Regarding your opening news item about the US deliberate bombing of rescue workers in Yemen...
Not only is the deliberate targeting of rescue workers a standard Israeli military tactic, it is an internationally recognized war crime, it is despicable and cowardly. Every involved US pilot, ground crew member, Intel officer, civilian logistics and weapon transport worker and every worker in the weapons manufacturers from the assembly line on up to the vile executive boardroom should hang their heads in shame. They have all disgraced the nation in yet another despicable and cowardly war crime.
All true. And bombing civilian infrastructure without even the benefit of a Declaration of War is as unconstitutional as the Patriot Act or what Nixon did to Cambodia in the 1970s.
Thank you!! How do any of these people sleep at night, I’ll never know. Scumbags, every last one of them & I don’t want any of them defending my freedom.🤮😞🙁😢
When it comes to the Bill of Rights, I submit now is not the time for citizens like myself whose families have been citizens since the beginning to be as loud and ornery as possible.
If the Chinese started kidnapping people off the streets and shipping to another country is paid by the Chinese government to disappear them, the new State Dept. Vamperella Spokewoman would be saying the Chinese are practicing human trafficking, and she would be correct.
Close the borders, sure. Deport illegals after they've had their day in court, sure. Just snatch 'em and fly 'em out, that's as unconstitutional as it gets. If I don't speak out now I never will.
A man might be able to reason, as some wise guy said many years ago. Unfortunately, the results of man's reasoning and his actions may not always be logical, or at least, be helpful to his survival.
Everyone loves to point out when "Trump's" judges don't side with him. Seems like it's time to start acknowledging that the heritage foundation made a decent list of principled judges that weren't political hacks.
Lol. Good point. He said he wanted "strict constructionist" judges, and so far, at least sometimes he has gotten them. I quoted Hugo Black, who really did try to apply the Constitution literally.
I think they'll stand firm on deporting people without hearings. What will really be interesting is when the constitutionality of the Patriot Act reaches them, but that might take awhile.
I agree with on deporting without hearing. I want to see a case get to the court for the revocation of a visa or green card. What does permanent residency mean if it can be taken away for saying things, or by your associations?
PM Carney may be "different" than Justin Trudeau, but he has a lot in common with Trump. Both are former businessmen who had never held an elected office before they took the highest office in the land... Makes you wonder if the international oligarchy planned this?
It does. Oddly enough, my wife started wondering that a couple of months ago. I think one faction of the international oligarchy either planned this or has figured out a way to take advantage of the situation.
I thought the plan was to rid the country of violent persons who came here illegally? So why are we rabidly pursuing a grad student with a green card... oh. Criticized Israel. Gotcha. Well, that's stupid, legal or not, and it is going to splatter the President's agenda with smelly goo.
"No State 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." Amendment XIV, Section 1
When deportation critics cite the 14th's provision for due process under law for all persons in the US, regardless of citizenship status, the unspoken assumption is that deportation deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. I think a case may be made that, as deportation is not a criminal proceeding or prosecution, due process does not follow. As I understand it, the executive is legally empowered to deport whom Sec State chooses. That's not taking or destroying; that's being nice. If you, my fellow citizen, provide substantial support to Hamas, you are subject to criminal prosecution and decades of jail time. That's what due process is for, not to keep a guest from being shown the door.
In other words, if the administration had escorted Kahlil to LaGuardia, put him on a flight home and told him not to come back, they would have been (imo) within the law(s), as written, to do so. Whisking him off to Louisiana and detaining him indefinitely without charge while making criminal accusations for which they have provided no support is, of course, a ridiculous flouting of the law(s) as written, and I predict they will leave their legal shoes in that mud.
Well, I think the unitary executive theory, which was pushed by authoritarian assholes like Dick Cheney starting over 40 years ago, is a steaming pile of tyrannical crap. Neither the President nor the Secretary of State should have that sort of power, and if they try they should be overthrown, by force if necessary. Read the Declaration of Independence.
