due to Republicans currently holding but a slim majority of seats, we must make sure that Trump's much needed “election reforms” do become law before said elections take place. Why so...because if we lose the House, and even if we were to hold the Senate, all MAGA stands for could well become but a memory of what could have been accomplished if only more folks had been paying attention.

But our president knows well how critical the midterm elections are, and he has been trying to get laws passed to help assure that our elections are not only free, fair, and most especially honest so that “We the People”...as in the sum of we “American citizens”...have no doubt that all our votes have been properly counted and tabulated minus what is now being referred to as “illegal dilution”...as in the great number of people who have been voting all along...especially in “blue” states...yet people who have no legal right to do so.

In fact, the blame for this “illegal dilution” falls not just on the federal level, but on the state and local levels as well. Why so...because a long held system of “checks and balances” has existed in every state for quite some time, and yet in many “blue” states and cities said system is simply being ignored, but then again so too is the Constitution's own words regarding whom exactly can vote...as in those deemed to be United States “citizens.” And know that the 14th Amendment clearly states in Section 1 that, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Simply, “citizens” is the key operative word in regards to voting as there's no mention; at all, in the Constitution of “illegals” or “non-citizens” being given the right to vote. And yet we all know that many do vote in certain parts of our country, because “leftist” judges and “bleeding heart” Democrat elected officials seem to be working in tandem to not only help those illegally crossing our border to do so...including amongst them thugs, thieves, drug mules, gang members, child molesters, rapists, murderers, and terrorists...but they also help to keep illegals safe from Trump's now ongoing and rightful deportations. And how do they accomplish this task...by “blanketing” those who are but criminal invaders under the Constitution's already existing words “due process” and “fundamental rights”...voting laws be damned.

So while our Constitution's 14th Amendment does indeed protect, on the federal level, what is known as “due process rights”...“rights” which ensure that no one can be deprived of “life, liberty, or property” without “due process” of law....basically what the words “due process” means to Democrats in regards to voting rights is that the government must follow what is known as “fair procedures and rules”* before disallowing an individual or a specific group of individuals the right to vote in a federal election. In other words, most Democrats and leftist judges want the Constitutionally deemed word “citizens” to be taken out of the voting mix so that future elections could become a Democrat “free for all” voting scenario. But try as the Democrats may, the 14th Amendment also has a few things to say about that as well.

And while, unfortunately, it is common knowledge that “illegal voting”...especially when considering the numbers now involved...has already influenced the outcome of many state and local elections...especially in “blue” what were once “ purple states”...in this political discourse all other words, while important, do now become secondary to the Constitution's key word, “citizens.” Why so...simply because it alone, as per the words of our “Founders and Framers,” not only protects we American “citizens” along with our actual right to vote, but its principal and intent also guards against what is now the rightfully deemed aforementioned “dilution by illegal voting.” And the fault here again lies within all branches of government...federal, state, and local level governments...however, said “dilution” most assuredly starts with the top tier elections and filters down from there.

How so...here's but one example that's being completely ignored, for the fact is that existing Federal election requirements...which includes the establishing of a uniform “Election Day”...already prohibits States from counting ballots received after “Election Day” because these are the ballots where most of the “illegal dilution” usually takes place...as well as prohibiting “foreign nationals”...aka “non-citizens”...from registering to vote in any national election. Don't believe me...see the law for yourself in both Federal law 2 U.S.C. 7 and 3 U.S.C. 1. and 18 U.S.C. 1015 and 611 as written as per the rulings of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit regarding the Republican National Committee v. Wetzel (2024).**

So if “settled law” has already been established with “precedence” set as to who can and cannot vote in our elections, why has this, what is fact, not just been ignored, but sees“blue” state governors and “blue” state elected officials not even being called to task for their allowing ballots received after Election Day to continue to be counted...ballots mailed in more times than not by those who should not be voting in the first place. In fact, the 14th amendment also authorizes the federal government to “punish states” that try to either take away, curtail, or stall...with stalling election results now being all too commonplace... a U.S.“citizen's” right to have their vote counted with results tallied and revealed in a timely, fair, and above all else legal manner.

And that brings us back full circle to the Constitution's five key words,“Citizens of the United States”...it cannot be said any clearer, more directly, truthfully or consistently than that, and for both liberal activist judges and elected officials to deny those five words is to deny the Constitution itself...the very document they took an oath to protect and defend. And by their doing so these folks, in my opinion, willingly and with malice intended choose to not only “aid and abet” those breaking our laws, but also took it upon themselves to do any and everything possible...legally or otherwise...to not only corrupt but to redefine the Constitution's words to help push forth their anti-American agenda, as well as to keep their anti-Trump political “witch hunt” ongoing.

