President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#27,626
#27,626
hndog609 said:
If someone breaks into your house and actually starts tidying up the place the lack of "criminal activity" while inside doesn't unhappen it being illegal to be there.
Click to expand...
LOL.

I can't help but read this post, and think back to the number of 1/6 apologists on here, who defended breaching the Capitol unlawfully, with some variation of :

"Yeah, it's trespassing, and they never had any right to enter Nancy Pelosi's office, but if they didn't cause any damage while they were there, it shouldn't matter. They were not breaking any laws, and should not be prosecuted."
 
#27,628
#27,628
BowlBrother85 said:
LOL.

I can't help but read this post, and think back to the number of 1/6 apologists on here, who defended breaching the Capitol unlawfully, with some variation of :

"Yeah, it's trespassing, and they never had any right to enter Nancy Pelosi's office, but if they didn't cause any damage while they were there, it shouldn't matter. They were not breaking any laws, and should not be prosecuted."
Click to expand...
And most of them spent three years in prison. So yeah, we don’t mind the same standard being applied now. Your terms are acceptable
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN and Orangeslice13
#27,630
#27,630
BowlBrother85 said:
LOL.

I can't help but read this post, and think back to the number of 1/6 apologists on here, who defended breaching the Capitol unlawfully, with some variation of :

"Yeah, it's trespassing, and they never had any right to enter Nancy Pelosi's office, but if they didn't cause any damage while they were there, it shouldn't matter. They were not breaking any laws, and should not be prosecuted."
Click to expand...
I don't recall anyone making the argument you make in the context* you make it and would disagree with any that did.

*Meaning trespassing
 
#27,631
#27,631
OrangeTsar said:
And most of them spent three years in prison. So yeah, we don’t mind the same standard being applied now. Your terms are acceptable
Click to expand...
Funny that there was nary a word from the Supreme Court on this but when it’s an illegal with questionable behavior, the Supreme Court springs to life overnight.
 
#27,632
#27,632
McDad said:
We need more immigrants. As important, we need the right type of immigrants. Our current system is driven by politics. It isn't driven by best-practices.
When one political group swings too far in one direction, the other swings too far in the other. This is where we are right now.
People here illegally should be deported. The only "due process" necessary is confirmation or refutation of their immigration status. It takes less than 5 seconds.
But none of what came before or what is happening now is improving our immigration system in the long term.
Click to expand...
Immigrants are the scapegoat flavor of the day for the right and democrats take in marginalized groups. It’s no more simple or complex than that. Is it right? That’s for individuals to decide, but it’s history repeating itself for the umpteenth time.
 
#27,634
#27,634
EasternVol said:
Yeah, passport control at immigration checkpoints is usually pretty quick. It's whether your visa is good, you meet the entry requirements, and you're not blacklisted per the database. On the street it would take longer to confirm identity and immigration status including residency applications and all.
Click to expand...
You're in the weeds on this.
First, the tech to reconcile the valid passport to person exists globally. All persons entering the US even on visas must have a passport..at least that is my understanding. This is the first and easiest step which requires no judicial proceedings. Evaluation of visa, refugee, and other status can be done through the courts if necessary.
The people we are targeting have no passport scanned upon entry, or no passport at all.
It's a quick and effective first step.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN and Orange_Crush
#27,637
#27,637
OHvol40 said:
Immigrants are the scapegoat flavor of the day for the right and democrats take in marginalized groups. It’s no more simple or complex than that. Is it right? That’s for individuals to decide, but it’s history repeating itself for the umpteenth time.
Click to expand...
Illegal immigrants. Not "immigrants". It's an incredibly important qualifier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, USF grad in TN, 85SugarVol and 4 others
#27,638
#27,638
Serious Question :

Has Donald Trump invoked the Insurrection Act? Because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits federal troops from performing law enforcement duties on American soil, unless he has.

Even if there is some way around the Posse Comitatus Act, this is an extraordinary use of active-duty Marines.
 
