ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, June 24, 2018

They have to go back... immediately

No due process for non-citizen invaders:
President Donald Trump said on Sunday that people who enter the United States illegally should be sent back to where they came from immediately without any judicial process.
He's right. The challenge will be overcoming the courts and the cucks. I suggest martial law. After all, this is the single biggest invasion in all of recorded human history. If that doesn't justify it, the mere nuking of a single city or two couldn't either.

The Constitution is not for foreigners. Even those who fold, spindle, and mutilate the definition of "posterity" can't make it stretch that far.

Labels: ,

173 Comments:

Blogger L June 24, 2018 2:31 PM  

Send them back immediately and then we avoid the exploitative photos and stories that come with time spent in detention. Good call.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 24, 2018 2:31 PM  

The people who wrote the Constitution were very clear on that point But judges 240 years later know better.

Blogger Argus Bacchus June 24, 2018 2:32 PM  


Little Marco secretly wants millions of his fellow mestizos to be given special treatment like his border jumping illegal grandfather was granted back in the mid-1960’s.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/06/22/rubio-not-wise-for-trump-to-cast-immigrants-as-criminals-vast-majority-want-a-better-life/

https://infogalactic.com/info/Marco_Rubio#Early_life.2C_education.2C_and_entry_into_politics

Blogger tuberman June 24, 2018 2:32 PM  

At first, it will seem like just talk, but that talk is to get the Left to freak and get further insane, then he will go more and more on the attack. He will do this stuff, but after exposing all the globalists for all their craziness.

Blogger Teleros June 24, 2018 2:37 PM  

Even those who fold, spindle, and mutilate the definition of "posterity" can't make it stretch that far.

Hold my guac bowl.

Blogger Longtime Lurker June 24, 2018 2:37 PM  

Tuberman, du has Recht. Exhibit A: Maxine Waters.

Blogger Michael Maier June 24, 2018 2:40 PM  

I love our God Emperor.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 24, 2018 2:42 PM  

The people that have been trashing the Constitution and Rule of law for decades now don't like it when Trump does the same to them.

Karma is a bitch

Blogger tuberman June 24, 2018 2:43 PM  

Stg58/Animal Mother wrote:The people who wrote the Constitution were very clear on that point But judges 240 years later know better.

Many of these Judges, are involved in all kinds of dirt including child trafficking, and the NSA has it all. Some people say that many lower level agents are now patriots, including in the FBI (at least outside of DC), and they are working to get the goods, for court cases, on these corrupt judges, antifa, and BLM. The NSA info is not good enough for court, but clues in real investigators just where to look for trial level proofs. Have to wait and see, but I believe these are very likely. They have collected DNA samples for all antifa people, a sign that they will use such soon.

Blogger Argus Bacchus June 24, 2018 2:48 PM  

The left: "Bu..bu..you have to follow the constitution and federal immigration law!"


Also the left: "Fuck enforcing federal immigration law! That shit is for Nazis!"

Blogger #7139 June 24, 2018 2:53 PM  

...the mere nuking of a single city or two couldn't either.

Nukes? Nukes? I love nukes.

Blogger Long Live The West June 24, 2018 2:56 PM  

Stg58/Animal Mother wrote:The people that have been trashing the Constitution and Rule of law for decades now don't like it when Trump does the same to them.

Karma is a bitch


Trump isn't trashing Rule of Law. He's enforcing it.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 2:58 PM  

They complain about due process, but you can apply for asylum at a consulate or port of entry.

Build a camp on the Mexican side of the border (think GITMO but larger and with barracks), with an open gate back into Mexico. Let them wait there and have their babies there on that side until they are tired or have been vetted. If Mexico doesn't like it, end NAFTA imports immediately, ban remittances there completely, and deport immediately.

Blogger wahr01 June 24, 2018 3:02 PM  

"CBS News poll June 21-22 AFTER peak of family separation crisis:

Dem advantage *down* to four points on generic ballot."

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/1010904940376666118

"Also CBS poll: only 21% of voters favor releasing illegal immigrants into the country. Nearly 3/4 support incarceration and deportation"

https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1010923282395254785

When your own opposition's polls can't make them look good, you know you're winnning.

Blogger John June 24, 2018 3:02 PM  

Republicans using martial law to get rid of illegal hispanics won't atone for using martial law to re-define blacks as Americans.

But it would be a good start.

Blogger pnq8787 June 24, 2018 3:02 PM  

The U.S. should heed the advice of Muldoon when dealing with those crossing the border illegally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvjJcaVJlH0

Blogger Anno Ruse June 24, 2018 3:02 PM  

The great irony of all this is if Democrats had gone to the negotiating table on DACA and played it perfectly straight, Trump likely would've cucked somewhat on amnesty. He gambled big there and it's paid off. Dems are openly calling for open borders, Trump is calling for closed borders. There is no middle, but Trump has the will and the power to push through to victory.

The Dems are so weak their base won't even listen to them when they croak "Resist! Rebel! Trump is... a tyrant!" The best they can do is harass a few WH staffers trying to eat a meal. It's like trying to stop Hitler by refusing to sell Frau Goebbels a loaf of bread.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 24, 2018 3:03 PM  

Long Live the West,

He's ignoring a court ruling. That, in their mind, is trashing the law.

Otherwise I agree with you.

Blogger James Dixon June 24, 2018 3:09 PM  

> President Donald Trump said on Sunday that people who enter the United States illegally should be sent back to where they came from immediately without any judicial process.

And when the courts reject that, shooting them before they get to the border also works.

Blogger Resident Moron™ June 24, 2018 3:10 PM  

"http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/06/22/rubio-not-wise-for-trump-to-cast-immigrants-as-criminals-vast-majority-want-a-better-life/"

Doesn't everyone?

Even the richest man alive still wants more.

The question is not wht do they want, it's:

At whose expense?

They have to go back.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 24, 2018 3:10 PM  

GE dunking on the Democratic coalition, give it a few days and the Ds will be desperate to change the theme in political theater

Blogger Dave June 24, 2018 3:23 PM  

Nukes? Nukes? I love nukes.

Yeahhh, baby!

Blogger bornagainpenguin June 24, 2018 3:25 PM  

Mr.MantraMan wrote:GE dunking on the Democratic coalition, give it a few days and the Ds will be desperate to change the theme in political theater

It's the kind of thing that makes you extra grateful that school is out for the summer in the US, otherwise who knows what could happen to cause that shift in the conversation? Too many coincidences make one go 'hmmmm...'

Blogger Jack Amok June 24, 2018 3:29 PM  

The vast majority of immigrants want a better life? That's nice, and good luck too them, as long as they don't try to take it from my kids and grandkids.

GTFO.

Blogger pyrrhus June 24, 2018 3:31 PM  

...the mere nuking of a single city or two couldn't either.

Nukes? Nukes? I love nukes.

Depends on which cities, doesn't it....

Blogger Jack Amok June 24, 2018 3:32 PM  

It's the kind of thing that makes you extra grateful that school is out for the summer in the US,

Yes, but you just made me realize school starts up again two months before the elections. Holy cow,

Blogger pyrrhus June 24, 2018 3:34 PM  

@20 Apparently Marco hasn't noticed that about 7 billion poor people want a "better life" and might create a problem his compatriots....Or maybe Marco is just a well paid traitor.

Blogger Gen. Kong June 24, 2018 3:39 PM  

Apparently the ruling Body-Snatchers, their (((Ministry of Truth))) mockingbirds, and the various Chamber of Commerce Pedobears are quite pissed that their supply of special pizza could be reduced. They'll have to spend money to fly to Haiti or Thailand for the flavors they favor, unless they're in the club that frequents Epstein's Pleasure Island.

Blogger Gen. Kong June 24, 2018 3:48 PM  

tuberman wrote:
At first, it will seem like just talk, but that talk is to get the Left to freak and get further insane, then he will go more and more on the attack. He will do this stuff, but after exposing all the globalists for all their craziness.

He is truly brilliant at it. There's nobody who can trigger them the way Trump can. I was working out earlier and MSNBC was on (no sound thank heaven) with screaming headlines and some pedoface Californicastani billionaire calling for impeachment - frothing at the mouth.

Blogger CM June 24, 2018 3:51 PM  

The Constitution is not for foreigners. Even those who fold, spindle, and mutilate the definition of "posterity" can't make it stretch that far.

[Sarc] If they are rights bestowed by a creator, then why do these rights not apply to everyone in the world?[/sarc]

Yeah... they can make it stretch that far.

Except for the DOI says that we have formed this government to secure those rights for us.

Blogger Dire Badger June 24, 2018 3:51 PM  

"Nor did Trump differentiate between illegal immigrants and people who entered the United States to seek asylum protection. "

That's because they are exactly the same thing.

Blogger Shimshon June 24, 2018 3:52 PM  

Can someone explain something to me?

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/06/24/kids-exchange-deportation-migrants-claim-they-were-promised-they-could/

This article discusses Carlos, from Honduras, 24 years old, who paid a smuggler $7000 to help him invade America.

Honduras has a per-capita GDP of $4400. How on earth can a 24 year old, probably of limited skills, save $7000 by that age in that shithole? Has he been stuffing money in a mattress since he was 10? None of these articles makes any sense, solely by the self-reported smuggler fees these poor people keep claiming to save all on their own. Can anyone explain this to me?