Simply, “divert and deflect” the issues at hand has become the obstacles thrown in both Trump's and the laws path...“settled law” included...to not only help keep but “up the numbers” of those illegally voting, with the hope that declining Democrat party numbers will at least start to reverse.

Remember, these current slew of liberal activist judges trying to remove the word “citizen(s)” from the voting discourse are, for the most part, Obama and Democrat party loyalists who are resurrecting, if you will, the meaning behind the words stated by Barack Obama back when he was president...the words where he implied that our Constitution was an “outdated document” no longer appropriate for “modern times.” And so with his now infamous words that,“We can no longer rely on a rule book made a few centuries ago,” it can clearly be seen that the fair and honest voting laws President Trump is trying to enact...laws regarding only “citizens” being able to vote as per the Constitution...are laws which could permanently derail Obama's still to this day hoped for “fundamental transformation of America.”

And so it was and remains Obama's own words that, I do believe, laid the very foundation upon which these liberal judges are actually not just trying to usurp President Trump's Constitutionally given presidential powers...most especially those regarding voting laws...but that they are using Obama's words as the means and conduit by which to help assure that every individual of voting age residing in our country today...no matter their legal citizenship status...is allowed to vote. Why so...as in a last desperate attempt to help Obama's socialist driven “transformation of America” not only reach fruition, but across the board implementation as well.

Simply, the above stated is why not only must Trump's March 25th signed executive order to overhaul U.S. federal elections...including voters having to show proof of “citizenship” before voting in the 2026 midterm elections...but why the Constitution's word “citizens” remains one of the most important words...after “We the People” of course...in the very document Obama arrogantly dared to call but a “rule book.”

So as I write this, President Trump's “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections“ executive order seems to be facing court challenges and delays revolving around the all-important word “citizens”...meaning the Constitution's stated words, as written, continue to be challenged by liberal judges with a decidedly anti-America/anti-Trump agenda. Better to them to make a mockery of the Constitution...one of the greatest documents to freedom ever written...then it is for them to abide by its words.

And while our “Founders and Framers” did design our Constitution in order to “establish a more perfect union, ensure justice, promote domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote general welfare, and to secure liberty,” they also made it very clear that being an “American citizen” was not just needed in establishing a government based upon both “popular sovereignty” and the “consent of the governed,” but that “citizenship” itself was to be an integral part of who were are as a nation.

In fact, these learned gentlemen viewed “citizenship” as the cornerstone in which ultimate power would reside, as in “We American Citizens”...while at the same time protecting individual liberties, ensuring equal treatment under the law, and encouraging what they referred to as “active civic engagement.” And it's the sum of these individual parts that our “Founders and Framers” deemed an inherent component of being a U.S. “citizen.” Simply, “citizenship” itself was the very cornerstone of this new nation they helped to create, and in his standing strong for we “citizens”...and specifically only “citizens” being allowed to vote...President Donald J. Trump honors the rule of law that is our Constitution while activist judges and Democrat politicians continue to deem her as but an “outdated document” that needs an infusion of illegal alien blood...and that is the saddest, and most traitorous act of all. Case closed. ___________________________________________________________

 Footnotes

* “Fair procedures and rules” help to ensure a “just process” is in place when decisions affecting someone's rights or interests are in play. These rules include, but are not limited to, providing adequate notice, a fair hearing with the right to respond, and an unbiased decision-making process.

** The Republican National Committee v. Wetzel (2024) is the case involving a challenge to a Mississippi statute that allows absentee ballots to be received up to five days after the federal Election Day. 

Copyright © 2025 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All rights reserved.

 *********************************************************************************************

For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, The Liberal Media’s Fallen House of Cards.

*********************************************************************************************

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!                                           

Tomorrow, Tuesday, May 13th from 7pm to 8:30pm EST, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'Citizenship: The Cornerstone of Our Republic'; 'The Liberal Media’s Fallen House of Cards'; and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in to RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on https://rspradio1.com Click 'LISTEN LIVE' starting at 6:50pm EST, show begins at 7pm EST.

Op-ed: 

A Calculatingly Clever Political Move

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio 

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”  

– The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

And so the battle rages on between President Trump and the rule of law vs. liberal judges and justices who flagrantly violate the law that is our Constitution. And what a sad situation it truly is for even after having survived eight long traitorous years of a presidency where America’s allies became our enemies and America’s enemies became that president’s friends, and with us now finally having a president who truly wants to keep the homeland and ‘We the People’ safe, he is being forced to fight tooth-and-nail to do so.

