US Politics Thread

[Fiero425]

I addressed the points in your first paragraph, which were germane to this conversation. As to the firebombing in Boulder, I'm sorry, but I don't find one specific example of a racist nut job that interesting to the wider concern. It's not different than the home-grown American anti-semite who killed 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in PA a few years ago. There will be criminals who do horrible things, but they're not all immigrants, illegal or otherwise. Those are stand-alone examples, and don't tell you who the vast majority of immigrants are in this country, or any country, for that matter.

We're discussing the protests in LA, and I'm also talking about the seizing and deporting of people wholesale, without due process. Trump said he was going to get rid of illegals who were criminals. Perhaps if they'd been more judicious about who they were going after, they might have picked up that guy in CO who overstayed his visa before he was able to attack those people. No such care is being taken.

But speaking of not addressing what the other person wrote in response, you responded to nothing in my post. You only came back with your same-old: that I'm a partisan, that I never criticize my own side, and back to the castration of boys.

I have NOT cheered rioters. Federberg and I are discussing how that's a bad look, but also how much that's being overblown, in terms of LA. I posted a longer bit above on this, with a radio clip of an LA Times reporter telling what's really going on in LA, which is only 15-20 minutes long. From a very reliable and fair program. You would do well to listen to it, before you go off on how violent it all is.

I didn't ask you this directly, but I will now: Are you OK with Trump flaunting the rule of law to his end of mass-deportation? He has defied court orders. He has denied due process to many of these people, which the courts are telling him he cannot due. He's discussing suspending habeas corpus. "Due process of law" and habeas corpus applies to everyone in the US, regardless of citizenship status. It is the rule of law. How do you feel about those laws being suspended, or potentially so? Because then it applies to everyone, once you move the bar and set new precedent. And he's got the Supreme Court he packed.

The only thing worth "SMH" over is that Obama probably deported more Mexicans, but didn't do it in such an obnoxious way as Trump! Something's seriously wrong w/ our populous not raising HELL over what's going on w/ ICE, Nat'l Guards, a complicit political party, & a lawless president! It was bad enough when people were being detained in dog cages the last term, now innocent Americans who happen to be Latino are being snatched up off the street as if living in old East Germany or Russia! I barely hear a little bit here & there! My BP can't handle "the news" so I avoid it spending my time on You Tube & my video collection! It's truly amazing how easy it is not to be informed as some are out here trying to preach to us how to handle our affairs! I have to just ignore them; actually overlook whole posts! We're fighting a losing battle w/ real insensitive morons out there!

 

[Moxie]

Something's seriously wrong w/ our populous not raising HELL over what's going on w/ ICE, Nat'l Guards, a complicit political party, & a lawless president!

But people ARE raising hell. Tomorrow is a big No Kings protest nationwide. Particularly as a counterpoint to Trump throwing himself a big military parade in DC for his birthday tomorrow.
This may make you laugh: there is a Craiglist ad which may or may not be a hoax appealing for seat fillers for the military parade. Let's see what the turnout is like. But I still say it's a huge waste of taxpayer money, given that this administration created a Department of Government Efficiency. Most Americans polled do not think it's a good use of their money to hold that parade. And his other numbers are tanking, too.

 

[Kieran]

I addressed the points in your first paragraph, which were germane to this conversation. As to the firebombing in Boulder, I'm sorry, but I don't find one specific example of a racist nut job that interesting to the wider concern. It's not different than the home-grown American anti-semite who killed 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in PA a few years ago. There will be criminals who do horrible things, but they're not all immigrants, illegal or otherwise. Those are stand-alone examples, and don't tell you who the vast majority of immigrants are in this country, or any country, for that matter.

You missed the complete point of this. It’s not that he’s an immigrant, and illegal one, it’s the sympathy for his family and their potentially ruined hopes.

The sympathy is misplaced. Or premature. Perhaps if daddy wasn’t a terrorist then their lives might be different, right? The thinking behind that article is almost as big a problem as what the terrorist did.

And it’s very different to your home grown antisemite, who seems unfortunately to represent a lot of people in the west.