Blogger Jeff aka Orville June 24, 2018 4:02 PM  

The left is desperately trying to bring this to a bloody conclusion. I would welcome martial law at this point. March Maxine Waters to GITMO, and send the invaders back immediately. When AMLO, who will be the next Mexican president on 7/1, is openly encouraging invasion to the North.

Blogger Dire Badger June 24, 2018 4:04 PM  

The supreme court needs to be replaced, and every decision for the last 200 years reviewed.

They 'ruled' that invaders are entitled to due process. Who gave them that authority? It is absolutely NOT in the constitution.

Blogger CM June 24, 2018 4:05 PM  

This article discusses Carlos, from Honduras, 24 years old, who paid a smuggler $7000 to help him invade America.

I would not be surprised if $$ raised for missions and charity are being used to fund their travel.

Also, remittances might play a role in it, too.

Blogger Cloom Glue June 24, 2018 4:07 PM  

@32 They "borrow" it from the smuggler and promise to pay after they get across, like indentured servants, the same as the old days.

Blogger Looking Glass June 24, 2018 4:15 PM  

@17 Anno Ruse

Trump wouldn't have cucked. He'd have taken a different position. All of Trump's alignment & position on the topic worked on the reality that the Dems could never deal. Trump spent 6 months pinging them, and he actually setup Left of Center for most of it. It was purely Machiavellian, but the "playing field" was such that it was the only way to play.

There was never a deal that the Left would accept that wasn't complete surrender, thus Trump set about making the Left take the blame for failure. Vicious, very vicious.


@23 bornagainpenguin

The Republican that beat Mark Sanford in a primary lost a bunch of her guts from the assassination attempt this weekend. They always find someone to maim for their evil.

tuberman wrote:At first, it will seem like just talk, but that talk is to get the Left to freak and get further insane, then he will go more and more on the attack. He will do this stuff, but after exposing all the globalists for all their craziness.

Trump has the entire Left strategically locked in a response cycle. Remember, they call him racist, Nazi & fascist for having lunch, so it provides "media space" to shift the Overton Window in many directions. Further, Trump can say what 65% of the public is already thinking, but it's the things that un-PC. He did this entire routine against the GOP Primary field, so he could play to the Left, Right & Center at the exact same time.

@32 Shimshon

Middle Class. That's most of who tries to get to the States. Low + High vs Middle is the strategy in every leftist dominated place. This is true in countries with far worse economies.

Blogger Looking Glass June 24, 2018 4:16 PM  

@34 Dire Badger

Jefferson should have had the entire SCOTUS executed in 1803. Marbury vs Madison was a coup that he had full Constitutional right to put down by force.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 4:26 PM  

Every other criminal wants a better life too. Robbers, rapists, murders, all of them. Illegals are hardly unique in that regard.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 4:30 PM  

Also, Rubio has to go back.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore June 24, 2018 4:31 PM  

This might be a sick thing to say but I am entertained by the way Black leadership (the Civil Rights Industrial Complex) has joined the Dems in a policy that will make the Black vote less useful.

Blogger Silent Draco June 24, 2018 4:38 PM  

CM, interesting that nowhere in the article do they hint at what Carlos did for a living. $7000 is big money to accumulate unless you're in the upper class, and it's harder when every official takes a taste first.

Middle class in Central America implies professional or skilled technical background, more like uppwr-middle class in U.S. They are few and caught in the middle.

Now, get this out on TV and Internet for every working class American who's trying to keep a $5000 clunker car on the road, pay cheap insurance, and hope their $500-1500 life savings holds out a little longer. Where's this guy getting $7K to come here?

They have to go back.

Blogger FUBARwest June 24, 2018 4:46 PM  

"This might be a sick thing to say but I am entertained by the way Black leadership (the Civil Rights Industrial Complex) has joined the Dems in a policy that will make the Black vote less useful."

Ditto. I wonder when they will realize it hurts them in the long run.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 4:49 PM  

"Ditto. I wonder when they will realize it hurts them in the long run."

Probably around the same time they stop killing their own babies by the millions.

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 4:50 PM  

The Constitution is not for foreigners. Even those who fold, spindle, and mutilate the definition of "posterity" can't make it stretch that far.

This is wholly ignorant. I am surprised at your VD.

The Constitution doesn't grant rights, it recognizes right inherent by our human nature, established by natural law. The Bill of Rights doesn't grant any specific rights, it prohibits the expansion of government in a way that limits those rights.

The core problem here isn't that the due process exists, it's simply it's too slow. This is an executive problem only. Trump should appoint every Border Patrol agent as an Executive Law judge. Hearings can be summary, and on the spot, and appeals can be conducted by mail from your point of origin. Trump needs Congress to unshackle the Executive power inherent in the office, or, alternatively, Trump could simply those laws and rulings which constrain the power of the Executive to enforce the security interests of the US.

But he and you are both wrong that the due process protections recognized by the US Constitution don't apply to everyone. They do. I argued it when Obama was droning Americans in the middle east. And I continue to argue it now.

Blogger APL June 24, 2018 4:51 PM  

"His proposal drew immediate criticism from legal analysts and immigrant rights advocates who said it would violate the U.S. Constitution’s due process provision, "

and immigrant rights advocates, who see their revenue stream evaporating. Fixed that.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 4:56 PM  

Read the Preamble, dh. The purpose of the Constitution is plainly stated. It's written by Americans for Americans. Any sort of "We Are The World" interpretation is pure nonsense.

Blogger APL June 24, 2018 5:00 PM  

DH: "They do. I argued it when Obama was droning Americans in the middle east. "

The U.S. Constitution provides, Article I, Sec. 8 cl. 11:

The Congress shall have Power ... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

That's interesting. But not in Space. Although I guess Congress could constitutionally declare war in Space.

Blogger Peaceful Poster June 24, 2018 5:02 PM  

Build the wall.
Deport them all.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore June 24, 2018 5:03 PM  

@45 I think the idea of "our posterity" is in play here. These were Englishmen forming a country for themselves. However, I do agree with the idea that due process is afforded to persons who are not citizens, and that in the case of illegal aliens, there is reason to undertake a rapid process of adjudication in which the illegal alien "works things out" from their nation of origin.

Blogger Unknown June 24, 2018 5:07 PM  

But he and you are both wrong that the due process protections recognized by the US Constitution don't apply to everyone.

Ok but where does it says that the due process HAS TO occur on US soil? Couldn't Trump pay off Ghana to host them during the process? If not, why not? Are Ghanian roads too muddy for US immigration lawyers? I hear Gucci shoes are water proof, so what's the problem?

Blogger Lovekraft June 24, 2018 5:09 PM  

The Race Hustle Racket that NoBordersBarack mainstreamed carried into the Trump Era, with most of the beneficiaries thinking in would be business as usual. The smart (as far as the Devil can be) ones are BLM and Nation of Islam/Black Panthers who are just laying low, consolidating their gains. Fifth columnists that require constant monitoring.

The real morons are the LGBT cabal, feminist journalists and globalist shills.

Right now, they think they have enough money (Soros), stacked courts and public fear of the mob to continue on their way. The thing is, things turn ugly real fast and anyone can see that we're heading towards something big. Europe's Italian and Austrian alliance, overreaching african/Muslim no-go zones are but two examples where the leftists/SJWs will be drawn in.

Blogger Looking Glass June 24, 2018 5:11 PM  

@48 APL

We really need to bring back Letters of Marque & Reprisal.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Letter_of_marque

We really, really need to.

Blogger Dire Badger June 24, 2018 5:13 PM  

Not Okay. dh is flat-out lying. Actually reading the constitution, including the preamble, would make it clear that the due process conclusions apply singularly and solely to citizens of this sovereign nation.

THIS is why globalism's fools are so numerous, they can convince themselves of ANYTHING. He has a chicken in this fight, we simply don't know what it is.

Blogger John Doe03526 June 24, 2018 5:15 PM  

The long term solution is for these Latin American countres to get their act together and become places people want to live and work. Not the mass migration of millions of people into the US.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 5:18 PM  

@45 @dh - The error is you don't have rights if you break the law, and if you are here illegally, first based on an existing doctrine (why Customs can search your Laptop and more WITHOUT a warrant) that until you've cleared Customs, you are technically not yet on "US Soil", so the 4th amendment doesn't apply. Second, when you break the law prima facie, you don't have the same rights as someone who is a citizen or law abiding.

Entering illegally is SUFFICIENT reason to eject them back over the border they came across immediately, or at least after taking their biometrics so if they do so again they can be charged with a felony. If they prefer sitting in a dungeon waiting for a speedy trial (the Prosecution in the Bundy Ranch case said 5 years was "speedy"), maybe they could do so, but would have to agree to have their kids taken and humanely removed from any future custody.
There are specific procedures and allowed reasons for asylum claims. They aren't hidden from these illegals. WILLFUL ignorance of the law is no excuse, and this isn't some complex, abstract, ambiguous technical portion.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 5:19 PM  

@55 That would require something beyond any revival, great awakening, or reformation yet experienced since Pentecost, or something like the Black Death (which Venezuela seems to be actively toying with).

Blogger Mark Stoval June 24, 2018 5:20 PM  

@54

I think the left-wing and the SJWs are trying to install the policy that anyone in the world who sets foot on American soil is then a citizen if he or she wants to be one. Then welfare, medical care, free housing, affirmative action, set-asides, and all the rest must be paid out.

Since the written constitution is no longer valid, and the "living constitution" is just whatever the SC says it is --- what is to stop them?

