HOW MANY OF THE 50 STATE GOVERNORS ARE
OWNED BY THE KHAZAR BOLSHEVIKS?

HOW MANY OF THEM ARE COMPROMISED BY SEXUAL BLACKMAIL?

HOW MANY OF THEM ARE CORRUPTED BY BRIBES?

IS THERE EVEN ONE GOVERNOR WHO WOULD PROTECT HIS STATE?

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

This is not "migration"; it is an invasion and even the largest and best-endowed, holding all of Wall Street, cannot afford it.

New York City will be cutting overtime pay for its police officers in an effort to pay for the city's ongoing migrant crisis despite police complaints that they are already understaffed.

Mayor Eric Adams' administration has informed the city's police, fire, corrections and sanitation departments that they must submit an overtime pay reduction plan and begin tracking progress each month, City Hall confirmed to Fox News Digital. Police unions say the plan will reduce the number of cops on patrol and make the city more dangerous.

New York cannot afford this.

Its not just New York.  Chicago alone will spend $255 million on this and they don't have it either.

CHICAGO - Chicago’s burgeoning migrant crisis will have cost taxpayers more than a quarter of a billion dollars by Dec. 31, Mayor Brandon Johnson told City Council members Friday.

But this is a complete lie:

Ald. Ray Lopez (15th) later issued a statement saying he’s "cautiously optimistic" about Johnson’s proposal, but that it’s "simply unacceptable that Chicago is forced to shoulder the burden for asylum-seekers" because the federal government won’t "address this crisis decades in the making."

The Federal Government -- both sides of the aisle, and every Administration back to at least Reagan's, has refused to act on this as an invasion which it is.

Reagan essentially granted amnesty in 1986 under the statement and claim that it was a one-time deal and all illegal immigration would be stopped.

Neither his administration or any other has actually stopped it since.

OK, if the Federal Government will not because they both are buying votes from various constituencies then it is the duty of the Governors to do so, and they have their State Guard with which to do so.  Call them up and post them on the border, deputizing as many citizens as you need to and will volunteer (that'll be "lots") in support for observation, communications and, with their own weapons and ammunition, as provided for as the unorganized militia, to buttress said forces of The Guard.

Attempt to enter illegally and you will be denied entry.
Attempt to force your way in anyway and you will get shot.

"Oh, they'll go get an injunction!" many say.  Of course they will.

So what?

Sack up and tell them the options are either deploy the US Military and stop the entries, all of them OR YOU, AS GOVERNOR, WILL DO SO as the Constitution DEMANDS, letters on paper be damned.

May I remind you of Norton .v. Shelby County?

An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed. 

It says an unconstitutional act.  It does not limit this to the legislature.

Any such injunction is invalid as it is clearly a violation of the Constitution which requires the Federal Government to stop all invasive acts.

The Constitution does not say "except if some group of people profit from it"; the requirement is absolute.

While many States and localities could make an entirely-reasonable argument in court about financial matters (e.g. SNAP/EBT, Medicaid and similar) onto which citizens are forced as a direct and indirect result of this invasion and the taking from the state, local and citizens that come from it, along with the additional crime, this is not a court proceeding, it has no requirement for standing and it is not a complaint for equitable relief.

You do not sue to enforce that which has been sued over and ignored for forty years by every Administration on both sides of the aisle when the subject matter is a black-letter Constitutional requirement that is intentionally, willfully and maliciously being ignored.

YOU SACK UP AND TELL THEM IT ENDS RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW and you do it under the CLEAR authority of the US Constitution as a State Governor who has both a State Police force and a State Guard -- that is, a State-authorized and armed militia and if fulfillment of that duty by the Federal Government does not come right here and now, on a permanent basis, you will use it along with the unorganized militia consisting of your entire adult population.

That is why the States have a Guard; there are times the Federal Government either can't or won't comply with the requirement to defend the nation against invasion, and should such occur there are other forces who both can and under the Constitution must do so.

Enough with the bull**** Governors.

PS: Don't tell me you can't as we all know that's a lie -- one of your own did at Martha's Vineyard, didn't you?

(read more)