We're discussing the protests in LA, and I'm also talking about the seizing and deporting of people wholesale, without due process. Trump said he was going to get rid of illegals who were criminals. Perhaps if they'd been more judicious about who they were going after, they might have picked up that guy in CO who overstayed his visa before he was able to attack those people. No such care is being taken.

But speaking of not addressing what the other person wrote in response, you responded to nothing in my post. You only came back with your same-old: that I'm a partisan, that I never criticize my own side, and back to the castration of boys.

I have NOT cheered rioters. Federberg and I are discussing how that's a bad look, but also how much that's being overblown, in terms of LA. I posted a longer bit above on this, with a radio clip of an LA Times reporter telling what's really going on in LA, which is only 15-20 minutes long. From a very reliable and fair program. You would do well to listen to it, before you go off on how violent it all is.

I didn't ask you this directly, but I will now: Are you OK with Trump flaunting the rule of law to his end of mass-deportation? He has defied court orders. He has denied due process to many of these people, which the courts are telling him he cannot do. He's discussing suspending habeas corpus. "Due process of law" and habeas corpus applies to everyone in the US, regardless of citizenship status. It is the rule of law. How do you feel about those laws being suspended, or potentially so? Because then it applies to everyone, once you move the bar and set new precedent. And he's got the Supreme Court he packed.

If trump broke the law then he’s being monotonously consistent, just like the left and their violence. I have more sympathy for the victims of their “protests” and the law enforcement officers and ICE officials who are under attack. I know there have been some foreign students deported for what they try to foment on college campus.

You are better off without them, and it’s proper that they were deported. This is not an issue of free speech..

 

[Kieran]

This is really sad, and very troubling and insane:

Democratic state politician and husband shot dead in targeted attack, Minnesota officials say​

 

[Moxie]

You missed the complete point of this. It’s not that he’s an immigrant, and illegal one, it’s the sympathy for his family and their potentially ruined hopes.

The sympathy is misplaced. Or premature. Perhaps if daddy wasn’t a terrorist then their lives might be different, right? The thinking behind that article is almost as big a problem as what the terrorist did.

I didn't completely miss the point. Read what you wrote. You talked about the man who did it, that he was illegal, what he did, etc., and stuck a bit on at the end that USA Today wrote and article about his family that you find inappropriately sympathetic to their own misfortunes. I chose to ignore that part, because you already editorialized what you thought. Plus, a) it was USA Today, aka, "McPaper," and b) newspapers write companion stories to lots of big headline incidents. However, to my reading, you invited commentary over the whole event. Particularly since that's what we were actually talking about.

And it’s very different to your home grown antisemite, who seems unfortunately to represent a lot of people in the west.

Tell me how one brand of murderous antisemitism is different from another. IMO, people that do things like that are not a commonplace. They're crazy.

If trump broke the law then he’s being monotonously consistent, just like the left and their violence. I have more sympathy for the victims of their “protests” and the law enforcement officers and ICE officials who are under attack. I know there have been some foreign students deported for what they try to foment on college campus.

You are better off without them, and it’s proper that they were deported. This is not an issue of free speech..

I find it unfortunate that that's all you have to say about Trump's breaking of laws, and defying of the courts. Maybe you don't know what "due process" means, but everyone is entitled to it, in this country. Do you understand what it means even that he threatens to suspend habeas corpus? I'm not trying to treat you like a dummy, but we have different laws and different wordings in our countries. If you are that complacent about it, I wonder if you get the implications.

As to foreign students and various troubles with immigration due to participating in pro-Palestinian rallies on campuses, if all they did was protest, and their papers were otherwise in order, it absolutely IS an issue of free speech. That protection is not extended only to citizens. They are accused of being pro-Hamas, which is NOT the same thing as being pro-Palestinian, or of protesting the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza since the war started. The government is willfully and opportunistically conflating the two things, artificially. In the same way, to be against Netanyahu and his far-right government is NOT the same as being anti-Semitic. Hell, a huge majority of Israelis are against Netanyahu, and including his policies towards Gaza.

However, some had over-stayed visas, and in this climate, that's a big problem. Still, everyone is entitled to a hearing before being deported, and this is not happening, in many cases, and I'm talking about all of them.

