What do you call people who use foreigners to win power? The hirers of mercenaries? In today’s political campaigns (a military term, interestingly), they’re called something else: statist public officials.
And they’re hard at work, an internal Obama administration e-mail shows, trying to turn as many foreigners as possible into citizens in time to vote in the November 8 election. As Fox News reports:
The email, from a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services field office chief and part of a chain of correspondence within the agency, urges the unnamed recipient to swear in as many citizens as possible “due to the election year.”
“The Field Office due to the election year needs to process as many of their N-400 cases as possible between now and FY 2016,” reads the email, which was disclosed to FoxNews.com by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who chairs the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
“If you have cases in this category or other pending, you are encouraged to take advantage of the OT if you can,” the email continues. “This will be an opportunity to move your pending naturalization cases. If you have not volunteered for OT, please consider and let me know if you are interested.”
Parts of the email were redacted before it was disclosed to FoxNews.com, but it was sent by the branch chief of the Houston Field Office District 17. It was not clear to whom it was addressed.
“I couldn’t have said it better!” reads the July 21 note introducing the forwarded missive. “It’s the end of the year crunch time, so let’s get crunchy! Go Team Houston! Thanks for all your hard work!”
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
The e-mail’s release amounts to the disclosure of a dirty little secret about a dirty, but poorly kept, big one: Today’s immigration, as I wrote in 2014, is a massive Democrat “get in the vote” drive. In other words, with 85 percent of our post-1965 newcomers hailing from the Third World and Asia — and with 70 to 90 percent of them voting Democrat upon being naturalized — it’s no mystery why Democrats have become the immigration party. As to my quoted terminology, as I explained in 2014:
While [getting out the vote] involves getting as many as possible of the set number of sympathetic potential voters to the polls, getting in the vote is the process by which you increase that number of sympathetic voters. This process is…done in two ways. One is by indoctrinating people — especially young people — via academia, the media and entertainment. The second way is through immigration.
Why immigration? Because virtually the whole world is, to use our provisional (and lacking) political terminology, to the “left” of America. In addition, indoctrinating a young person is effective, but it’s an expensive process that must continue throughout his formative and teen years. Far easier is to import ready-made leftists. The results are quicker, too: the targeted babe born today won’t be entering the voting booth for 18 years. An immigrant, however, can perhaps be naturalized in just a few years. And politicians are more interested in the next election than in a future election involving the next person to hold their seat.
Given that under “the Obama administration, 1,811 aliens from terrorist countries were granted U.S. citizenship instead of being deported,” as Breitbart writes today, a sane policy would be to slow down and apply a fine-tooth comb to naturalizations. Instead, the site continues, the “Obama administration ended the program that uncovered the extensive [naturalization] fraud” and is “now in full and blind rubber stamp mode to crank out new citizens,” as Jessica Vaughan, director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, put it. Nothing, it appears, matters more than the attainment of power — not even American lives.
And make no mistake, writes American Thinker’s Rick Moran, this “is an order direct from the top. For months, the administration has been urging legal immigrants to become citizens so they can vote against Donald Trump in November. Immigration officials have been tasked to make that a reality.” As to the legality, Moran continues, “On the surface, these exhortations would appear to violate the Hatch Act — the law that prevents executive department employees from engaging in political activity. You could easily define the activity of immigration officials as a quasi-“Get Out the Vote” strategy to help Hillary Clinton get elected. But as long as there is no overt coordination with the Clinton campaign, it would be tough to prove.”
Yet no coordination is necessary, as the strategy of winning political power by diluting Western populations with “left”-leaning foreigners is well known among, and zealously advanced by, pseudo-elite insiders. For example, Briton Andrew Neather, once an advisor to ex-prime minister Tony Blair, confessed in 2009 that the massive immigration into the United Kingdom over the previous 15 years was designed to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.” Articulating the treasonous spirit even more brazenly, Social Democrat Swedish politician, multiculturalist, and immigrationist Mona Sahlin announced in 2001 that “the Swedes must be integrated into the new Sweden; the old Sweden is never coming back.” Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.) said last year, “Immigration reform [amnesty] is probably the biggest issue of the 21st century. It will decide who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.” Also in 2015, Barack Obama said he was “pretty optimistic” conservatism would be neutralized “because this country just becomes more and more of a hodgepodge of folks.”
Then consider the testimony of Fredo Arias-King, ex-aide to former Mexican president-elect Vicente Fox. About how he and his colleagues spoke to 50 US congressmen and senators back in 1999 and 2000 he writes, “[The Democrat legislators] seemed more interested in those immigrants and their offspring as a tool to increase the role of the government in society and the economy. Several of them tended to see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs and the political class guaranteeing those programs, a point they emphasized more than the voting per se. Moreover, they saw Latinos as more loyal and ‘dependable’ in supporting a patron-client system and in building reliable patronage networks to circumvent the exigencies of political life as devised by the Founding Fathers.”
This is why Obama and his fellow travelers push not just immigration but also illegal migration and practically make complaints of microaggressions sufficient grounds for being granted “refugee” status. It’s also why a 2015 report, by radio personality Sue Payne, about a secret Obama administration amnesty plan rings true. As she related, administration sociopolitical engineers intend to use the new illegal aliens as “seedlings” that will develop a “country within a country.” These foreigners will “navigate, not assimilate,” she said, as they eventually “take over the host,” coming “out of the shadows” and “pushing the citizens into the shadows.”
If you can’t get the people to change the government, change the people. After creating that country within a country, make it the new country by feeding it and growing it until it consumes all. And then feeding and growing government until it consumes all, is already as good as done.