And doing so President Trump is, but he is fighting an uphill battle against the very people that are supposed to follow the rule of law not interpret it in such a way as to push forward their own personal political agendas. And sadder still is that that scenario reaches all the way up to the Supreme Court...our nation’s highest court...yet a court also rife with some who not only let their personal beliefs guide their decisions, but who fail to understand the law as written in the very document they swore to serve and protect.

..."[it] is the law that governs, not the intent of the lawgiver." 

 – Justice Antonin Scalia in his 1997 Tanner Lecture 

And know that the Constitution clearly defines the duties that belong to the states and those that belong on the federal level, yet today’s liberal courts willingly and knowingly choose to either ignore the very words their rulings should be based upon or to blur the distinction between state and federal duties in order to reach a decision that fits their political agenda and the Constitution be damned.

A huge difference indeed and critical to understanding just how wrong the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals got it when they upheld the lower court’s ruling to stop President Trump’s temporary travel ban from going into effect...a ban that affected citizens from Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, and Syria from entering the U.S. for 90 days, halted the refugee program for 120 days, and indefinitely barred the acceptance of Syrian refugees.

So what does the Constitution say regarding immigration into our country and how does it affect what President Trump wanted to impose in regards to his travel ban is the question. First, it must be understood that the right to freely travel is indeed an inherent natural right afforded American citizens falling under the banner of the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” but that right was not fully recognized as such until a 1969 Supreme Court ruling came down in the case of Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969). This was the case filed on behalf of a 19-year-old unwed mother of one who was pregnant with her second, who was (I believe rightfully) denied welfare benefits...the 'gimme-gimmes' were at it even back then...based upon the grounds that she had not lived "in-State" for a year before her welfare application was filed, a requirement under then Connecticut law. 

So when the then left-leaning Supreme Court ruled in the plaintiff’s favor their decision established within U.S. law as fundamental the "right to travel" as a privilege of citizenship that was now to be understood as protected by Article IV...the Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause. But, and this is critical, nowhere in the ruling did it say that the “right to travel” would be given to foreign nationals to freely travel into our country.

And herein lies the crux of the issue we now face for while the courts should protect 'natural rights' given to American citizens it cannot and should not interfere with said rights and give those same rights to non-citizens based upon misinterpretations...whether deliberate or not...of the law as written. In other words they must be faithful to the original meaning of the Constitution, being that while Congress does indeed have the Constitutional authority to establish laws of naturalization and/or immigration they do not have the right nor Constitutional authority to create blanket legislation that allows non-citizens the rights of born or naturalized Americans.

And as such, thrown out should be any talk of blanket amnesty for illegals that Democrats so desperately want, and as for President Trump’s temporary travel ban where the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals put the ‘so-called’ rights of muslim college students above that of American citizens, that too should be thrown out.

So in regards to the right to freely travel as it relates to President Trump’s temporary travel ban as per what the law intended...foreign nationals whether immigrants, refugees, and most especially those out to kill us all, have no right to “freely travel” to come here nor do we as a country have a legal right to take them in for they are not citizens. Remember, the Constitution was written to be the laws for and to be the protection of American citizens alone and for liberal judges to adjudicate decisions in such a way as to blanket cover all the world’s people is just plain wrong for the law is as it is, and the law should not and must not be manipulated via reckless intent and interpretation by those wishing to bend it to fit their own personal or political ideologies or agendas.

And the Fourteenth Amendment is clear on this as it defines who are citizens and who are not as in "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States..." meaning the rights we citizens are afforded as per the Constitution does not allow for foreigners to be put above the rights of American citizens nor does it say we must welcome into our country those intent on doing us harm. 

Also, Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, empowers Congress, “To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization,” and this combined with Congress’s shared power with the president to govern the foreign policy of the nation, does indeed give Congress and the president discretion on who enters this country, how long they can stay, under what specific conditions they can enter or stay, and by what process some of them can become citizens.

And all this translates into President Trump’s executive order temporarily banning travel to the U.S. of those from seven muslim countries deemed a danger to America in that they harbor, train, operate from, or afford protection to those wishing to do us harm, was most assuredly Constitutionally sound and that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in their decision handed down did indeed not only go against the set perimeters of Constitutional law in regards to the separation of powers, but also adjudicated their vision of how to conduct foreign affairs instead of letting the president do what he needed to do as Commander-in-Chief in regards to protecting these United States.