I do understand that there are freedom of speech issues on campuses, for some time now. Something I admit to having been slow to grasp. The shouting about it, in recent years, has come from the right. But suddenly, now, they're against it. You don't correct a problem by going extreme in the reverse.

 

[Kieran]

I didn't completely miss the point. Read what you wrote. You talked about the man who did it, that he was illegal, what he did, etc., and stuck a bit on at the end that USA Today wrote and article about his family that you find inappropriately sympathetic to their own misfortunes. I chose to ignore that part,

And so you missed the point: it's inappropriate to be concerned for a terrorists family when said terrorist has spent a year plotting to kill Jews. It shows a reckless regard for your own citizens, and a lack of respect for the law.

Tell me how one brand of murderous antisemitism is different from another. IMO, people that do things like that are not a commonplace. They're crazy.

The crazy one was an illegal immigrant who shouldn't have been there to bomb Jews. That's the difference. You have enough anti-semites running wild around the place hollering for the genocide of Jews without having illegals plotting to bomb them in your country.

As to foreign students and various troubles with immigration due to participating in pro-Palestinian rallies on campuses, if all they did was protest, and their papers were otherwise in order, it absolutely IS an issue of free speech. That protection is not extended only to citizens. They are accused of being pro-Hamas, which is NOT the same thing as being pro-Palestinian, or of protesting the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza since the war started. The government is willfully and opportunistically conflating the two things, artificially. In the same way, to be against Netanyahu and his far-right government is NOT the same as being anti-Semitic. Hell, a huge majority of Israelis are against Netanyahu, and including his policies towards Gaza.

To chant support for terrorists and call for the annihilation of Jews is not covered by "free speech". And if you're on a student visa and you're blocking Jewish students from entering class, then your visa can be revoked. They do not have full citizens rights, they are there as guests under certain conditions. I recommend reading the report into antisemitism at Harvard to see the full extent of how widespread the hatred of Jews has become, and why Harvard is facing huge financial sanctions. I'm not finished reading it yet but I see a lot in it that can be said to be a problem in Ireland too.

I do understand that there are freedom of speech issues on campuses, for some time now. Something I admit to having been slow to grasp. The shouting about it, in recent years, has come from the right. But suddenly, now, they're against it. You don't correct a problem by going extreme in the reverse.

You took your time but that's fair enough. The left's hold over who should speak and what's allowed to be said is breaking. Far as I know, there might be people on the right who want to block free speech - in fact, I'm sure there are - but if you're referring to people being deported for basically becoming activists and threatening Jews, well, as I say, that's not covered by "free speech..."

 

[Moxie]

This is really sad, and very troubling and insane:

Democratic state politician and husband shot dead in targeted attack, Minnesota officials say​

Violent rhetoric has consequences. A madman also took a hammer to Nancy Pelosi's husband's head. Someone shot at Trump during the campaign. And someone shot Gabbie Giffords. I don't have to recount the obvious ones. We are a violent people with easy access to guns. (Though, apparently, hammers will do.) It's all a national shame.

 

[Moxie]

The crazy one was an illegal immigrant who shouldn't have been there to bomb Jews. That's the difference. You have enough anti-semites running wild around the place hollering for the genocide of Jews without having illegals plotting to bomb them in your country.

How is one less crazy than the other? Unless you think that day-to-day antisemitism in the West is acceptable. You don't make sense. All antisemitism is wrong. But you understand that there are layers of prejudice, in all cases. Some people just quietly dislike or distrust Jews or Black or Brown people. (Sadly, Trump has given them voice.) And then there are nuts, who act out on their outsized fears of others, such as Jews. But why is is the illegal alien the crazy one, and the homegrown anti-Semite not crazy? Are you saying that it's more egregious because he shouldn't have been there in the first place, to cause the harm, or that he's crazier, because, what, Western anti-Semitism is OK?

To chant support for terrorists and call for the annihilation of Jews is not covered by "free speech". And if you're on a student visa and you're blocking Jewish students from entering class, then your visa can be revoked. They do not have full citizens rights, they are there as guests under certain conditions. I recommend reading the report into antisemitism at Harvard to see the full extent of how widespread the hatred of Jews has become, and why Harvard is facing huge financial sanctions. I'm not finished reading it yet but I see a lot in it that can be said to be a problem in Ireland too.

