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.
Tuesday, May 13, 2025
Monday, May 12, 2025
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.
*********************************************************************************************
*********************************************************************************************
Monday, February 25, 2019
And Vermont Gov. Phil Scott...a Democrat of course...is already salivating over his upcoming signing of this bill.
So while Vermont's Republican House members did try hard to at least amend and temper down this monstrosity of a bill...including their wanting a key amendment that would require a woman to receive an ultrasound before aborting their baby in addition to the aforementioned parental consent for minors...their demands of course fell on deaf ears. And why...because Democrats as a whole... both in Vermont and apparently nationwide...now see abortion...now see infanticide...as a no questions asked no answers needed fundamental right afforded women under Roe v. Wade...instead of what more times than not is a last ditch choice made out of desperation, fear, and hopelessness, coupled with a resounding sense of guilt.
But even guilt cannot alter the facts that as of today, according to recent polls, a full fifty-five percent of Americans consider themselves unabashedly pro-choice, while just 38 percent consider themselves fully pro-life...with the rest making up the remaining seven percent who fall somewhere in between. And I personally seem to fall within that seven percent as I do support abortion in incidents of rape, incest, when the life of the mother is in immediate jeopardy, and when a baby is so medically compromised that it has zero chance of survival outside the womb, yet at the same time I do support the “Heartbeat Law”...a law where once a heartbeat is detected via a vaginal ultrasound...and hopefully except in those four aforementioned cases...abortion would become a no-no.
And why do I support the wanting of a “Heartbeat Law”... a law some on the left claim was solely “designed” to give the Supreme Court an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade which it was not...because the true scientific fact is that without a beating heart a human being is not “alive” per se (I do not believe that life begins at conception)... and if one is not “alive” one is not conscious of nor does one feel pain. But once the heart starts beating we enter another whelm completely and with the human heart starting to beat between day's 18 to 21 after conception so does it become a human being. And while some women don't know they're pregnant that early on they do know when they've missed a period or two, and at that point a heartbeat is well established…no abortion for you...except...and again I hope...in the four stated cases.
A “Heartbeat Law” plus specifically laid out “exceptions” seems like a fair compromise to me, and states like North Dakota (the first to enact such a law back in 2012), Arkansas, Ohio, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi, not only have such a law in place but also ban abortions in full at 20 weeks gestation and later...basically when a fetus becomes “viable”...as in it can live independently of its mother.
And both Alabama and West Virginia also entered into the abortion fray when their states respective voters approved ballot measures that amended both their state's constitutions in ways that do not, at this time, change abortion rights in their states but could play a role if by some chance Roe v. Wade were to be overturned...which by the way it won't be as precedence has already been set. In Alabama, for example, the ballot measure gave the unborn protective “legal rights,” while in West Virginia, their state constitution was amended to stress these simple yet direct words, "nothing in this constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion."
And right now 14 other states are considering implementing a “Heartbeat Law” including my state of Florida where there is a bill...HB 235...currently being introduced into our state legislature. And while Florida law currently prohibits third trimester abortions except in cases of medical necessity, this bill, actually two bills combined into one, aims to not only ban women from getting an abortion after a fetus' heartbeat is detected, but does not allow exceptions for rape or incest. And if the "Heartbeat Law" is passed any violation of said law would render the woman who had an abortion and the doctor who preformed the abortion a third-degree felon.
But I don't believe such a “Heartbeat Law” as the one Florida is proposing...a bill without any exceptions at all...will ever come to fruition as Florida's Supreme Court, even while leaning conservative, would first have to wait for precedence to be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court...precedence set in Roe v. Wade (and in other cases) that states cannot impose an "undue burden" on a woman seeking an abortion before fetal viability is reached which usually happens between 24 and 26 weeks gestation.
And while Democrats will continue on in their efforts to shove their extremist views on the entirety of reproductive rights down America's collective throat, overturning precedence... which in the past has been done in certain key instances...I believe in the particular case of abortion will not be done as to do so would only serve to delegitimize the Supreme Court itself which is something I highly doubt the justices would be willing to do. Hence, abortion will remain an option but with adjustments to current laws made by some states...the “Heartbeat Law” being just one such adjustment.
And yet another key adjustment regarding abortion was made just last Friday when, thanks to President Trump and his administration, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced what has come to be know as the Protect Life final ruling...a ruling which will now partially defund the abortion mill known as Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. How so...via its new requirements that federal “TitleX” family planning funds cannot go to abortion facilities, while also denying “Title X” locations from giving abortion referrals.
In fact, the new ruling...done to ensure both transparency and the legal and ethical use of taxpayer funds...also states that a "financial physical separation" between facilities and programs where abortion is a method of family planning must be in place, while also eliminating the current requirement that, “Title X providers offer abortion counseling and referral.”
And know that Planned Parenthood is hopping mad what with it being our country's largest provider of abortions and with its having about 41 percent of all “Title X” patients, mostly low-income women or so they claim. Now fearing the loss of a good chunk of the $60 million they already receive from said “Title X” program, Planned Parenthood is not happy with the fact that while the new ruling would not reduce the overall amount of federal funds spent on family planning itself, it will redirect monies to “Title X” centers that do not promote or perform abortions thus taking needed funding away from them and giving it to (gasp) faith-based groups instead.
Killing unborn children costs Planned Parenthood a lot of money you know.