Blogger van helsing June 24, 2018 5:21 PM  

yes noah i pointed that out to a nevertrumper on fb recently... he says security isnt a job for usg. well, see the preamble...

Blogger Looking Glass June 24, 2018 5:24 PM  

In semi-related news, Trump has, via Twitter, warned other countries to play Trade "fair", or he's bringing the hammer.

Announcing trade wars via Twitter. Gotta love it.

Blogger Darwinite June 24, 2018 5:24 PM  

dh when you try to examine what the Constitution does (create or recognize rights), you mistake its purpose. The purpose of the Constitution is to protect those rights for the posterity of the American people.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 5:27 PM  

@45 - one more clarification, any PROCESS rights are NOT HUMAN rights. Natural law defines human rights, so you can start from freedom of conscience, and prohibitions on cruelty, and requiring evidence, but none of those apply in this case.

First, there is never any question these people are here ILLEGALLY. They don't show their passports or other ID showing citizenship or even claim they left it at home or something. They are found to have crossed avoiding the normal ports of entry (or overstayed visas, etc.). Due Process meets summary judgment.

This is similar in that I am justified in shooting a home invader without asking if they are armed or any other niceity. They are trespassing in an inner sanctum. Juries handle matters of fact, not law, and there are no facts in dispute here.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 5:28 PM  

@45 also, if they are natural law human rights, why doesn't anyone have those rights in any country south of the border, or even in Canada that imprisons those who quote the unPC parts of the bible?

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 5:34 PM  

Re: Pre-amble, posterity, etc.

The Constitutions preamble does specify it's for the posterity. It creates a system of government, and sets limits on governments, not on rights. Re-read the bill of rights and see where it creates a right. It doesn't. The right to due process is established in natural law, to all persons, and is recognized by the Constitution, and Congress is prohibited from abridging it, exactly like the right to defend one-self.

Re: No rights if you are illegal

This is also false. The Constitution recognizes that you can't have a reduction of your rights without due process. We remove the civil rights of convicted criminals because they have had due process, and it's an acceptable form of punishment. This is straight out of natural law. We have due process.

RE: lying

> Not Okay. dh is flat-out lying. Actually reading the constitution, including the preamble, would make it clear that the due process conclusions apply singularly and solely to citizens of this sovereign nation.

Quote it. I'll wait. And wait. And wait. You can't quote it. Because the words don't exist. Nor do the penumbra. Nor does the shadow. Nor does any other twisting.

ALL people are entitled to the rights in the first amendment, for example. The US Government need only concern itself with those rights for people who are US persons - under US jurisdiction. The same applies to immigration. Once a person comes under US law, Congress nor the Executive can abridge due process - a right which all people have and the government can't abridge.

RE: War/space

Space is an interesting question, I have no idea what to make of that. But it's pretty irrelevant.


I'll re-iterate it. There is no reason why the system can't be instantly fast. There is no reason that every border patrol agent can't conduct a due process compatible hearing on the spot in the desert. Military officers during war time would conduct due-process compatible hearings on the side of battlefields when capturing unmarked agents - spys - and sentence them to summary execution. That's all we are talking about. He doesn't ened anyone to fix the process. He has all the power he needs. Ignore the laws that constrain his executive power, ignore any such rulings, and do it through executive action.

The problem is he blinked. I don't know why he did, but he did. Hopefully he'll find a way to fix it, but it just might be he gets this one wrong.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore June 24, 2018 5:55 PM  

@64 I'm spitballin' here. That portion of the Preamble which reads "..and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.." seems pretty clear to me. I'm also thinking of some of the writings of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Sprinkled in some of those articles is the idea of a nation made of people with common habits and customs. Given the Preamble's mention of "ourselves" and "our posterity", I think they were thinking a nation created by English men for their posterity.

Certainly there were others who were not English. Right now I am thinking William Penn and invite to Europeans who were not English, as well as something in the charter of Pennsylvania that prohibited non-Christians from holding elected office (I might be wrong).

And the fates of Native Americans and Blacks seem to have been factored into the equation. In the case of the latter, there was both a conflict about the practice but meaningful attempts to address slavery in order to live up to the idea of securing liberty (I think Black folks should accept the idea that they were along for the ride - a good ride indeed when you consider the shit-show that West Africa tends to descend into).

Blogger Salt June 24, 2018 5:56 PM  

@64 And when the barbarians are coming through the gates, overwhelming the due process system afforded while the We The People discuss and apply the system with genteel and lofty standards as the Country disappears... what then?

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 6:01 PM  

We need to stop this problem at its source: Random, unannounced inspections of meat packing, fruit picking, and building sites with the punishment for finding even a single illegal alien being complete forfeiture of all assets of the owner followed, shutting down the business, and culminating in 10 year prison sentence. Incentivize inspectors by giving them a cut of the spoils. Make companies that bring over H1Bs be held legally liable for any criminal activities of the people they sponsor. Finally, institute a policy where first and second gen immigrants cannot receive any state welfare.

Blogger Othello June 24, 2018 6:01 PM  

This. Guy is the best ever.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 6:03 PM  

Oh, and citizenship checks for all drug dealers. If they're not citizens, and they're found with distribution levels of drugs, they are summarily executed.

Blogger Ich kann nicht Anders June 24, 2018 6:20 PM  

"I argued that when Obama was droning *Americans* ...."

Checkmate.

Blogger APL June 24, 2018 6:26 PM  

DH: "Once a person comes under US law, Congress nor the Executive can abridge due process "

By that token, the Mexican army could walk into Texas and demand that they each receive a trial. Demand the right to bear arms, and claim the right to prosecute legal insurrection against unconstitutional action, and POTUS could do nothing to stop them.

Blogger APL June 24, 2018 6:28 PM  

DH: "But it's pretty irrelevant."

I mentioned it because TGE wants to create the Space Force.

Blogger Raging Papist June 24, 2018 6:29 PM  

I hope he actually does this. The legal oligarchy was always going to be a problem, so he needs the courage to go through with it. I think he has been gathering up enough political power to enact it with Korea being peacefully handled, and pushing the Left (which was always hysterical) to call for no borders. Having the Mexican president openly call for a mass migration into America, and the GE calling it an "invasion" in one of his tweets, and we are getting there.

Blogger Mark Stoval June 24, 2018 6:30 PM  

"... Finally, institute a policy where first and second gen immigrants cannot receive any state welfare."

I think that 4 generations is much more reasonable. I also think doing away with all forms of welfare for everyone is a much better answer still.


... If they're not citizens, and they're found with distribution levels of drugs, they are summarily executed."

Yes, on the spot.

----------
As an aside, if the police, any law enforcement, find an illegal adult male then I think they should be allowed to execute on the spot. This is war after all. (but we don't have that sort of intestinal fortitude anymore)

Blogger DJ | AMDG June 24, 2018 6:39 PM  

Just read AltHero #2 Vox. Top notch. Better everything than #1 and for a first issue it was pretty good. One comic pane got cut off in frame view. When Rebel explains her name to the deputy. The cosplay page was, well played. Good stuff. Glad to say I had a small part in supporting it.

Blogger OneWingedShark June 24, 2018 6:41 PM  

Looking Glass wrote:@34 Dire Badger

Jefferson should have had the entire SCOTUS executed in 1803. Marbury vs Madison was a coup that he had full Constitutional right to put down by force.

Except Madison says essentially completely the opposite of the common/modern legal understanding:
It is a proposition too plain to be contested that the Constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it, or that the Legislature may alter the Constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The Constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and, like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.

If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law; if the latter part be true, then written Constitutions are absurd attempts on the part of the people to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.

Certainly all those who have framed written Constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be that an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void.

This theory is essentially attached to a written Constitution, and is consequently to be considered by this Court as one of the fundamental principles of our society. It is not, therefore, to be lost sight of in the further consideration of this subject.

If an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the Courts and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory, and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on.

And so on. Switch out "judiciary" for "legislature" and the theory still holds: either the Constitution is supreme or it is not.

Blogger pyrrhus June 24, 2018 6:46 PM  

@74 No one trusts cops enough to give them executory authority...some of them would be executing people who refuse to pay bribes, as already happens in Mexico.

Blogger Ledford Ledford June 24, 2018 6:46 PM  

This might be a sick thing to say but I am entertained by the way Black leadership (the Civil Rights Industrial Complex) has joined the Dems in a policy that will make the Black vote less useful.

This is very sad to me. Blacks and whites have a shared history going back 400 years in America. After the American Indians, they're the real Americans. There is no group better disposed towards American Blacks than American Whites.

California is a glimpse at the future, the displacement of both Blacks and Whites by various immigrants and their descendants. It's a shame that Blacks are among the strongest supporters of open borders, they suffer disproportionately from uncontrolled immigration.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 6:57 PM  

"wrong that the due process protections recognized by the US Constitution don't apply to everyone."

Tell it to the people who are in prisons in other countries. They might laugh.

Obviously they don't apply to everyone.

"The Constitution recognizes that you can't have a reduction of your rights without due process."

Don't have to reduce what isn't granted.

"ALL people are entitled to the rights in the first amendment"

That's full-on retarded.

"Once a person comes under US law"

What part of "illegal" is difficult for you?

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 7:00 PM  

dh @64

Re-read the bill of rights and see where it creates a right. It doesn't. The right to due process is established in natural law, to all persons, and is recognized by the Constitution, and Congress is prohibited from abridging it, exactly like the right to defend one-self.