You took your time but that's fair enough. The left's hold over who should speak and what's allowed to be said is breaking. Far as I know, there might be people on the right who want to block free speech - in fact, I'm sure there are - but if you're referring to people being deported for basically becoming activists and threatening Jews, well, as I say, that's not covered by "free speech..."

You clearly didn't read what I wrote above. All nuance is lost on you. Also, you really don't understand what free speech is, in this country. And yes, it is protected for everyone. Not just citizens. Even hate speech is protected in this country. The ACLU has historically gone to bat for the KKK, American Nazis and the Nation of Islam for their right to speech and assembly. You may not like it all, but it IS protected speech. If you are not being violent, you can say anything you want. The classic counter-example is that you can't yell "Fire" in a movie theatre, if there is none. But, unlike Germany, for example, which prohibits Nazi symbols and other such speech, we have no prohibitions. If it's only speech, and peaceful assembly, you can say what you want. Like it or not. If laws get broken, if violence is involved, then you're not only liable for the violence, but for civil rights violations, if you are seen to have violated civil rights. There is a limit, and the limit is violence.

 

[Kieran]

How is one less crazy than the other? Unless you think that day-to-day antisemitism in the West is acceptable. You don't make sense. All antisemitism is wrong. But you understand that there are layers of prejudice, in all cases. Some people just quietly dislike or distrust Jews or Black or Brown people. (Sadly, Trump has given them voice.) And then there are nuts, who act out on their outsized fears of others, such as Jews. But why is is the illegal alien the crazy one, and the homegrown anti-Semite not crazy? Are you saying that it's more egregious because he shouldn't have been there in the first place, to cause the harm, or that he's crazier, because, what, Western anti-Semitism is OK?

Why are you missing the point here? Seriously, it’s straightforward: the terrorist was in your country illegally. All antisemitism is bad, the difference with him was that he should never have been in your country in the first place.

You clearly didn't read what I wrote above. All nuance is lost on you. Also, you really don't understand what free speech is, in this country. And yes, it is protected for everyone. Not just citizens. Even hate speech is protected in this country. The ACLU has historically gone to bat for the KKK, American Nazis and the Nation of Islam for their right to speech and assembly. You may not like it all, but it IS protected speech. If you are not being violent, you can say anything you want. The classic counter-example is that you can't yell "Fire" in a movie theatre, if there is none. But, unlike Germany, for example, which prohibits Nazi symbols and other such speech, we have no prohibitions. If it's only speech, and peaceful assembly, you can say what you want. Like it or not. If laws get broken, if violence is involved, then you're not only liable for the violence, but for civil rights violations, if you are seen to have violated civil rights. There is a limit, and the limit is violence.

I ignored most of this because it was somebody feeling superior to me telling me wrong stuff about what I’m saying.

Supporting terrorists and being a threat to national security and to US citizens - Jewish or otherwise - is not free speech. Incitement to violence is not covered by the first amendment. I remember you applauded the bug eyed freak who screeched at Josh Hawley that his questions were violence, well the rhetoric on campus is violent towards Jewish students and they don’t feel safe. I’m not talking about crybully leftist safe space nonsense either, I’m talking about actual safety. They are being blocked from going to class by deranged fellow students and professors who are ideologically compromised and sticking Jews.

If anyone is on a student visa doing this, then they ought to be gone, ASAP. This is not free speech…

 

[Moxie]

Why are you missing the point here? Seriously, it’s straightforward: the terrorist was in your country illegally. All antisemitism is bad, the difference with him was that he should never have been in your country in the first place.

I have read nothing that indicates that he came here with the purpose of being a terrorist, unlike the ones who perpetrated 9/11 attacks, for example. Which could mean he's a nut job who committed a hate crime. He did come here legally with his family, so why do you say he never should have been here?

I ignored most of this because it was somebody feeling superior to me telling me wrong stuff about what I’m saying.