And in their ruling in favor of what the liberals love to call ‘social justice’ these justices went against Constitutional law for the Constitution does not...I repeat does not...delegate to the federal government the power to make decisions regarding immigration, it only gives the federal government the power over naturalization, as in giving Congress the power to restrict “migrants” eligibility for citizenship. This means that with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals being a federal court...thus being part of the federal government...they did indeed overstep their bounds when refusing to lift the restraining order as per a lower court’s ruling that stopped Trump's temporary travel ban from being implemented even though much needed precedent for its implementation had already been set. 

To see those cases of precedent please refer to my article 'Precedent Had Already Been Set.'

In addition is the fact that the Constitution itself gives the president the right to issue such an order. And while executive orders do not require Congressional approval, they do, according to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, have the same legal weight as if they were passed by Congress even though they are not actual legislation. 

So where do we go from here now that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has taken it upon themselves to interpret the law as per their whims and not as laid down in the Constitution. Where do we go as said court claimed Trump’s executive order as written violated the Establishment Clause because it was discriminatory towards a certain group of people (muslims) and singled out a certain religion (islam)...which it did not as can be seen in my article 'Tim Scott, Activist Judges, and an Unconstitutional and Traitorous Ruling'....an order that I personally believe was not tough enough and for the obvious reason that muslims put sharia law above our rule of law which is the Constitution, something these judges either failed to take into account or simply chose not to take into account.

Where do we go...we go to President Trump himself to turn this wrong right and who issued the following statement upon hearing the 9th Circuit Court’s ruling, “We’ll be doing something very rapidly having to do with additional security for our country...you’ll be seeing that sometime next week,” letting everyone know that he will not be giving into a ruling that truly does put our nation’s security in jeopardy. 

And while Trump could have an 11-judge Circuit Court panel review the decision to see if his order as it stands should be heard by the entire 9th Circuit Court of Appeals know two things...first, even if he does this it does NOT mean this is the final outcome only that it could be reviewed and second, know Trump does have tricks up his sleeve including that he could use The Refugee Act of 1980 to 'manipulate' refugee numbers down...as in set the ceiling lower on the annual numbers let in and from which countries specifically...as is his right to do. But being the smart man that he is, President Trump knows he cannot risk taking this to the Supreme Court as the court is now evenly split along ideological lines and if their vote also splits along those lines the 9th Circuit’s ruling would stand...meaning the delusional left wins and ‘We the People’ lose yet again.

So President Trump’s most likely options include either a reworking of the order’s language in such a way that is more likely to pass legal scrutiny...such as clarifying that the order does not apply to legal permanent residents and other certain visa holders...both key points of contention in his order as it now stands. Or he could actually shelve that order and write a brand new executive order that will actually toughen the ban by zeroing in on more specifics thus tightening our security even more, and if written correctly there will be nothing the courts, the Democrats, or his naysayers on the left can do for like they found out with the ‘nuclear option’ they will find that sometimes things should have been left as was and not as they want or wish it to be. 

And with a man as calculatingly clever as Donald Trump is maybe this was his plan all along...root them out...find out both their weakness and their wants...and then go in for the figurative political ‘kill’ so to speak.

Something to think about now isn’t it...just saying.

**********************************************************************************

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Today, Tuesday, February 14th from 7to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss the Constitution's upholding of Trump's travel ban, defining the Democrat party, and numbers maybe even Democrats can understand.

Hope you can tune in at: http://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed: 

The Man Promoting Immigration Jihad vs Donald Trump

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots

To begin…let it be known that I thank Army Captain Humayun Khan for his service to our country and I honor the ultimate sacrifice he made for her. 

So with that being said does the old adage ‘like father like son’ apply in this case…no it does not for this father, Khizr M. Khan, in speaking at the Democratic Nation Convention used his son’s war time death in Iraq to help promote a candidate who is directly responsible for the death of four brave Americans in Benghazi, countless others during the monstrosity that was the Arab Spring, and whose ineptitude as Secretary of State helped Barack HUSSEIN Obama give birth to the nightmare that is ISIS. 

And in Kahn’s willingness to politicize every parent’s worst nightmare, this Gold Star father has not only insulted his son’s memory but has turned his back on the very country he now claims to love…a country he claims to love so much that his wife Ghazala, when it serves his…when it serves their…true purpose…stands silently and stoically by his side encased in a hajib-like head covering when just a few years ago she wore no such garment.

Newly radicalized…I doubt it…more like radicalization hidden just below the surface waiting for just the right time to appear. 