And just WTF do you mean by providing "substantial support for Hamas?" Trump is saying that calling what Israel is doing a genocide is providing substantial support for Hamas. It's bullshit and I won't stand for it.
That's the same shit John Adams tried in 1798, Woodrow Wilson did in 1917-21, and Joe McCarthy and company did in the 1950s. Americans fought them then, and Americans will fight this bunch of holier-than-thou faux patriotic puppets of Zionism now.
If we let them get away with deporting noncitizens who are legally here without a hearing, we will let them get away with deporting citizens just for waving Palestinian flags later. I won't tolerate that. Better to challenge them now and stop them sooner.
Or do you have faith that a bunch of woke neolib shitheads won't try to do the same to you if they take power in a few years? Think, please. This is about your rights as much as mine.
By "substantial support" I mean what the law means; pecuniary or other material assistance. That's what the courts have found, too, over and over. If Democrats were trying to stretch the meaning of 'substantial', I'd be afraid the courts would allow it. Trump? no way.
Like you, I support some of what Trump says he wants to do, in his more lucid moments, while wishing a smarter man were at the wheel.
The administration is trying to justify deporting a legal resident with accusations of supporting a designated terrorist organization, while providing no support for their accusations, cuz clowns. I think they are morally obligated to justify deporting the guy, but I do not think they are legally so obligated. The law is on the books, right or wrong. Maybe SCOTUS will declare it unconstitutional.
It may that there is a conflicting statute somewhere specifying that deportation constitutes a form of legal punishment and is therefore subject to the provisions of due process. I confess to ambivalence about the deportation of guest residents, legal, permanent, or not. Justice is a mill wheel, and a damned expensive one. Is the removal of one guest resident worthy of setting the whole cranky machine in motion? Prosecuting a crime is a different matter.
Should a guest be deported because SecState don't like him? Probably not. May he be deported because SecState don't like him? The law sure seems to read that way.
I wrote neither to agree or disagree with the deportation of Kahlil, but to show that the crux on which the issue pivots is the question of whether due process applies to deportation or not. Sure sounds like this case is a good opportunity to decide it.
I looked up Unitary Executive Theory. I don't think it applies to my comment much. Cheers--
Hey, OB.... The first sip of alcohol I ever had was when I was a 10th grade JV cheerleader in St. Pete, FL. One Friday night, I left after a game with a hefty football player named Cy, a gentle giant who worked after school at Hood's Dairy. He knew just the place to stop off to get a couple of empty milk cartons to dump a mixture of Wild Turkey and Sprite. We eventually maneuvered our way to joining other party animals at Fort Desoto park. It was what had to have been the worst mixed drink, but you can see that I remembered it to this day. But, it was my first fest, so who knew? There was lots of partying till I'm sure we all puked, or wanted to. That was the beginning of the end of my innocence...
Here, in good ole fracked Pennsylvania some 54 years later, can I believe what passes for Federal law? Did I ever cover imperialism in my history class? Nuh-Uh.
I keep having Walter Mitty moments, mostly to change the vocal cords on Alex Jones. And, at the peak of genocide, I SO much envision puking in SUCH a different way. I start off with somehow fetching Ben Shapiro. I rip off his pencil neck with a loud snap. I perform theater doing this on a wide stage in front of the people of Yemen. I'd have Benjamin Netanyahu tied up to the side, waiting his turn.... a little more yanking... and .... *pop* leaves him with just the right sized opening to be capped with the other Ben, now full of a low pH of puke... In this way, I'd demonstrate a more creative way to endure either one of them whilst creating a fatter zionist who looks just a little like Howard Hughs with many germs. You'll have the good taste not to tell them... don't want to spoil the surprise. It's gonna be great.
Regarding your opening news item about the US deliberate bombing of rescue workers in Yemen...