I told you I wasn't trying to treat you like a dummy, I was just trying to clarify some things about our laws that may be different from yours. Sorry if I offended you, but, let's be real: you insult me at least once every issue cycle around this thread that you respond to. Try not to be so sensitive.

You still have nothing to say about Trump's suspension of due process and defying the courts. It's OK. I know you won't comment on that.

Supporting terrorists and being a threat to national security and to US citizens - Jewish or otherwise - is not free speech. Incitement to violence is not covered by the first amendment. I remember you applauded the bug eyed freak who screeched at Josh Hawley that his questions were violence, well the rhetoric on campus is violent towards Jewish students and they don’t feel safe. I’m not talking about crybully leftist safe space nonsense either, I’m talking about actual safety. They are being blocked from going to class by deranged fellow students and professors who are ideologically compromised and sticking Jews.

If anyone is on a student visa doing this, then they ought to be gone, ASAP. This is not free speech…

I don't remember who the "bug-eyed freak who screeched at Josh Hawley" was. I take your point above that incitement of violence is not covered in free speech, (as in my example that you can't yell "fire" in a movie theater.) However, my point about these students is that you have to separate who did what, and each deserves to be heard in court before being deported. This is simply respecting the rule of law. You, and by you I mean this administration, can't paint everyone with the same brush, just because they're immigrants. Every situation is different. Everyone deserves to plead their case. That is the law. Trump and Kristi Noem are flaunting the laws, and the courts who try to rein them in. This is a bad precedent.

As to "incitement of violence" not being free speech, it's Trump's stock in trade, and yet he gets away with it. He drummed up the furies that gave us the Jan. 6th insurrection, and he stood by passively and watched it happen. To me, that was treasonous.

 

[Kieran]

I have read nothing that indicates that he came here with the purpose of being a terrorist, unlike the ones who perpetrated 9/11 attacks, for example. Which could mean he's a nut job who committed a hate crime. He did come here legally with his family, so why do you say he never should have been here?

Because his visa ran out. Which means he should have left. Or renewed it.

Instead he spent a year plotting to kill Jews.

This is bad, right?

I told you I wasn't trying to treat you like a dummy, I was just trying to clarify some things about our laws that may be different from yours. Sorry if I offended you, but, let's be real: you insult me at least once every issue cycle around this thread that you respond to. Try not to be so sensitive.

I don’t insult you, and I’m sorry if you think I do. You’re a friend. We’re can go back and forth in the interests of truth, no foul!

You still have nothing to say about Trump's suspension of due process and defying the courts. It's OK. I know you won't comment on that.

Because I haven’t looked at it. Give me examples. But if you’re telling me about guests in your country who are activists against Jews, sorry, fuck them.

They’re in your country to study, not attack people they hate.

I don't remember who the "bug-eyed freak who screeched at Josh Hawley" was.

She was the irritating professor of woke who screamed that men can become pregnant.

I take your point above that incitement of violence is not covered in free speech, (as in my example that you can't yell "fire" in a movie theater.) However, my point about these students is that you have to separate who did what, and each deserves to be heard in court before being deported. This is simply respecting the rule of law.

I’m not a legal expert, but I think they don’t get a costly court date if they broke the terms of their temporary visa. I’ll be happy to read something that corrects me.

You, and by you I mean this administration, can't paint everyone with the same brush, just because they're immigrants.

I truly don’t know how you confused me with the Trump administration. I’m not so important. Really. My brother is an immigrant in New York. Really, what you said makes no sense.

Every situation is different. Everyone deserves to plead their case. That is the law. Trump and Kristi Noem are flaunting the laws, and the courts who try to rein them in. This is a bad precedent.

As to "incitement of violence" not being free speech, it's Trump's stock in trade, and yet he gets away with it. He drummed up the furies that gave us the Jan. 6th insurrection, and he stood by passively and watched it happen. To me, that was treasonous.

I know you don’t like Trump and I agree with a lot of it, but your anti-Jewish protesters, the ones screaming for a global intifada, blocking Jewish students, and protesting for the destruction of Israel? Sorry, but if they’re in your country on a visa that is subject to conditions - and we know they are - they need to be roughly and immediately evicted. I’m not sure “due process” is even relevant. If they’re seen to be acting against your countries interests and also attacking Jews, then sorry, send them back to where they came from.