A Gold Star father and mother whose true allegiances seem not to lie with America but with the Muslim Brotherhood for Khizr Muazzam Khan is a co-founder of the ‘Journal of Contemporary Issues in Muslim Law’...as in his being an ongoing promoter and proponent of the subjugating and savage islamic rule of law known as the sharia…hence his wife’s head covering.  And Kahn’s Muslim Brotherhood ties are really no secret for his loyalties to Said Ramadan, the son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, are well known. And Ramadan, a major leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, was a man who publicly promoted jihad and islamic revivalism in Malaysia through the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia, which was and is actually the Malaysian branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

And it’s this very allegiance that has led some to believe that Khizr M. Khan is indeed a Muslim Brotherhood operative…an operative who had the audacity to say at the convention and again afterwards that Republican nominee Donald Trump’s temperament and lack of empathy…and what he calls “his black soul” because he temporarily wants to halt all muslim immigration into our country from what he believes are countries with terrorist ties and to do so until we get “our house in order”…render him unfit to lead this nation. And Khan also stated that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan have a “moral obligation” to speak out against the Republican standard-bearer. In fact, Kahn warned…threatened actually in both his words and speaking demeanor…with the word ‘blackmail’ coming to mind…that if they do not withdraw their support of Trump post-haste that he will continue to speak out against the Republican nominee at every opportunity given…and then some. 

But I say what a father has is a ‘moral obligation’ not to use his son…a son who gave his life fighting for this country…as a tool to try and sway an election in favor of those who support and want to welcome into our country those out to kill us all.

And when Khizr M. Khan’s wife Ghazala was asked in a recent Washington Post print interview why she stayed silent at the convention…something Trump himself questioned… she answered by responding directly to him saying, "If he (Trump) studied the real Islam and Koran, all the ideas he gets from terrorists would change, because terrorism is a different religion." Taqiyya in print for sure for it’s the qur’an itself that contains at least 109 verses that call for muslims to ‘war against’…to kill…nonbelievers for the sake of implementing islamic rule and sharia law.

And in said interview Ghazala Khan’s added that "Donald Trump said he has made a lot of sacrifices. He doesn’t know what the word sacrifice means," but I say neither does she or her husband because the true sacrifice made was by her son…a son who voluntarily chose to enlist as an American and to put his life on the line for this country…a sacrifice not made by either one of them.

"Captain Khan, killed 12 years ago, was a hero, but this is about RADICAL ISLAMIC TERROR and the weakness of our 'leaders' to eradicate it!" was the tweeted response of Donald Trump, a man who has always stood up for our military…a military he (rightfully) feels is now being used by the puppet Khizr M. Khan who willingly dangles on the end of Hillary Clinton’s Muslim Brotherhood pulled strings… strings put in place by none other than her ever vile BFF and 'so-called' advisor Huma Abedin.

And Huma Abedin...who is all for bringing into the U.S. as many muslim 'so-called' refugees as possible...is the very woman whose loyalty to the Muslim Brotherhood runs blood deep as well as tying her directly to Khizr M. Khan. And how so…the Saudi’s used Huma Abedin’s father Sayed Zaynul Abedin’s paper, ‘Muslim Minority Affairs in the West’ in their devising of a plan to conquer the U.S. through “massive muslim immigration”…immigration jihad if you will…and Khan himself worked briefly with Abedin’s father on this very plan. 

And what does Khizr M. Khan do here in the U.S. now…he currently heads KM Khan Law Office, a law firm with questionable ties to islamic investors and a law firm that just happens to specialize in both E2 and EB5 immigration services…with both services being a little more than a bit unnerving for rumor has it that the immigration services his firm offers are believed to be ‘visas for a price’…in other words ‘if you pay our asking price you gain entry into the U.S. and if you don’t you don’t get in’…but with Khan’s suspected islamic ties that means at what cost to the U.S. do they get in.

At a very high cost I believe for the ‘E2 Treaty Investors’ and ‘EB5 Investments & Related Immigration Services’ are the very programs that are “riddled with flaws and corruption” according to Senator Chuck Grasseley, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. And some of those ‘flaws’ in E2 include the fact that E2 monetary investments can be spent before plans are approved; foreign investment funds are not properly vetted (meaning they can come from countries that don’t like us very much); gifts and loans are accepted from foreign governments (can you say bribes); foreign governments can own and operate regional centers and projects; there are no background checks on anyone associated with a regional center; and visas for foreign workers are pushed through even if a person is tagged with a security warning; and these are just to name but a few.

And as far as EB5 is concerned, it comes complete with national security issues and abuses, including as per Senator Grasseley, Iranian operatives illicitly trying to enter the U.S. through said program, and EB5 is the very program that Khizr M. Khan is directly attached to.