So where do we stand now that a final ruling is in place? First, while in place the new rules are not yet official as they still need to be published in the Federal Register and get through the 60-day waiting period to go into effect. Second, so-called reproductive rights advocates fully expect lawsuits challenging the rule to be filed way before the ruling goes into effect. In fact, Planned Parenthood's Deputy Director of Public Policy Litigation and Law Carrie Flaxman said that the organization is already reviewing their legal options in regards to fighting this new ruling and is “committed to fighting it.”
And the ACLU, as expected, is already sticking their nose into the mix with ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project Senior Staff Attorney Ruth Harlow, saying in a statement that, "Nobody should be denied access to reproductive health care or receive inadequate care because of their lack of income," and that the ACLU is also currently reviewing the legal options and are, like Planned Parenthood, committed to fighting back.
Honestly, I see no disparities at all as “Title X” is open to anyone no matter their race, color, income, or creed proving that the “race card” is getting both tiring and old for it's not President Trump's fault that Americans who value the sanctity of human life are tired of the killing of our unborn. I know I am...how about you?
Copyright @ 2019 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 Who Really Lynched Jussie Smollett?
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!Tuesday, February 26th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'A Heartbeat and a Ruling...Planned Parenthood Ain't Happy at All' 'Who Really Lynched Jussie Smullett?'; and important news of the day.
Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
And while it was a given that the liberal left would oppose
President Trump's travel ban...a ban that would at least temporarily keep the enemy ‘over there’
instead of us laying out the welcome mat for the enemy to come here... sadly
some even on the right oppose it as well for they hope that some way somehow we
can peacefully live side-by-side together with those wishing us dead. But what
these folks forget is the simple fact that the civilized man can never exist in
peace alongside those whose vision of peace is subjugation, submission, and
of America becoming part of the ever expanding caliphate.
And unless we wake-up to this harsh reality our future will be a future decided
by simple math. And the numbers involved are truly staggering...numbers seeming to
start small but while we remain sleeping turn into numbers that increase more
than two-fold with each generation. In fact, a recent Pew Research Center study...a study done over six years using data from 2,500 censuses and surveys... found
that by the middle of this century there will be about 2.8 billion muslims
worldwide up from 1.6 billion today. And with islam now being the world’s
second-largest religion after Christianity, the numbers say that by 2070
muslims will outnumber Christians worldwide.
Are you starting to wake-up yet?- On May 6, 1882, President Chester A. Arthur signed the 'Chinese Exclusion Act' which banned "skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining" from entering the U.S for 10 years, while also forcing Chinese who were already living here to obtain certificates in order to re-enter if they left the country as well as prohibiting them from obtaining citizenship. Expiring in 1892, it was extended for 10 more years in what was called the 'Geary Act' which now forced Chinese residents to register and obtain a certificate of residence, without which they could be deported.
- On March 3, 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt signed the 'Anarchist Exclusion Act' banning anarchists and others deemed to be political extremists from entering the U.S. after the 1901 fatal shooting of President William McKinley by Leon Czolgosz, an American anarchist who was the son of Polish immigrants. This act which became known as the 'Immigration Act of 1903' codified previous immigration law, and in addition to anarchists, added three other classes of people then deemed ‘undesirables...those with epilepsy, beggars, and importers of prostitutes. This was also the first time individuals were banned for their political beliefs.
- In the days leading up to World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt told America that refugees posed a serious threat to our country's national security, and he did so by using the premise that Nazi spies could be hiding amongst them. Now limiting the number of German Jews who would be admitted to the U.S. to 26,000 annually, the reality became that less than 25% of that quota was actually filled due to Hitler’s extermination camps...something Roosevelt knew but did nothing about.
- On August 21, 1950, the 'Internal Security Act of 1950'...also known as the 'Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950' or the 'McCarran Act'...allowed for the deportation of any immigrant believed to be a member of the Communist Party, and members of communist organizations already here were required to register as well as not being allowed to become citizens. And while some sections of the act were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1993, some parts of the act still stand to this day.
- On April 7, 1980, following the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis, President Jimmy Carter cut diplomatic relations with and imposed sanctions on Iran as well as banning Iranians from entering the country.
- In 1987, during President Ronald Reagan’s second term in office, Senator Jesse Helms...via his ‘Helms Amendment'...had those suffering from Aids or HIV added to the list of those not allowed entry into the U.S. as the U.S. Public Health Service listed both as "dangerous and contagious" diseases.
Hopefully you can now see that besides the all-important
afore mentioned numbers, precedence has already been set for denying entry into our country those
we deem to be hostile...and in this case those rightfully so deemed are muslims...muslims hostile
to both our way of life and to the Constitution...the very rule of law we are governed by. And really,
why should we take in those who show no interest in assimilating into the fabric
of our American society...who show no interest in becoming true red, white, and
blue Americans...but who instead want to bend us into submission to ways, ideals,
and values so reprehensible to not only our Judeo-Christian faiths, thinking, and
beliefs, but to what we know is simple right vs. wrong.And as for most of those (obviously not all) who say they have either converted to Christianity or who are more 'moderate' in their views...remember the word taqiyya...the islamic juridical term whose meaning relates to when a muslim is both encouraged and allowed, under sharia law, to lie to help achieve the goal of islamic conquest.
It is coming and probably soon for lone wolves are being
awoken by those whose commands they follow...lone wolves as in terrorist
themselves...lone wolves arriving on our shores who will breed like animals with
the sole purpose of increasing muslim numbers.****************************************************************************************************
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!


