Not only is the deliberate targeting of rescue workers a standard Israeli military tactic, it is an internationally recognized war crime, it is despicable and cowardly. Every involved US pilot, ground crew member, Intel officer, civilian logistics and weapon transport worker and every worker in the weapons manufacturers from the assembly line on up to the vile executive boardroom should hang their heads in shame. They have all disgraced the nation in yet another despicable and cowardly war crime.
All true. And bombing civilian infrastructure without even the benefit of a Declaration of War is as unconstitutional as the Patriot Act or what Nixon did to Cambodia in the 1970s.
Maybe they should hang in a different sort of way🤔
Thank you!! How do any of these people sleep at night, I’ll never know. Scumbags, every last one of them & I don’t want any of them defending my freedom.🤮😞🙁😢
Roman Catholic Easter is the same date as Orthodox Easter this year. Today. So, for those who survived, Kali Anastasi.
Is it? I hate lunar holidays. Never could keep track of them.
And, as for the fine cult of the blue oyster, don’t fear the reaper. But keep your head down anyway. Just sayin.
When it comes to the Bill of Rights, I submit now is not the time for citizens like myself whose families have been citizens since the beginning to be as loud and ornery as possible.
If the Chinese started kidnapping people off the streets and shipping to another country is paid by the Chinese government to disappear them, the new State Dept. Vamperella Spokewoman would be saying the Chinese are practicing human trafficking, and she would be correct.
Close the borders, sure. Deport illegals after they've had their day in court, sure. Just snatch 'em and fly 'em out, that's as unconstitutional as it gets. If I don't speak out now I never will.
A man might be able to reason, as some wise guy said many years ago. Unfortunately, the results of man's reasoning and his actions may not always be logical, or at least, be helpful to his survival.
Everyone loves to point out when "Trump's" judges don't side with him. Seems like it's time to start acknowledging that the heritage foundation made a decent list of principled judges that weren't political hacks.
Lol. Good point. He said he wanted "strict constructionist" judges, and so far, at least sometimes he has gotten them. I quoted Hugo Black, who really did try to apply the Constitution literally.
I think they'll stand firm on deporting people without hearings. What will really be interesting is when the constitutionality of the Patriot Act reaches them, but that might take awhile.
I agree with on deporting without hearing. I want to see a case get to the court for the revocation of a visa or green card. What does permanent residency mean if it can be taken away for saying things, or by your associations?
PM Carney may be "different" than Justin Trudeau, but he has a lot in common with Trump. Both are former businessmen who had never held an elected office before they took the highest office in the land... Makes you wonder if the international oligarchy planned this?
It does. Oddly enough, my wife started wondering that a couple of months ago. I think one faction of the international oligarchy either planned this or has figured out a way to take advantage of the situation.
As always you have cemented the fact that we live in a a fucked up world
I thought the plan was to rid the country of violent persons who came here illegally? So why are we rabidly pursuing a grad student with a green card... oh. Criticized Israel. Gotcha. Well, that's stupid, legal or not, and it is going to splatter the President's agenda with smelly goo.
"No State 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." Amendment XIV, Section 1
When deportation critics cite the 14th's provision for due process under law for all persons in the US, regardless of citizenship status, the unspoken assumption is that deportation deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. I think a case may be made that, as deportation is not a criminal proceeding or prosecution, due process does not follow. As I understand it, the executive is legally empowered to deport whom Sec State chooses. That's not taking or destroying; that's being nice. If you, my fellow citizen, provide substantial support to Hamas, you are subject to criminal prosecution and decades of jail time. That's what due process is for, not to keep a guest from being shown the door.
In other words, if the administration had escorted Kahlil to LaGuardia, put him on a flight home and told him not to come back, they would have been (imo) within the law(s), as written, to do so. Whisking him off to Louisiana and detaining him indefinitely without charge while making criminal accusations for which they have provided no support is, of course, a ridiculous flouting of the law(s) as written, and I predict they will leave their legal shoes in that mud.