Under the philosophy of natural rights, you are correct that the Constitution recognizes rights rather than creates them. However, the US government is restrained only from infringing upon the rights of American citizens. This is necessarily the case because our Congress is granted the explicit power to infringe on the natural rights of non-citizens through the declaration of war upon them. War mandates the absence of due process.

Blogger SidVic June 24, 2018 7:02 PM  

Fortress America!

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 24, 2018 7:23 PM  

Hilarious to read about Trump's visit preparations as reported by the Daily Mail. North but police officers whining about the extra duty, and how Trump won't be given the full red carpet treatment. 53,000 people are signed up to attend a protest as well. Should be fun there.

Blogger Crew June 24, 2018 7:23 PM  

This will likely lead the left to commit greater acts of violence.

It also seems to me that things are getting to look more and more like Germany in the early 1930s ...

Perhaps that is why Obrador is calling for an invasion on the US by Mexicans and others.

Blogger JohnofAustria June 24, 2018 7:25 PM  

The government of United States exists for the express purpose of protecting the rights of its own citizens only.

The reason we reduce the rights of criminals via due process is that they ARE citizens with those rights and who the US government has the responsibility to protect.

Blogger Crew June 24, 2018 7:27 PM  

As an aside, if the police, any law enforcement, find an illegal adult male then I think they should be allowed to execute on the spot. This is war after all. (but we don't have that sort of intestinal fortitude anymore)

You have to remember that such females carry the genes to produce males like those you would execute.

Blogger robwbright June 24, 2018 7:28 PM  

Massive eye roll... In another post last year, Vox stated:

"The idea that the Constitution was intended to do anything at all for immigrants, resident aliens, or foreigners is... absurd..."

That statement and the positions of most in this thread are absurd. The Constitution is a legal document that uses terms of art. Two of those terms are "citizen" and "person". Those terms are NOT equivalent, nor are they used interchangeably. For example:

"No PERSON shall be a Representative who shall not have... been seven years a CITIZEN of the United States..."

"No PERSON shall be a Senator who shall not have... been nine years a CITIZEN..."

"The migration or importation of such PERSONS as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to..."

Those "persons" migrating or being imported aren't citizens, are they?

"No PERSON shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."

"The CITIZENS of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of CITIZENS in the several states. A PERSON charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice... shall... be delivered up... to the state having jurisdiction of the crime."

Notice the distinction between "citizens" and "persons"?

How about the Bill of Rights?

"No PERSON shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury... nor shall any PERSON be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

The 6th Amendment switches to "the accused", which carries no implication of citizenship at all.

"In all criminal prosecutions, the ACCUSED shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury..."

And then there's the 14th Amendment - which is the law, regardless of whether or not we like it... and the language is consistent with all of the above:

"All PERSONS born or naturalized in the United States... are CITIZENS of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of CITIZENS...; 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."

Words have specific meanings - especially in legal documents. In the above instances, it is quite obvious that "Person" means "human being" and "Citizen" means "human being who was born a citizen or became a citizen".

Some provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (and the later amendments) quite clearly DO have application to "Persons" - which would include immigrants, resident aliens, and foreigners if they come into/under the jurisdiction of the US courts/government.

That doesn't mean I agree with it or think it's ideal in our current situation re: immigration. But if you're going to ignore the plain and obvious meaning of the due process provisions of the Constitution, then don't bitch when the left ignores the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment or some other section you like.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 24, 2018 7:29 PM  

Shimshon wrote:None of these articles makes any sense, solely by the self-reported smuggler fees these poor people keep claiming to save all on their own. Can anyone explain this to me?
Once Carlos is here, he can get all his immediate family in. That's the savings of 7-10 people.

@dh,
Crossing the border without permission is an act of war.

Full stop.


This is why it is, and has been throughout history, a commonplace to kill illegal border crossers.

Blogger JohnofAustria June 24, 2018 7:32 PM  

It is certainly possible that the philosophy which says all persons have the right to free expression is universally true.

What that means for citizens of other countries though is that they it must establish positive law (or a constitution if you will) in their own dam country to protect it. There is absolutely no reason why the laws we have created to protect those rights for ourselves we are also obligated to extend to others who are not a part of our country.

Blogger mike June 24, 2018 7:32 PM  

@robwbright,

The Constitution implies that the 'person' in question is a lawful resident of the United States. Otherwise, they couldn't be eligible to be a citizen, no could they?

Use your brain, fuckstick.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 7:36 PM  

Even if the Constitution did claim to grant rights to other-than-citizens, it would be absurd, as it could have neither the authority nor the power to enforce any such thing.

Your only way out of that one is to go to the invade-the-world/invite-the-world neocon empire-building side.

As for people that are within our territory, if they're here illegally, they're already outside the scope of the law. The most basic law recognizes that infringing the law loses you certain protections of it, and even that's for citizens.

As for those legally here who still should not be, that's going to have to be fixed either by repeal, partitioning, or outright war and exile.

Blogger JohnofAustria June 24, 2018 7:40 PM  

I want you to tell me with a straight face that you think the founders intended the 2nd amendment to apply to illegal immigrants. Get the h*** out of here with that nonsense

Blogger Jonathan June 24, 2018 7:43 PM  

Mexico has effectively declared war on us. Any foreigner attempting to cross the border is attacking us and needs to be treated like an enemy combatant. Our borders either mean something or they do not.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 7:45 PM  

@87 For all the Conan LARPers out there, you know that isn't going to happen. Short of a coup d'etat, there is simply no way you are going to get enough people on board with the idea of the police or military gunning down civilians on the border. It's why we need more than just the wall (though we need that too). We need to turn off the beacon drawing the people here by punishing skinflint employers hiring slave labor, cutting off the welfare spigot to first and second generation immigrants so Rosalita and her ilk can't hop the border and squat out a 'US Citizen', and sending people out to check papers, en masse. All of these things have been done before, successfully, and we can do them again.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 7:49 PM  

Oh, and repeal the '65 Immigration Bill.

Blogger JohnofAustria June 24, 2018 7:52 PM  

Going back to an earlier said though I do want to address the idea ( The pernicious lie really) that the most Fundamentally American virtue is to want to make more money. The most fundamental American virtue is to want to live free and be willing to die for that. No matter if freedom brings riches or poverty.

And I bet if we went back and looked at when people started phrasing the highest American virtue as the pursuit of profit it would coincide with a certain group gaining admittance here.

Blogger JohnofAustria June 24, 2018 7:53 PM  

I don't know man it seemed like a lot of basic conservatives were OK with Isreal gunning down palestinians At the Gaza wall. Maybe they just need a couple of nudges.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 8:00 PM  

@96 - Not our country, not our problem. Also, I very much doubt even a plurality of people are aware of that event. While I have no love lost for Zionists, Israel belongs to the Israeli's and whatever means they are willing to employ is no concern of mine. I just don't want people getting hung up on impractical solutions when there are practical, proven solutions we've yet to employ (again).

Blogger DonReynolds June 24, 2018 8:06 PM  

During WWII (and in WWI), German saboteurs were landed along the East Coast by submarine at night. Some were picked up while hitchhiking, others resorted to crime to move about, stealing cars and taking hostages. I seriously doubt they were all caught but those who were caught were quickly executed by the US government. Many of them were captured while in uniform, but they were not treated as prisoners of war. They were treated like mad dogs because they were.

WE have some more mad dogs in this country and not all of them are MS-13. Some of them are Muslim terrorists. Some of them are communist radicals and Negro militants. Some are anarchists. All of them are a danger to American citizens and would try to overthrow the Constitution and Rule of Law and the Republic.

The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact.

Blogger van helsing June 24, 2018 8:23 PM  

correct, don, it is not a suicide pact, and like i said, the preamble lays it out. and no, as dh was corrected, illegals (and other immivaders) really dont have rights, not the rights of citizens, despite the best efforts of dimrats and some weak kneed gope, there are still immigration courts. altho those have been perverted, they could still be used properly, or better yet, tossed aside fro immediate justice, as the OGE has laid out. the leftards have simpy decided they want to transfuxate the country, and will misread, misinterpret, misquote anything they have to to keep their illicit program going. here is the preamble and how i looked at it and immivasion.

"Lets go to the source material, ie, the Preamble.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I don’t see how willy nilly illegal or legal immivasion perfects the union, more like it makes perfection, or merely even a good outcome, impossible. Willy nilly illegal and legal immivasion do not establish justice for actual Americans, and immivaders do not have Constitutional rights, despite people like Obama trying to say they do. Immigrants have their own court system, in fact. Willy nilly immivasion of both kinds, but especially illegal, does not insure any domestic tranquility at all – in fact it guarantees the opposite. They are not tranquil, whether their political representatives are in the seat of power, or not. Willy nilly immivasion of both kinds, but especially illegal, does not provide for the common defence – in fact it is a dagger at the heart of the common defence. They are foreign agents, and I liken them to the quartering of an enemy force among us. Willy nilly immivasion, especially illegal, does not promote the general welfare, but if one thinks like a dimrat and enjoys seeing the 10th amendment (among others) blown wide open, then one probly likes the explosion in lots of specific welfare benefits. Willy nilly immivasion does not secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity – it removes those very blessings, while blessing the immivaders with a target-rich environment to go along with whatever freebies the political class can extract from us to provide to whatever other that the political class can crowbar into America. Open borders thus rent asunder the Constitution as well as the country and the citizens."