I urge you to look at the report into anti-semitism in Harvard. Foreign students on a visa are guests in your country under certain conditions. It’s not rocket salad…

 

[Moxie]

Because his visa ran out. Which means he should have left. Or renewed it.

Instead he spent a year plotting to kill Jews.

This is bad, right?

It is bad, what he did. I just don't know if he came here with the ambition to be a terrorist, or if he's just a nut. Hopefully, we'll get to the bottom of it.

I don’t insult you, and I’m sorry if you think I do. You’re a friend. We’re can go back and forth in the interests of truth, no foul!

We are friends. But you do say, basically every cycle of a new conversation here, that I'm a partisan, that I only parrot what the Dems say, and I never criticize my own party. That IS insulting. It implies that my opinion is not worth reading. I don't mind batting around the politics with you, but you've said that one about 50,000 times now, so you might stop. We've debated subjects face-to-face, so I know you think my opinion is valid.

Because I haven’t looked at it. Give me examples. But if you’re telling me about guests in your country who are activists against Jews, sorry, fuck them.

I'll address "due process" below.

I’m not a legal expert, but I think they don’t get a costly court date if they broke the terms of their temporary visa. I’ll be happy to read something that corrects me.

This is what "due process" is. Meaning that you get to be heard in court before you get shipped off, or sent to jail, or whatever. Due process (or due process of law) primarily refers to the concept found in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which says no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law" by the federal government.

There is no provision for how much the court date might cost. The rights supersede cost. Immigrant or not, legal or not, they have the same rights under the law.It is important that it not be corrupted, because it applies to us all.

I truly don’t know how you confused me with the Trump administration. I’m not so important. Really. My brother is an immigrant in New York. Really, what you said makes no sense.

I phrased that poorly. I was trying to say that by "you" I meant the Trump administration, in the sense of "one" or "they." I do not confuse you with the Trump administration.

I know you don’t like Trump and I agree with a lot of it, but your anti-Jewish protesters, the ones screaming for a global intifada, blocking Jewish students, and protesting for the destruction of Israel? Sorry, but if they’re in your country on a visa that is subject to conditions - and we know they are - they need to be roughly and immediately evicted. I’m not sure “due process” is even relevant. If they’re seen to be acting against your countries interests and also attacking Jews, then sorry, send them back to where they came from.

I urge you to look at the report into anti-semitism in Harvard. Foreign students on a visa are guests in your country under certain conditions. It’s not rocket salad…

What I'm urging you to understand is that they are not all the same people, or guilty of the same things.

That aside, I do understand that pro-Palestinian protests on campuses have left some Jewish students feeling attacked, ostracized and unsafe. It's complicated. I don't think it's basically anti-Semitic, as I've expressed above, but it doesn't mean that it hasn't been felt that way. Or, but idiotic college students, expressed that way. Young people can have an inability to understand subtlety. It's unfortunate, but it also shouldn't be a fatal flaw.

 

[Kieran]

We are friends. But you do say, basically every cycle of a new conversation here, that I'm a partisan, that I only parrot what the Dems say, and I never criticize my own party. That IS insulting. It implies that my opinion is not worth reading. I don't mind batting around the politics with you, but you've said that one about 50,000 times now, so you might stop. We've debated subjects face-to-face, so I know you think my opinion is valid.

It’s not an insult, it’s an observation, and it doesn’t mean your view isn’t valid, because that would mean that the views of half America aren’t valid. But when was the last time you called BS on your own side? I don’t remember it, if it happened. You’re down with all their crazy excesses, and if there’s a mostly violent peaceful protest going down, or a weirdo saying stupid things like “men can chest feed cos they’re real WOMEN BIGOT”, you’re like, tumbleweeds, nothing to see here.

And yet all this stuff is very dangerous and damaging.

I'll address "due process" below.

This is what "due process" is.

I know what due process is.

.