Well, I think the unitary executive theory, which was pushed by authoritarian assholes like Dick Cheney starting over 40 years ago, is a steaming pile of tyrannical crap. Neither the President nor the Secretary of State should have that sort of power, and if they try they should be overthrown, by force if necessary. Read the Declaration of Independence.
And just WTF do you mean by providing "substantial support for Hamas?" Trump is saying that calling what Israel is doing a genocide is providing substantial support for Hamas. It's bullshit and I won't stand for it.
That's the same shit John Adams tried in 1798, Woodrow Wilson did in 1917-21, and Joe McCarthy and company did in the 1950s. Americans fought them then, and Americans will fight this bunch of holier-than-thou faux patriotic puppets of Zionism now.
If we let them get away with deporting noncitizens who are legally here without a hearing, we will let them get away with deporting citizens just for waving Palestinian flags later. I won't tolerate that. Better to challenge them now and stop them sooner.
Or do you have faith that a bunch of woke neolib shitheads won't try to do the same to you if they take power in a few years? Think, please. This is about your rights as much as mine.
By "substantial support" I mean what the law means; pecuniary or other material assistance. That's what the courts have found, too, over and over. If Democrats were trying to stretch the meaning of 'substantial', I'd be afraid the courts would allow it. Trump? no way.
Like you, I support some of what Trump says he wants to do, in his more lucid moments, while wishing a smarter man were at the wheel.
The administration is trying to justify deporting a legal resident with accusations of supporting a designated terrorist organization, while providing no support for their accusations, cuz clowns. I think they are morally obligated to justify deporting the guy, but I do not think they are legally so obligated. The law is on the books, right or wrong. Maybe SCOTUS will declare it unconstitutional.
It may that there is a conflicting statute somewhere specifying that deportation constitutes a form of legal punishment and is therefore subject to the provisions of due process. I confess to ambivalence about the deportation of guest residents, legal, permanent, or not. Justice is a mill wheel, and a damned expensive one. Is the removal of one guest resident worthy of setting the whole cranky machine in motion? Prosecuting a crime is a different matter.
Should a guest be deported because SecState don't like him? Probably not. May he be deported because SecState don't like him? The law sure seems to read that way.
I wrote neither to agree or disagree with the deportation of Kahlil, but to show that the crux on which the issue pivots is the question of whether due process applies to deportation or not. Sure sounds like this case is a good opportunity to decide it.
I looked up Unitary Executive Theory. I don't think it applies to my comment much. Cheers--
As usual, OB, another good one you posted. I enjoy your sarcasm & witty style. Thank you, again.
Hey, OB.... The first sip of alcohol I ever had was when I was a 10th grade JV cheerleader in St. Pete, FL. One Friday night, I left after a game with a hefty football player named Cy, a gentle giant who worked after school at Hood's Dairy. He knew just the place to stop off to get a couple of empty milk cartons to dump a mixture of Wild Turkey and Sprite. We eventually maneuvered our way to joining other party animals at Fort Desoto park. It was what had to have been the worst mixed drink, but you can see that I remembered it to this day. But, it was my first fest, so who knew? There was lots of partying till I'm sure we all puked, or wanted to. That was the beginning of the end of my innocence...
Here, in good ole fracked Pennsylvania some 54 years later, can I believe what passes for Federal law? Did I ever cover imperialism in my history class? Nuh-Uh.
I keep having Walter Mitty moments, mostly to change the vocal cords on Alex Jones. And, at the peak of genocide, I SO much envision puking in SUCH a different way. I start off with somehow fetching Ben Shapiro. I rip off his pencil neck with a loud snap. I perform theater doing this on a wide stage in front of the people of Yemen. I'd have Benjamin Netanyahu tied up to the side, waiting his turn.... a little more yanking... and .... *pop* leaves him with just the right sized opening to be capped with the other Ben, now full of a low pH of puke... In this way, I'd demonstrate a more creative way to endure either one of them whilst creating a fatter zionist who looks just a little like Howard Hughs with many germs. You'll have the good taste not to tell them... don't want to spoil the surprise. It's gonna be great.