A series of mere coincidences…I think not.

But now let’s go back in time for a bit and follow Khan’s history that led him to the above stated points. Khizr M. Khan, a graduate of Pakistan’s Punjab University Law College, moved from Pakistan to the United Arab Emirates…a known hotbed for the Muslim Brotherhood...who then, after a brief layover in the U.S., moved to Saudi Arabia where he worked directly for the Royal House of Saud as an interest lawyer specializing in International Trade Law…trade laws specifically concerning islamic oil companies. And it was while in this capacity that Khan wrote ‘In Defense of OPEC’…a paper defending OPEC against its naysayers in the West, including those naysayers here in the U.S.

After returning to the U.S., Khizr M.Kahn worked for seven years for Hogan Lovells LLP (then Hogan & Hartson), the Washington D.C. law firm that is officially registered to represent the government of Saudi Arabia here in the U.S. through election year 2016 (how convenient is that), and a law firm with ties to the Clinton Foundation…no surprise here. Beginning in 2004, this firm was and is the Clinton’s personal and the Foundation’s tax lawyers as well as their being the lawyers for the very foreign government…as in Saudi Arabia…that has given upward of $25 million to their Foundation. 

And get this…Hogan Lovells LLP is the very law firm that contentious AG Loretta Lynch worked for…just a bit too cozy of a coincidence if you ask me. And here’s the real kicker, Hogan and Lovells LLP just ‘happened’ to represent the small tech firm that managed Hillary's private server and did so through their handling of the patent for MX Logic’s email filtering program as well as being responsible for that company’s annual reports 

And the circle of corruption and collusion, united together as one lump sum, is now starting to fall in on itself.

So until both Khizr M. Khan and his wife publicly denounce, for all to hear, the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Taliban…until they both herald this country as the rightful and just player in this war against terror…neither of which either of them has done to date…Khan really needs to keep his mouth shut and stop using his son as but one piece in the political election game of immigration jihad. And Khizr M. Khan needs to let his brave son Rest in Peace as the American hero that he was… something he nor his wife will ever be no matter how much the Democrats…no matter how much the media…and most especially no matter how much the Republican primary sore losers…try to make them both out to be.

And that includes sore losers like former presidential rival Lindsey Graham who said Trump’s remarks were, "Unacceptable' doesn't even begin to describe it" and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush who called Trump's comments "incredibly disrespectful." What these two and others forget is that Khan’s remarks were the disrespectful  ones…disrespectful to the memory of his own son and the freedoms he was fighting and ultimately died for.

And lastly, here’s a little lesson in the Constitution for Khizr M. Khan…the anything but self-professed constitutional authority and the man striving for immigration jihad. In his referencing Donald Trump’s remarks at the DNC regarding his call to temporarily ban muslim immigration into this country, Khan cited the 14th Amendment as to why Trump’s proposal is unconstitutional. But he cited it wrong as the 14th Amendment applies only to "all persons born or naturalized" in the U.S.  It does not now nor has it ever referred to or referenced foreign persons in foreign countries coming here.   

And as Donald Trump clearly stated…and did so on numerous occasions…this proposed ban "would not apply to U.S. citizens, members of the U.S. military and others with a legal right to be in the United States"…it proves but one thing…Khizr M. Khan truly has ‘selective hearing’ as to what he does or does not want to hear or to what he is told or allowed to hear. 

And if truth be told that nicely sums up the entirety of the kumbaya blind following ‘you owe me’ members of today’s Democratic party…or should I say the Constitution trampling, America-hating, God-mocking members of today’s Democratic party…as well as those in the Republican party who cater to the left's agenda of political correctness...just saying.

Investigative Report:
First Amendment Held Hostage In Kentucky
By: Diane Sori and Craig Andresen / Right Side Patriots on http://cprworldwidemedia.net/

“I’ve weighed the cost and I’m prepared to go to jail, I sure am...this has never been a gay or lesbian issue for me. This is about upholding the word of God.” 
- Kim Davis, the woman who has made herself the flag bearer for the anti-gay marriage issue

Diversions...deflections...and all modes of roadblocks for a woman who's been turned into a martyr by the religious far right as she, a civil servant, used her personal religious beliefs as a weapon of sorts to stop others...in this case a same-sex couple...from accessing their now SCOTUS awarded, Constitutionally given, legal right to civilly marry.

Now please understand before we go forward that this co-written article in no way is an attack on Christianity nor on anyone's personal beliefs, know that we both are straight, and that we both are believers in the one true living God of the Christians and the Jews.