That aside, I do understand that pro-Palestinian protests on campuses have left some Jewish students feeling attacked, ostracized and unsafe. It's complicated. I don't think it's basically anti-Semitic, as I've expressed above, but it doesn't mean that it hasn't been felt that way. Or, but idiotic college students, expressed that way. Young people can have an inability to understand subtlety. It's unfortunate, but it also shouldn't be a fatal flaw.

I get that they’re stupid, and whenever I see activist crazies in America waving placards, that’s my default go to - they’re stupid. Doesn’t matter if they’re BLM, or trans, whatever. But if stupid YT people (I’m trying to be fashionable) start threatening and assaulting people cos they’re Black? Is the fact they’re stupid a defence?

I also get it that a lot of them are anti semitic and so are their professors and that all of them should be treated that way if they’re pro-Hamas “protesters” calling for the destruction of Jews.

It’s not complicated…

 

[Moxie]

^ If you know what due process is, then why do you ask if someone deserves a "costly" hearing before being deported?

 

[Kieran]

^ If you know what due process is, then why do you ask if someone deserves a "costly" hearing before being deported?

Because I'm not sure it applies to somebody who enters your country but continually breaks the terms of the visa, especially one who is inciting hatred and violence toward Jews, and actually causing security concerns in your country. Once it's established that they're not abiding by the terms of the visa, then they may have to leave, and they don't get a trial.

I don't know that this is true, which is why my remark was phrased as a question. The internet isn't fully clear due to the partisan nature of reporting these things, but if you have a student on a visa who is busy fomenting hatred of Jews, calling for global genocide against Jews, blocking Jews from actually entering class, while chanting support for Hamas, then I'm not sure that they're owed due process because of the threat they pose to your country, or if there's a quicker way to rid yourself of them.

To be clear, I'm not dismissive of due process being legally their right either, but I know that there is at least one undesirable held up in the system while they all argue law...

 

[Moxie]

Because I'm not sure it applies to somebody who enters your country but continually breaks the terms of the visa, especially one who is inciting hatred and violence toward Jews, and actually causing security concerns in your country. Once it's established that they're not abiding by the terms of the visa, then they may have to leave, and they don't get a trial.

I don't know that this is true, which is why my remark was phrased as a question. The internet isn't fully clear due to the partisan nature of reporting these things, but if you have a student on a visa who is busy fomenting hatred of Jews, calling for global genocide against Jews, blocking Jews from actually entering class, while chanting support for Hamas, then I'm not sure that they're owed due process because of the threat they pose to your country, or if there's a quicker way to rid yourself of them.

To be clear, I'm not dismissive of due process being legally their right either, but I know that there is at least one undesirable held up in the system while they all argue law...

But read what you wrote here. Some of it is full of things that are subjective, therefore, they need to be determined by a judge. Have they been fomenting hate? Show the judge the evidence. Make the case. Let the person have their say, too. If it's clear and easy, let the judge rule that they be deported. Otherwise, who makes the judgement, the ICE agent? No, that's what you have judges for. Also, it's for a judge to decide who is using pro-Hamas verbiage, and who is simply pro-Palestinian. There is a difference, and they can get conflated.

On the other hand, if a person has an expired visa, that should be a purely bureaucratic thing to fix, right? If Trump was so keen to get illegals out, they could have put Homeland Security to the task of finding out who was still here on an expired visa, and deport them. I don't know immigration law, but I don't think you need a judge for that. That's pretty straightforward, right? You had a visa, you didn't renew it, now you're here illegally. It's not as flashy as rounding people up for the cameras, filling planes with them and sending them off without any due process, but it would be correct. I think @Federberg is very right when he says that what Trump is doing is very performative. But it's not all legal, and the judges have been calling him out when it isn't. Had they been working on this angle of it, they might have caught the guy in Boulder, CO before he injured all of those people.

This is one of the many ways that our immigration system is broken. People overstay their visas all the time. It's boring paperwork to find them, but that's what bureaucrats are for. What DOGE didn't do was go in and update government computer systems, which was something I've heard government workers were hoping they'd do. They might have streamlined a system for finding people who are still here, on expired visas. But instead, they just fired a bunch of people.