#27,639
#27,639
BowlBrother85 said:
Serious Question :

Has Donald Trump invoked the Insurrection Act? Because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits federal troops from performing law enforcement duties on American soil, unless he has.

Even if there is someway around the Posse Comitatus Act, this is an extraordinary use of active duty Marines.
Click to expand...

He has not. And federal troops are able to assist law enforcement. Multiple examples of that during interrogation of public schools in the 60s
 
#27,640
#27,640
BowlBrother85 said:
Serious Question :

Has Donald Trump invoked the Insurrection Act? Because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits federal troops from performing law enforcement duties on American soil, unless he has.

Even if there is some way around the Posse Comitatus Act, this is an extraordinary use of active-duty Marines.
Click to expand...
He used the weighted term "insurrection" though (just like the dems did for j6) since it's an attempt to justify extraordinary action by the feds. Not sure anyone worries about legality any more
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#27,641
#27,641
BowlBrother85 said:
Serious Question :

Has Donald Trump invoked the Insurrection Act? Because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits federal troops from performing law enforcement duties on American soil, unless he has.

Even if there is some way around the Posse Comitatus Act, this is an extraordinary use of active-duty Marines.
Click to expand...
Should matter but doesn't. Unfortunately, we have accepted precedent as a valid justification of decision making. National guard troops have been "called in" a dozen times for a wide variety of reasons, including riot control / suppression.
 
#27,642
#27,642
Vol8188 said:
He has not. And federal troops are able to assist law enforcement. Multiple examples of that during interrogation of public schools in the 60s
Click to expand...
Per the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, federal troops are not supposed to perform law enforcement duties on American soil, unless the Insurrection Act has been invoked.
 
#27,643
#27,643
McDad said:
Illegal immigrants. Not "immigrants". It's an incredibly important qualifier.
Click to expand...
Ok, maybe so, but it’s important to distinguish that the animosity isn’t generally directed at Canadian immigrants or European immigrants, it’s a specific “type” of illegal immigrant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#27,644
#27,644
BowlBrother85 said:
Serious Question :

Has Donald Trump invoked the Insurrection Act? Because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits federal troops from performing law enforcement duties on American soil, unless he has.

Even if there is some way around the Posse Comitatus Act, this is an extraordinary use of active-duty Marines.
Click to expand...

No, thanks to the Biden administration he doesn't have to invoke the insurrection act. DoD Directive 5240.01
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#27,645
#27,645
BowlBrother85 said:
Seriously? It was all over this forum.
Click to expand...
I distinctly recall lots of people supporting the idea that obviously after a certain point trespassing was obviously applicable.

I think you might be conflating things with some observations of video that showed "some" people actually being let inside.

In any case you're just deflecting. If you are illegally somewhere regardless of how benign your actions are you are still there...what's the word...illegally.
 
#27,646
#27,646
OHvol40 said:
Ok, maybe so, but it’s important to distinguish that the animosity isn’t generally directed at Canadian immigrants or European immigrants, it’s a specific “type” of illegal immigrant.
Click to expand...
Characteristics which allow groups to be easily identified have always promulgated a sense of xenophobia. Irish, Chinese, Japanese, and now Hispanics have all drawn the ire as an immigrating group. It's part of our national history.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and TrumpedUpVol
#27,647
#27,647
BowlBrother85 said:
... and all of them have since been pardoned. So yeah, there is a double standard here.
Click to expand...
I am perfectly fine with imprisoning the current malefactors for three years and then giving them a pardon as well. So exactly the same treatment.
Therefore there is no double standard whatsoever.
 
#27,648
#27,648
BowlBrother85 said:
Per the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, federal troops are not supposed to perform law enforcement duties on American soil, unless the Insurrection Act has been invoked.
Click to expand...
As long as they are only used to protect federal facilities and employees; they are not technically participating in law enforcement duties. It appears that is what the National Guard has been doing at least so far.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top