The U.S. Constitution, coupled with the SCOTUS decision against discrimination as per the 14th Amendment, makes it unconstitutional to “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”...and this is the touch-point in a case that has set religious Conservatives against more secular Conservatives with neither side realizing that by feeding into and focusing on the media driven hype surrounding this case that they are actually allowing the left to once again orchestrate what is the news. And in this particular case...a case that should have remained a local issue at best...now thanks to the media and a woman looking for her 15 minutes of fame coupled with a healthy dose of cash...has Kim Davis...who just four years ago says she “surrendered” her life to Jesus Christ... being jailed for refusing to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. Setting herself up as their judge and jury, this woman willfully and knowingly violated the law for when the couple asked “under whose authority” is she refusing them their now legal right to civilly marry, she replied “under God's authority.” 

When Davis claims this is about upholding the word of God...and when those who support her and are desperate to make her a martyr use those words as the basis for their argument, they are all making a big mistake as none of them are separating Davis' private life from her public job. To be clear, Davis is free to believe and worship how she so chooses in her private life, but as an elected official, and with no mention in her job description regarding the word of God, she is required to uphold the rule of law. And when you realize that this case has become ground zero for the religious far right seeing how far they can bend the letter of the law...Davis...the elected Clerk of Rowan County who has previously denied other same-sex couples their marriage licenses...set the stage for all that followed when within hours of the SCOTUS ruling asked that she be excused from performing same-sex marriages. Not happy when the High Court refused her request, Davis now relishes in being the Holy Grail of sorts in this fight, saying this was a “heaven or hell issue for me and for every other Christian that believes.”

“Christian that believe”...odd choice of words from a woman who like we said was not quite the epitome of a pious Christian woman just a mere four-years ago...we'll get into that in a bit. And Davis saying...after the media started giving her her 15-minutes of fame...that she would not step down from her $80,000 a year taxpayer-funded elected position, because she would lose a platform from which to preach the Gospel. “If I left, resigned or chose to retire, I would have no voice for God’s word,” Davis said.

But the problem is that a government position, especially one that is taxpayer funded...is not now nor has it ever been the place to preach the Gospel...that is what churches are for. A government position is and must remain a secular position...no matter how some are trying to change that...and a fairly recent conversion in no way negates that fact for her or for anyone else. Davis, plain and simple, is a public servant and is one of her own free will...doing what she knew was a secular job...and nothing in her job description has canceled out that fact... and remember no one is denying her her personal religious beliefs. However, what Davis is being called to task for is breaking the law and for pushing her religious beliefs on members of the public who do not share her same beliefs.

The founding principal of 'separation of church and state'...critical to the principals of a non-theocratic nation...has now come into play as some religious Conservatives insist the very institution of marriage is strictly religious in nature, and that efforts to force people to sanction something they are against violates the Constitution by intruding on their religious freedom. What these folks choose to forget is that prior to the SCOTUS ruling, 37 states issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples understanding that the Constitution does not allow states to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, and clerks of the court did issue the required licenses with no problem...that is until Kim Davis came along.

And now what most of the religious Conservatives point to in their mistaken belief as to why Davis was jailed is a law...made effective July 15, 1998...402.005 'Definition of Marriage'...which states “as used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, 'marriage' refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.”

That law stemmed from a November 9, 1973 decision by the Kentucky Court of Appeals. In Jones v. Hallahan, two women were properly denied a marriage license, but that decision by the court was based solely upon a dictionary definition of marriage, despite the fact that state statutes did not restrict marriage to a male/female couple its decision said that "in substance, the relationship proposed...is not a marriage.”

The religious sorts have also been attempting to make their case based upon the Kentucky State Constitution which states...“Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized,” an amendment which was added to the Kentucky Constitution in 2004.

On February 12, 2014, a U.S. district court ruled that Kentucky must recognize same-sex marriages established in other jurisdictions. On July 1, the same judge ruled that Kentucky's denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples violates the U.S. Constitution, but stayed the implementation of his decision pending appeal, and both decisions were overturned on appeal. However, after the SCOTUS decision on June 26, 2015, citing any law or state Constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages was in violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and therefore unconstitutional...Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear and Attorney General Jack Conway made a public announcement that the court's order would be implemented immediately, thus nullifying any laws or Constitutional amendments against same-sex marriage.

A few key things of note here…first, the decision to ban same-sex marriage in Kentucky made by the Kentucky Court of Appeals in 1973 was based not upon any Biblical definition of marriage rather it was based upon a dictionary definition of marriage...a definition that has changed over the years. The original definition of marriage as written in the 14th century came from the Anglo-French word 'marier' and referred to both marriages of a man and a woman as well as to couples of the same sex. In fact, if you go to today's Marriam-Webster dictionary or even dictionary.com you will find an adherence to this centuries old definition. Only the religious continue to define marriage as solely between one man and one woman, but the reality is that nowhere in the Bible does it say that.