Blogger DonReynolds June 24, 2018 8:25 PM  

I see several questions as to whether the US constitutional guarantees apply to non-citizens. Every American Indian can answer that question and the answer is definitely NO!

American Indians did not become US citizens until 1925 and it was NOT by a twisted court interpretation of the 14th amendment....it was by Act of Congress.
Even AFTER American Indians became US citizens, they were not subject to the same constitutional guarantees as everyone else. Why? Ask any American Indian and they can tell you...they are only subject to treaty. The Indian nations signed treaties with the Federal government and a treaty trumps all Federal laws. In fact, a treaty is the highest law, other than the Constitution itself.

Even today in Oklahoma, an American Indian cannot be arrested by anyone but Federal officers or Tribal police. Otherwise, the state and local cops can detain them and call someone else to actually arrest an American Indian who has committed a crime. Here again, the crime must be a crime that the Indian nation says is a crime. They are not subject to "white man's law"....even building codes, fire regulations, and code enforcement. Yes, they are American citizens and they can vote. No, it is not the same as everyone else....it is governed by treaty. No, they do not have to be on an Indian reservation for any of this to be true.

I worked as director of planning for the city of Durant, Oklahoma....the National Capital of the Choctaw Nation. Quite an education. (They really do not like Cherokees much.)

Blogger van helsing June 24, 2018 8:40 PM  

yes, indians are separate nations. this impacts some of what local, state, federal government do. check out the tohono o'odham tribe in AZ. their res spans the border into mexico. the tribe officially, and certainly some members and "handlers" dont want a wall. it's sacred land, a nation! but... you name it, it goes thru that corridor. mostly north. neon revolt had some posts about that area recently...

Blogger Karl June 24, 2018 9:11 PM  

The full text of the relevant section of the 14th amendment reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Now why would someone take out "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," in a long-winded comment?

Mala Fide. Because the clear language of the 14th means children of foreign nationals are not U.S. citizens at birth. Persons was put there to ensure that slaves were granted citizenship. It was not put there to give the children of invaders citizenship.

Blogger tz June 24, 2018 9:34 PM  

Maybe we should do STEM for the Crow, Navajo, Iroquoia, Shoshone, etc. so they can be hired under H1-B visas.

(They would be an improvement v.s. the pajeets which I am trying and often failing to practice the virtue of patience with).

Blogger Keef June 24, 2018 10:04 PM  

I suggest martial law.

Of course you do, you don’t live here and would t have to face any of the consequences of martial law. Vox, you have a lot of good ideas but you are not an American and you do not speak for Americans.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 10:28 PM  

@104 Agreed. Trusting the same government that put us into this mess in the first place to not abuse its powers seems woefully naive. I'd rather not find out the hard way whether Trump is more Caesar than Cincinnatus.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 10:29 PM  

"there is simply no way you are going to get enough people on board with the idea of the police or military gunning down civilians on the border."

Pfft.

What civilians? Those aren't civilians.

And it already happens, just not as often as it used to.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 10:34 PM  

I don't know if martial law is a good option or not.

I am completely certain that people will call for it when they are agitated enough.

Blogger Ronin F9 June 24, 2018 10:38 PM  

The 5th Amendment clearly states, "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;"

Illegal aliens forcibly deported are deprived of neither life, liberty, or property and therefore require no due process. They can and should be summarily kicked out.

Blogger Ian Stein June 24, 2018 10:49 PM  

Put a boat in the gulf. Put them on buses and take them to the boat and drop them off at their preferred port of call. The Trump Ferry. Run it 24/7. This BS has got to stop.

Blogger HoosierHillbilly June 24, 2018 10:49 PM  

@104 and @105 You kids really haven't caught on yet when Mr. Vox makes these kinds of offhand suggestions, have you?

No use getting bowties knotted worrying about the long-term effects on a nation...when there won't BE a recognizable nation if things keep on strolling.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 11:01 PM  

"without due process of law"

Illegals are already without the due process of law. This is not hard to understand.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 24, 2018 11:07 PM  

F*** 'em. F*** 'em all. I have to deal with my "house" before I can afford to go outside. Shooting trespassers on sight is entirely called for, especially when they're already breaking the law.

Granted, I'm also quite sure there would very, very soon be virtually no trespassers once they started getting shot. The only thing you're doing here is arguing against people being punished for doing things they shouldn't be doing. Your position is quite clear, and you have to go back.

Blogger Ryan G June 24, 2018 11:30 PM  

@110 - I'm not talking about doing nothing, I'm talking about doing something that would actually be feasible in today's political and cultural environment. Mass murder isn't going to happen. Could you find people among local police and in the military to do it? Sure. Would the overwhelming majority of them be willing to do so? I'm going to go with 'no'. Furthermore, I promise the geopolitical ramifications for doing that would wreck incalculable harm to the country. We'd become a pariah among the first world for at least several decades. Also, if Trump authorized that, he would be impeached - full stop. Unless you honestly believe the military would back the man while he setup a fucking military Junta in the United States, he'd be gone within days of issuing such an order and likely spend the rest of his life in prison.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 11:31 PM  

there is simply no way you are going to get enough people on board with the idea of the police or military gunning down civilians on the border.

Fine. Killer robots it is. They'll be cheaper and more effective in the long run anyway.

Blogger Pseudotsuga June 24, 2018 11:39 PM  

Well, we could just send these "migrants" up to the socialist utopia of Canada. They need people to settle the Great White Empty Spaces, and they already have "free" medical care and etc. set up and ready to go. I'm sure our friendly neighbors to the North would welcome the chance to virtue signal and show how Not-USA-and-woke they really are.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 11:40 PM  

Also with robots you have deniability. You can say you sent them on a humanitarian mission with only minimal self defense capabilities, and no one knows how they began targeting anything with a heat signature bigger than a jackrabbit.

Probably they were hacked. Damned Russians.

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 11:44 PM  

*@dh,
Crossing the border without permission is an act of war.

Full stop.

This is why it is, and has been throughout history, a commonplace to kill illegal border crossers.*

If Trump wants to use the military to secure the border, and make it a national security issue, I am all for it. There is the precedent and the support to do so. He is in sole command of national security, and that's his prerogative. He could ignore any court or policy that says otherwise and lock the border down immediately. Fine with me. He has not done that so it's pointless to pretend he has.

Once you cede that the it is a law enforcement matter, and use the executive's policing powers, anyone who is stopped by an officer of the Federal government is entitled to due process and protections of the US Constitution. It's really that simple.

*I want you to tell me with a straight face that you think the founders intended the 2nd amendment to apply to illegal immigrants. Get the h*** out of here with that nonsense*

Of course they did. Whatever would make you think otherwise. You think there was a length citizenship process in 1794? If you showed up on US soil, and looked like an Englishmen, you probably already had a weapon on you. You are just about as ignorant as they come.

Under the philosophy of natural rights, you are correct that the Constitution recognizes rights rather than creates them. However, the US government is restrained only from infringing upon the rights of American citizens. This is necessarily the case because our Congress is granted the explicit power to infringe on the natural rights of non-citizens through the declaration of war upon them. War mandates the absence of due process.

It is not true that the Constitution prevents the government only from infringing rights of citizens. The document is replete with the use of the word "person". Congress is given the duty to declare war, which recognizes that a state of war exists between two nations - the United States and another nation, not between a nation - the United States - and another person or group of people. Nations war. People fight.

Under natural law, a state of war exists when the required conditions are met, and there is no declaration. Congress is compelled to declare war to remove uncertainty and as a matter of policy. The declaration of war is just that - it is an announcement for clarity that the state of war between two nations exists. As always, the natural rights of all people exist regardless of the actions of this or any government. It's simply that we permit our government the discretion to violate those rights under limited circumstances.


Obviously they don't apply to everyone.
Natural rights are universal and inherent. You don't apply for them, they are not granted by a piece of paper. Real Americans know that source of rights is God, not a piece of paper, not Congress, not the God of the White House.

An imprisoned priest in Libya has all the same rights under natural law as a citizen living in the United States. The fact that his government doesn't recognize those rights is irrelevant to it's existence, just like an atheists denial of the existence of God doesn't affect His existence at all. The rights exist even if you don't know it.

What part of "illegal" is difficult for you?
Illegal doesn't mean the right is gone. And simply put, you can't pass a law that says that you are automatically illegal. That's why we have due process and a tradition of being able to ask a Court to redress grievances. Losing a piece of paper or having a piece of paper doesn't make you immune to due process or blind to it.

The rights recognized by the bill of rights and the Constitution are rooted in Natural Law. Rights are inherent, universal, granted by God and not by magic words incanted to a scrap of tree.

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 11:47 PM  

Don, you ignorant stupid vassal. In WWII German spies caught in the US were caught by the FBI, given trials, and then executed. Truman even pardoned the few that were awaiting execution at the end of the war. You should just shut up and let people who haven't gone full retard do the talking for you.
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/german-saboteurs-executed-in-washington

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 11:48 PM  

Illegal aliens forcibly deported are deprived of neither life, liberty, or property and therefore require no due process. They can and should be summarily kicked out.

The illegals being held often for weeks or months are deprived of liberty. Don't lie to try to make a point. If we had a wall, and it was just a matter of stopping them crossing it, I'd agree with you. But we don't have a wall. They are caught, bound, restrained, jailed. That requires due process. This isn't rocket science. You want to use water cannons to turn them back on the border? Be my guest. Otherwise, if you put them under arrest, they are deprived of liberty and require a hearing.