 

[Kieran]

But read what you wrote here. Some of it is full of things that are subjective, therefore, they need to be determined by a judge. Have they been fomenting hate? Show the judge the evidence. Make the case. Let the person have their say, too. If it's clear and easy, let the judge rule that they be deported. Otherwise, who makes the judgement, the ICE agent? No, that's what you have judges for. Also, it's for a judge to decide who is using pro-Hamas verbiage, and who is simply pro-Palestinian. There is a difference, and they can get conflated.

On the other hand, if a person has an expired visa, that should be a purely bureaucratic thing to fix, right? If Trump was so keen to get illegals out, they could have put Homeland Security to the task of finding out who was still here on an expired visa, and deport them. I don't know immigration law, but I don't think you need a judge for that. That's pretty straightforward, right? You had a visa, you didn't renew it, now you're here illegally. It's not as flashy as rounding people up for the cameras, filling planes with them and sending them off without any due process, but it would be correct. I think @Federberg is very right when he says that what Trump is doing is very performative. But it's not all legal, and the judges have been calling him out when it isn't. Had they been working on this angle of it, they might have caught the guy in Boulder, CO before he injured all of those people.

This is one of the many ways that our immigration system is broken. People overstay their visas all the time. It's boring paperwork to find them, but that's what bureaucrats are for. What DOGE didn't do was go in and update government computer systems, which was something I've heard government workers were hoping they'd do. They might have streamlined a system for finding people who are still here, on expired visas. But instead, they just fired a bunch of people.

The expired visa is a different thing, and I agree with you on that. Due process isn’t an issue there, just move them on. With regards to the supporters of Hamas, the ones chanting for a genocide of the Jews, which are the mobs we see on telly who couldn’t find Palestine on a map, if they are on a student visa, I might be wrong on this but they might be classified as a national security issue, and face a threat to their status there. I think that would be proper. They’re there to study, not to threaten people.

In terms of the overall issue of illegals, it’s interesting how this issue is big news now across the west. We have it here too. Mass immigration into western countries happened way too fast, and generally was not checked properly, and is now a security issue everywhere…

 

[Federberg]

I might find Tulsi Gabbard irritating but I have to respect her stance on no US military intervention in Iran. But... Trump should fire her. You can't have your people agitating and trying to subvert your authority if you're the President, or any type of leader for that matter

 

[Moxie]

The expired visa is a different thing, and I agree with you on that. Due process isn’t an issue there, just move them on.

Look at us agreeing on something!

With regards to the supporters of Hamas, the ones chanting for a genocide of the Jews, which are the mobs we see on telly who couldn’t find Palestine on a map, if they are on a student visa, I might be wrong on this but they might be classified as a national security issue, and face a threat to their status there. I think that would be proper. They’re there to study, not to threaten people.

Hamas has been classified as a terrorist organization for over 25 years by the US government. If foreign nationals support them, this climate/government or not, yes, they could easily be deemed a security risk, which is grounds for deportation. All I'm saying is that they deserve their day in court. Their due process.

In terms of the overall issue of illegals, it’s interesting how this issue is big news now across the west. We have it here too. Mass immigration into western countries happened way too fast, and generally was not checked properly, and is now a security issue everywhere…

The issue is rather newer in Europe than in the US. You'd think that, after 9/11, for one thing, we'd have a more efficient system for tracking people. One thing that DOGE might have tried to do, if they were true to their mandate, was update government computer systems, (which are notoriously basically stone age.) and streamline information between agencies. Instead, they just fired a bunch of people, including really competent and experienced ones. But they may yet get to actually making the system more efficient. It's a shame, though, how many good and knowledgeable people they've let go. The problem is much more the system than the people.

 

[Moxie]

I might find Tulsi Gabbard irritating but I have to respect her stance on no US military intervention in Iran. But... Trump should fire her. You can't have your people agitating and trying to subvert your authority if you're the President, or any type of leader for that matter

I agree that contradicting your President on such matters is a bad idea. Even though he contradicts himself. I don't like her and I won't mind seeing the end of her, though I fear for who he'll try to replace her with. The problem is not Gabbard. The problem is Trump. He's a non-interventionist until he is. No wonder the people who try to be loyal have no way which the wind blows.