Second, the SCOTUS did not, as religious Conservatives are claiming, write law in June 2015...what they did was interpret the law in accordance to the United States Constitution which is, indeed, their job. And in doing so they found that laws or Constitutional amendments offered or enacted by the individual states which barred or banned same-sex marriage were in violation of the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment and were, therefore, unconstitutional as such laws and amendments were discriminatory. 

Third, as per the June SCOTUS decision, and with Kentucky’s Governor and State’s Attorney General both implementing without delay the decision of the SCOTUS. thus nullifying Kentucky’s anti-same-sex marriage laws and Constitutional amendment, Kim Davis was not, as religious Conservatives claim, acting according to either Kentucky law or Kentucky’s Constitution...she was in fact, acting in direct opposition to them by denying same-sex couples a marriage license.

And lastly, Kim Davis was not...again as religious Conservatives claim...jailed for her Apostolic Christian beliefs...Davis was jailed for contempt of court and disorderly conduct after her deliberately orchestrated, second court date hissy-fit initiated just so she could become the for-profit 'Go Fund Me' martyr of the religious far right. And know that anyone who openly defies a court order and openly disrupts a court proceeding would also be rightfully thrown in jail.

Another important item of note as it pertains to the religious Conservative's claim...actually a fabricated myth...that Davis was upholding Kentucky law...the law in question...402.005 'Definition of Marriage,' as quoted above, contains this wording: “marriage refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life”...notice the important words 'civil status'...as this means that no...we repeat no...religious applications to a marriage union is part of the law.

Also, another part of the same law religious Conservatives seem all-too willing to ignore is the reality of Davis having been divorced not once, not twice, but three times, making it hypocritical to claim she was upholding the law since part of the law referring to “only one man and one woman” has been deemed unconstitutional and thus nullified by the SCOTUS, while the “for life” wording had nothing whatsoever to do with the SCOTUS ruling...meaning Kim Davis not only broke the law by her refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but that she also broke Kentucky law itself via her own three divorces.

Three divorces and four marriages within a fourteen-year time span. Divorced from husband number one in 1994, then from number two in 2006, and from number three in 2008...Davis' twins were conceived from an affair with husband number three while she was married to husband number one and whom husband number two then adopted. Husband number four is a remarry of husband number two... and the biggest farce is that Davis did not stay married to husband number three, the father of said twins, but divorced him to remarry the man, husband number two, who adopted them...can you keep that all straight...bet you can't and bet she can't either.

And all these marriages and divorces were while Davis served in some capacity or other with the county when she apparently had no problem breaking 'supposed' Biblical law. And the woman who thinks herself above the law, and has the audacity to speak of committed relationships, has been in a committed relationship...and isn't that what marriage is...for at the most nine years out of the ten years she was married to husband number one, eight years with husband number two, and a mere one year with husband number three...when the same-sex couple wanting to get a marriage license have been in a committed relationship solely with each other for over 17 years. Now pray tell what right does this woman have to judge anyone regarding the sanctity of whom should or should not marry...simply...she has none.

And Kim Davis, the woman who says, "I am not perfect...No one is...But I am forgiven," might believe she is forgiven in the name of her fairly new-found religious affiliation, but the truth is she is not forgiven in the secular eyes of the law. Continuing on in defiance, Davis, through her attorneys, issued a statement saying that any marriage licenses not bearing her signature were invalid even after the federal judge said Davis did not have to issue same-sex marriage licenses herself, she merely had to agree not to interfere with the five deputy clerks who had said they would issue them in her stead...which she would not agree to. And while the Rowan County Attorney rightfully dismissed her statement, Jack Conway, the Attorney General of Kentucky, is now considering the possibility of having a special prosecutor pursue potential charges of official misconduct against her.

And so the real questions that need to asked, and the ones that religious Conservatives trying to make Davis into a martyr do not want asked are clear...if Davis is allowed or even encouraged to hold her religious ground against Kentucky's laws, U.S. laws, and the Constitution, what is to keep any muslim in an elected position from using sharia law against our laws as the basis of their interpretation of what said laws should be, thus allowing others to hold our laws and Constitution hostage by invoking their personal religious beliefs as their excuse. And would those so eager to support Davis in her 'supposedly' First Amendment battle support others with whose religion they do not agree...we think not.