Blogger dh June 24, 2018 11:50 PM  

VD, the readership has gone full retard. Sometimes it's acceptable that Trump doesn't know what he's done, or has made a mistake, or has said something which has political or rhetorical value but not policy or directional value. That's okay. What's not okay is otherwise smart people falling over themselves to avoid pointing out the mistake.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 24, 2018 11:50 PM  

The declaration of war is just that - it is an announcement for clarity that the state of war between two nations exists.

That's factually and historically wrong, dh. Nothing in the Constitution prevents Congress from declaring war upon or authorizing the use of military force against groups that are not identifiable as nations. In fact Congress has done so on numerous occasions.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 24, 2018 11:52 PM  

Dh,

You're running into the realization that we are ceasing to care.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 25, 2018 12:05 AM  

"Real Americans know that source of rights is God, not a piece of paper, not Congress, not the God of the White House."

Funny how you said the First Amendment and now it's God.

If God killed people simply for killing invaders, or otherwise stopped that from happening, I'd agree. He does not appear to either be doing so or have done so in the past. Clearly no such right is not granted by God in the way you seem to be trying to imply.

"Illegal doesn't mean the right is gone. And simply put, you can't pass a law that says that you are automatically illegal."

It does mean that some rights are gone, such as the right not to be arrested or otherwise punished. You certainly can pass such a law. It's called outlawry and it's been successfully done many, many times in the past.

" That's why we have due process and a tradition of being able to ask a Court to redress grievances. Losing a piece of paper or having a piece of paper doesn't make you immune to due process or blind to it."

Could you please try to make a sane and coherent argument, or just shut up already? They never had the "piece of paper" (credentialism much?) in the first place. Stop acting like a moron.

It's right there. Due. Process.

There's no such thing for invaders. You try to displace someone else out of their property, your a** is liable to being killed. The only thing that's stopping anyone is the vile fiction that they aren't invaders.

You can play the legalistic sophist game to the hilt, I don't care, and I'm being merciful here. Either shut up or you have to go back.

"Rights are inherent, universal, granted by God and not by magic words incanted to a scrap of tree."

Keep telling us that while you balance your way out of town coated in a different color, clothed like a bird, and try not to get splinters in your feet. If he cares to enforce them he will. If he doesn't apparently it's our prerogative to mete the actions and deal with the consequences.

Blogger Freddy June 25, 2018 12:07 AM  

Trump download may be blackmailed with 6 suitcase nukes on the coast's, Vegas and 3 in Texas just cause. Deep State has nothing to lose. "We no go to Gitmo!"

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 25, 2018 12:08 AM  

In the mean time, I'll point out that rights as actually and apparently granted by God are held incredibly close to the chest. You've no right to live, be happy, or enjoy due process beyond what you can force to happen.

Blogger Freddy June 25, 2018 12:12 AM  

Way to bring in home Azure

Blogger Patrikbc June 25, 2018 12:25 AM  

There was no such thing as an illegal immigrant at the time.

Blogger Rob June 25, 2018 12:55 AM  

Vox, question: In a normal situation (that is when mass immivasion has not happened), would a merit based fixed quota immigration system be acceptable? Or is it always a negative? Thanks

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas June 25, 2018 1:07 AM  

I love Trump's stand on immigration but he needs to talk to Jr. about his taste in women and stop letting him wife up Fox News thots.

Trump Jr. is a hell of a shit lord but his pimp hand needs some work.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 1:19 AM  

Noah--

You fail. Congress has declared war only five times: 1812, Spanish-American, Mexican-American, World War I and World War II. I'll wait while you quote the others where Congress declares war against a not nation. Authorizing military force against a non-nation isn't declaring war, that's why we have other words for it.

Regardless I suppose, it's irrelevant if you declare against a non-nation group or not. Recognizing a state of war between a group and the US is the same.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 1:22 AM  

It does mean that some rights are gone, such as the right not to be arrested or otherwise punished. You certainly can pass such a law. It's called outlawry and it's been successfully done many, many times in the past.

If the government violates a right, it doesn't make the right go away. An arrest, to be valid, entails an amount of due process. Doing something in the past doesn't make it legal now, or correct, or Constitutional.

You can play the legalistic sophist game to the hilt, I don't care, and I'm being merciful here. Either shut up or you have to go back.

That's fine. You just have to give them a cursory hearing first. You know, if they happen to be a citizen or happen to have legal status, or just to scream and cry, it doesn't matter. Give them a hearing and send them back. Fifteen minutes and it's over. Easy.

Keep telling us that while you balance your way out of town coated in a different color, clothed like a bird, and try not to get splinters in your feet. If he cares to enforce them he will. If he doesn't apparently it's our prerogative to mete the actions and deal with the consequences.

This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard. If God doesn't prevent me from calling you a fag it must mean it's true.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 1:23 AM  

St--

That's fine. Care or not, it doesn't affect what is right.

Blogger bob kek mando - ( "an entirely disconnected spew of word vomit" ) June 25, 2018 1:42 AM  

86. robwbright June 24, 2018 7:28 PM
Notice the distinction between "citizens" and "persons"?


i notice that it's not possible for a non-Citizen to commit Treason ... being as, the non-Citizen has no allegiance to these United States to violate. if a non-Citizen attempts to over throw the Federal government, it's simply an act of War.

therefore, the term of Art "Person" may or may not mean "Citizen" in the Constitution. it depends upon context.

another way to look at this is that according to your attempted formulation, no Citizen of these United States is a "Person".

that's absurd on it's face.

all Citizens are Persons, but not all Persons are Citizens.

even according to your own examples
"No PERSON shall be a Senator who shall not have... been nine years a CITIZEN..."

we have Person who has been a Citizen for no less than nine years.


86. robwbright June 24, 2018 7:28 PM
Those "persons" migrating or being imported aren't citizens, are they?


as has been noted upthread, American Indians are all Native born.

but it was the 20th Century before any portion of US Law applied to them.

is an American Indian not a "Person" according to the Constitution?

Blogger bob kek mando - ( "an entirely disconnected spew of word vomit" ) June 25, 2018 1:56 AM  

131. dh June 25, 2018 1:22 AM
If the government violates a right, it doesn't make the right go away. An arrest, to be valid, entails an amount of due process. Doing something in the past doesn't make it legal now, or correct, or Constitutional.


fine.

then Trump can issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal to US Citizens for the purpose of seizing and confiscating, by violence, all properties of foreign nationals in these United States illegally.

any foreign national who resists the provisional confiscation of his property while inside US borders can then be legally killed by the US citizen.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 2:11 AM  

bob you ignorant slut. Would you please just shut up for a few minutes, sit down, and read the Constitution as it's written and then come back and talk like an adult.

I'll wait. If you've read it, and you don't know who issues Letters of Marque and Reprisal, then just shut the fuck up and go away. I'll give you a hint, it's not the President.

Blogger Shimshon June 25, 2018 2:13 AM  

Further down the article about Carlos, it notes contact with his mother, still in Honduras. So, the country is so dangerous that he has to flee for his life with his daughter in tow, while his mother is left behind, worrying for their safety? Uh huh...

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 25, 2018 2:17 AM  

dh, an authorization to use military force allows our armed forces to deprive others of all of their natural rights, just a declaration of war does. This being the case, the only constraint the Constitution places on Congress' ability to infringe upon the rights of non-Americans is the requirement for a majority vote.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 25, 2018 2:30 AM  

"That's fine. You just have to give them a cursory hearing first. You know, if they happen to be a citizen or happen to have legal status, or just to scream and cry, it doesn't matter. Give them a hearing and send them back. Fifteen minutes and it's over. Easy."

If it would work that way. We already try, it doesn't work. On top of that, who defines what a hearing is? Loopholes already being abused. Desperate times, desperate measures.

"This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard. If God doesn't prevent me from calling you a fag it must mean it's true."

If a word means precisely nothing in your mouth, why do you speak it? Human rights? These have no meaning when you speak them, things that do not exist.

To say that something is right (a "right" boundary. This is your only possible meaning at this juncture)? They were wrong the moment they stepped over the border.

I'm all for trying the nice peaceable way of settling things first.

It isn't working. The longer it doesn't work the harsher the eventual consequences.

Too high a threshold of patience leaves one a spineless cuck, too low a dangerous fool. Your argument presumptively ignores a large part of the gradient of potentially appropriate actions, your conclusion reached before your argument began.

This is exactly how your skin is remembered to be your your uniform. When powers start to move, men caught between are crushed into lubricant. You'd choose strange foreigners to save before your family, your nation? Don't pretend that choice has anything to do with love, justice, or what is right.

They're here to crush us in our land, and by being here their actions declare they care nothing for rights or law, whether granted by men or God. Let those who ignore the law be ignored by it, poetic justice.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener June 25, 2018 2:33 AM  

I'll wait. If you've read it, and you don't know who issues Letters of Marque and Reprisal, then just shut the fuck up and go away. I'll give you a hint, it's not the President.

The train is fine.

Blogger DonReynolds June 25, 2018 2:40 AM  

dh wrote:Illegal aliens forcibly deported are deprived of neither life, liberty, or property and therefore require no due process. They can and should be summarily kicked out.

The illegals being held often for weeks or months are deprived of liberty. Don't lie to try to make a point. If we had a wall, and it was just a matter of stopping them crossing it, I'd agree with you. But we don't have a wall. They are caught, bound, restrained, jailed. That requires due process.


The only illegal aliens that are detained (not arrested) are those who request asylum in the US. Those that are arrested for crimes are prosecuted accordingly....with legal representation and often the services of the 50+ Mexican Consulates. Those turned around at the border and sent back immediately are not denied any due process. They are simply being denied entry and returned to their own country. They are not free to wander around in the meantime (or escape from custody).

Noah B The Savage Gardener wrote:The declaration of war is just that - it is an announcement for clarity that the state of war between two nations exists.

That's factually and historically wrong, dh. Nothing in the Constitution prevents Congress from declaring war upon or authorizing the use of military force against groups that are not identifiable as nations. In fact Congress has done so on numerous occasions.


A declaration of war is a legal announcement that what follows are not crimes but acts of war. I agree that the enemy in question is a nation and I agree that the Constitution makes it clear that the use of military force against non-nations does not require a declaration of war by the Congress. The Constitution even provides handy examples.....the suppression of piracy on the high seas. In practice, the pirate crews were dispatched and only the pirate captains were tried in port and hanged. Also the use of military force to deal with hostile American Indians...and there were many during 300 years of American experience...did not require a declaration. While not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, the use of military force was justified in the suppression of the slave trade on the high seas...also without a declaration of war by Congress. And finally, one of the purposes in the Constitution for even having military forces is to put down rebellion and suppress insurrection, which would be only domestic.

Azure Amaranthine wrote:"there is simply no way you are going to get enough people on board with the idea of the police or military gunning down civilians on the border."

Pfft.

What civilians? Those aren't civilians.

And it already happens, just not as often as it used to.


Too late, or I suppose nobody remembers. In July 1997 (during the Clinton Administration) the Pentagon had "drug patrols" along the Mexican border, including Marine snipers....and they did shoot. The big deal was one of the snipers shot and killed an American citizen (who was Hispanic) by mistake and the adverse publicity resulted in the "drug patrols" being withdrawn.


Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 25, 2018 2:42 AM  

If someone loses their ID, they should go to a legitimate border crossing and call for assistance.

Trying to sneak in does not engender confidence that one is supposed to be here. Shooting them in the attempt is a sane immune response that has been long suppressed.

Blogger Tallen June 25, 2018 2:54 AM  

The Bill of Rights doesn't grant any specific rights, it prohibits the expansion of government in a way that limits those rights.

This is an incomplete statement. The BoR prohibits the expansion of government in a way that limits those rights as they belong to citizens. Noncitizens do not receive full protection of the Constition, only in part, therefore the government is free to encroach upon the rights of noncitizens, or not enforce protection of their rights to whatever extent the people choose. If the BoR required the government to enforce protection of all rights of all noncitizens, then the US government could be held liable for failure to secure those rights for anyone in the world. The US government cannot, therefore the BoR does not.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 4:58 AM  

Don-- Literally shut up. I am aware of how it works now. Whats being proposed in 140 characters or less is a change that would obviate that due process. Just literally shut up until you get a clue.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 5:00 AM  

*If the BoR required the government to enforce protection of all rights of all non-citizens, then the US government could be held liable for failure to secure those rights for anyone in the world. The US government cannot, therefore the BoR does not.*

This is stupid and idiotic. The Constitution and Bill of Rights doesn't concern itself with the actions of foreign governments because it's stupid and irrelevant. The restrictions restrict the actions of the US Government. It says nothing about citizenship or any of that. It is the most stupid of all arguments to pretend that an amendment that says "Congress shall make no law" actually means "Congress hall make no law concerning citizens". It's a stupid argument and you should just shut the fuck up.

Blogger VD June 25, 2018 5:13 AM  

I promise the geopolitical ramifications for doing that would wreck incalculable harm to the country. We'd become a pariah among the first world for at least several decades.

You clearly don't understand the situation you're in. The country is not going to exist in 20 years if you don't do something drastic. And who gives a damn about being a pariah? You sound like literally every European cuck ever.

"We can't possibly do that because then everyone would think badly of us!"

That's an argument for junior high school girls, not geopolitics.

Blogger VD June 25, 2018 5:15 AM  

VD, the readership has gone full retard.

No, DH, you're just not recognizing that Americans are realizing that their ideals and their laws have entirely failed them. You know better than most where this is ultimately going. One day, everything is fine, and the next, it isn't.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 5:30 AM  

VD, it's true this leads to a very ugly place. Everyone wakes up and the lines are drawn and nothing but what matters matters anymore.

I don't see the connection to abandoning basics to getting there. I don't buy the hyped up drama the left uses to pitch fundamental changes. School shootings don't convince me that we need to ban guns. The same is true for due process. Illegal immigrants don't sway me that we have to give up due process.

Blogger Avalanche June 25, 2018 5:35 AM  

@123 "You can play the legalistic sophist game to the hilt, I don't care, and I'm being merciful here. Either shut up or you have to go back."

Embrace the power of AND!

*shut up AND you have to go back*

Blogger VD June 25, 2018 5:50 AM  

Illegal immigrants don't sway me that we have to give up due process.

But no one is asking your opinion, so it doesn't matter if immigrants are convinced or not. I certainly don't expect Salvini and the Italians to respect my opinion on such matters, although I happen to agree with them.

Americans have been invaded by over 100 million non-Americans in the lifetime of many of the people reading this blog. They want their country back and they no longer give a damn about all the historical precedents and word games and legal interpretations and political institutions that have not only permitted, but abetted the invasion.

Blogger Unknown June 25, 2018 5:54 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger RTR June 25, 2018 5:55 AM  

This is some Sargon-level cuckery from DH. Fedora-tipping his way to destruction.

Blogger Ryan G June 25, 2018 6:01 AM  

Vox, with all due respect, I mentioned several realistic alternatives in earlier posts - things that have been tried before, successfully: going after employers of illegals, authorizing citizens to do citizen checks, eliminating welfare benefits for the first two generations (ok, this one hasn't been tried before because the welfare state was just being created when Operation Wetback was enacted), and repealing the '65 immigration bill.

But suppose we go with plan Conan. Please explain how this could happen without Trump being impeached and that order nullified. Furthermore, could you give an estimation on what percentage of military personnel would comply with such orders, especially factoring in the rather large percentage of those people who are Hispanic and may have divided loyalties.

Insofar as geopolitical ramifications, do you believe wealthy western nations, especially the NATO bloc, would continue trade with us after such aggressive action? How should we respond if, in response, countries around the world decide to expel our military bases which would diminish our force projection and create a power vacuum in Europe. I just don't see European countries, as fond as their leaders are of virtue signalling, just shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well, shit happens."

Blogger Mark Stoval June 25, 2018 6:09 AM  

"Americans have been invaded by over 100 million non-Americans in the lifetime of many of the people reading this blog." -- VD

Yes, and the majority of my family has served to defend this country overseas. (both Navy and Army)

What did they fight for? What did my uncle lose a leg for? They all fought outside the Western Hemisphere when the real fight was right here on the southern border.

The US military could stop this flow of people on our border. We could also invade Mexico and install a government that would stop this flow of people at their southern boarder.


Now, or we will surly lose what is left of our civilization.

Blogger VD June 25, 2018 6:17 AM  

I mentioned several realistic alternatives in earlier posts - things that have been tried before, successfully: going after employers of illegals, authorizing citizens to do citizen checks, eliminating welfare benefits for the first two generations (ok, this one hasn't been tried before because the welfare state was just being created when Operation Wetback was enacted), and repealing the '65 immigration bill.

These things are not politically feasible either. They are not going to happen through the regular political process.

Please explain how this could happen without Trump being impeached and that order nullified. Furthermore, could you give an estimation on what percentage of military personnel would comply with such orders, especially factoring in the rather large percentage of those people who are Hispanic and may have divided loyalties.

You clearly don't understand that the USA is almost certainly beyond any conventional solutions. Trump would have to declare martial law, suspend the Constitution, and arrest a considerable portion of the House and Senate, as well as the Supreme Court. He certainly has the ability to do that, it is very unlikely that he has the necessary will to do so.

Furthermore, could you give an estimation on what percentage of military personnel would comply with such orders.

Of course not. No one could. But if the US military can no longer be trusted to defend American posterity against domestic enemies, the USA is already over, it just hasn't stopped twitching yet.

Insofar as geopolitical ramifications, do you believe wealthy western nations, especially the NATO bloc, would continue trade with us after such aggressive action? How should we respond if, in response, countries around the world decide to expel our military bases which would diminish our force projection and create a power vacuum in Europe

Yes, of course they would. They will do anything to continue to have access to US markets. If countries expel our military bases, we should say "thank you very much". In fact, we should not wait for them to do so, but should proactively close all of them and bring all the troops home to deal with the domestic situation.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine June 25, 2018 6:46 AM  

Insofar as geopolitical ramifications, do you believe wealthy western nations, especially the NATO bloc, would continue trade with us after such aggressive action? How should we respond if, in response, countries around the world decide to expel our military bases which would diminish our force projection and create a power vacuum in Europe. I just don't see European countries, as fond as their leaders are of virtue signalling, just shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well, shit happens."

I'm not seeing the downside for me and mine. They'll never stop trade entirely because it's a major component of the best tool for bringing us under the NWO yoke. By that measure I'd actually prefer that they did stop.

NATO? It'd almost certainly dissolve without us anyway. Power vacuum in Europe? Sounds like a good excuse for the Euros to keep their bankster warz to themselves again, at least for a spell.

Expel our bases? Cool, that cuts our neocons in half at the belt, and frees up troops to guard borders or do productive things that don't advance globalism and the adulteration of the nation's blood. What's that? The dollar would collapse without the oil circulation mechanism? The fiat dollar needs to die anyway, and sooner is better. Yes, it'd suck a** for decades, but still best to get it over with. Rip off the bandaid as fast as possible and maybe we'll only have our coasts colonized instead of being manipulated by the remnant shreds of fiat flesh into an even worse global fiat Bancor or some absurd satanic slave collar like that.

Likely none of the above would happen though. It'd just be a media bit**storm and propaganda-fest, which would largely be laughed at by people unrepentantly cheering the accelerated sinking of the MSM ship. These people are stupid and overconfident in the face of their burgeoning decadence/senescence.

Blogger Stilicho June 25, 2018 6:47 AM  

dh, stop playing jailhouse lawyer. You don't know what you are talking about anymore than you did while trying to discuss tax law, or when you wasted a bunch of money to find out that, yes, it isn't illegal to fire someone for political beliefs, but the left would claim some other protected status anyway. Those you are criticizing are closer to the truth than you.

As a foreigner, your concern for our Constitution is touching and irrelevant. More to the point, if you want to twist the Constitution in a juridical fashion, then the well established 4th amendment cases support the argument that the BOR stops at the border with respect to not-Americans. Bureaucratic processes, rules, regs, and administrative law judges notwithstanding. Summary deportation of not-Americans is quite constitutional. Neither substantive nor procedural due process under the 14th Amendment is properly invoked in such matters. The fact that you might find a leftist judge who tries to do so is beside the point.

Blogger bob kek mando - ( "an entirely disconnected spew of word vomit" ) June 25, 2018 7:41 AM  

135. dh June 25, 2018 2:11 AM
bob you ignorant slut.


dh, you ignorant slut, Letters of Marque are authorized within the Constitution and permit private US Citizens to Lawfully conduct what would otherwise be considered Piracy against foreign nationals.

and, as i've noted before, US Citizens are subject to Asset Forfeiture on mere suspicion of 'Drug Activity' and this is supposed to be 'Lawful' behavior on the part of the police.

so strange that you have greater respect for the supposed 'Rights' of Alien Nationals than the Constitution ever had. and that you expect US Law enforcement to have GREATER respect for the "Rights" of foreign nationals than they do for the Rights of actual Law Abiding US Citizens.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 25, 2018 8:47 AM  

Congress grants letters of marque and reprisal, but the point is irrelevant.

Blogger Robert Coble June 25, 2018 10:10 AM  

@115: Send them north to Canada.

Do exactly what Mexico is doing to all non-Mexican immivaders: bundle them along to the next northern border - no asylum. When Soy Boy Trudeau squawks, remind him "That's not what Canadians do" to immivaders. Make him eat his own dog $#!+.

Blogger Dire Badger June 25, 2018 11:17 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Dire Badger June 25, 2018 11:19 AM  

I love all these arguments about the meaning of the word 'people' when the preamble to the constitution makes the word 'people' perfectly clear.

WE the people.

Not you the people, not them the people. dh can frankly go screw himself, he does not get to define who 'we' are.

"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is!"

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 11:19 AM  

Stil--

Summary deportation of not-Americans is quite constitutional. Neither substantive nor procedural due process under the 14th Amendment is properly invoked in such matters. The fact that you might find a leftist judge who tries to do so is beside the point.

I don't disagree that it is entirely possible and legal and Constitutional to deport people at the border with the most summary of processes. We already have streamlined deportations. There is literally nothing stopping Trump expanding that and making the process even faster. Literally, nothing.

Trump can bitch and moan about it, or he can fix it. He got played once already on this topic, and he's letting it happen again. Sometimes he's going to get it wrong. This is one of those cases.

Streamlined removals still trigger due process protections. That is what the "subject to the jurisdiction" portion of the 14th amendment means. If you are under control of US law, either because you are a US person or on US ground, you have due process protections. This is why it was wrong for Obama to drone an American overseas (US person), and this is why it is wrong for Trump to try to remove due process from illegals trying to break into the US.

Another way Trump could solve this issue is to ignore posse comitatus law, implement martial law at the border, and use his authority as commander in chief to exclude illegals from the border.

He's just doing it wrong. He's got people who are not immune to public pressure giving him *bad advice*.

You can go full retard in trying to defend this action or you can see around the smokescreen. There is nothing preventing Trump from solving this problem, and eliminating due process isn't the problem. Republicans in Congress have lost the will to stand strong on this issue.

Blogger dh June 25, 2018 11:22 AM  

bob--

You are still just wrong on many levels, and you just keep digging deeper. Just admit when you have no idea what you are talking about and move on. Pathetically trying to cover up the fact that you have no clue about who grants Letters of Marque is just silly. The record is right there.

Don't presume to tell me what I think on asset forfeiture or whatever topic you want to change the subject to. Let the informed adults talk and go back to coming up with snappy aliases.

Blogger Gen. Kong June 25, 2018 11:44 AM  

@152. You make some good points, especially about going after employers (Chamber of Commerce cucks) with all manner of tools presently available - including asset seizures. It's a far more effective first step and destroys domestic enemies encouraging while invaders self-deport. The blackrobed Satanic priesthood sacrificed the constitution upon the altar of equality long ago. The day of the rope is long overdue.

As for all of the constitutional arguments being made - this is just more ghost-dancing. The constitution is over, a well-rotted carcass that barely stinks any more. Lawyers are nothing more than maggots scouring the bones for meat.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2018 11:55 AM  

That is what the "subject to the jurisdiction" portion of the 14th amendment means. If you are under control of US law, either because you are a US person or on US ground,
No, "Subject to the Jurisdiction" means a native-born citizen, naturalized citizen, or non-citizen legally resident, such as Treaty Indians and immigrants.

Blogger Dire Badger June 25, 2018 2:49 PM  

Why all this yammering about letters of Marque and reprisal? They were, by custom, strictly maritime in nature, and occured only on unclaimed territory (unclaimable, ie oceans).

Not to mention that the restrictions surrounding letters of marque and reprisal were extremely severe. Individuals captured while using a letter of marque were generally returned for some sort of jurisprudence.

No, letters of Marque are not needed. Invaders sneaking into this country can be dealt with as spies or saboteurs without such clever wordplay, with summary execution or deportation. If you really want to make it funky, declare a mile's distance around the wall as unclaimed, and treat invaders as pirates... meaning open season and looting for anyone with balls and (hopefully) a gun.

Blogger Looking Glass June 25, 2018 5:57 PM  

@166 Dire Badger

Mexico is a failed state, much of Central America is utterly lawless (thus functionally unclaimed), and being a Privateer is just an awesome job title. Plus I think you fail to realize how much of these troubles are caused by foreign countries, which could lead to some fun adventures in pillaging.

But it's mostly just fun.

For more practical solutions, declare an invasion, suspend Habeas corpus, arrest most of DC, try & execute them. That'll solve the illegal invasion problems pretty quickly.

Blogger Darwinite June 25, 2018 8:09 PM  

Heh, I tried gently, because 5-10 years ago I would have been dh. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a similar sperg by me on the subject of universal rights in the archives. Now I understand I have to go back, but I intend to stay and do what I can to help MAGA until I _have_ to go back.
Keep dishing out the beatings, that’s how I learned so it might help dh.

Blogger bob kek mando - ( "an entirely disconnected spew of word vomit" ) June 26, 2018 12:39 AM  

163. dh June 25, 2018 11:22 AM
Pathetically trying to cover up the fact that you have no clue about who grants Letters of Marque is just silly. The record is right there.


because the POTUS has no bully pulpit?

this is the same situation as the President "submitting a budget". the Presidential budget has no authority, the budget will be whatever Congress decides to pass into Law. perhaps even over and above a Presidential Veto.

that doesn't mean that Trump can't exert a great deal of pressure in that direction.

as to Letters of Marque as applied, that actually goes back to that 'Due Process' you were harping on about. the Privateer actually has to drag both the seized property and nominal foreign nationals back to a US court and PROVE to the satisfaction of the Court that
a - the seized person(s) are valid targets according to the Letter of Marque
b - the seized person(s) were treated with all due respect and consideration AFTER SURRENDER
c - the property which was seized was a valid target by the terms of the Letter of Marque.

violation of any of those points could lose a Privateer his spoils as well as his Letter.

abuse of point B could get a Privateer executed.



163. dh June 25, 2018 11:22 AM
Don't presume to tell me what I think on asset forfeiture or whatever topic you want to change the subject to.


i don't care what you do or do not think of Asset Forfeiture. i consider it an overt violation of the 4th Amendment.

the fact remains that the Judiciary has decided to rule Asset Forfeiture 'legal' by Fiat.

the fact likewise remains that you continue to advocate that Illegal Aliens should have greater security in their persons and property than Law enforcement has the courtesy to grant to actual Law Abiding US Citizens.

and that's just goddamn stupid.

Blogger Dire Badger June 26, 2018 7:11 AM  

Thank you bob, that was exactly what I was trying to say about letters of Marque and reprisal being inapplicable. Not to mention that they are VERY strictly nautical... for good reason.

land-based militia are NEVER out of their country's 'juridiction' without becoming outlaws, thus the level of discretion for a civilian commander should never be as complete as that for a naval vessel that is umbilically tied to a nation.

Many nations have discovered to their horror what happens when you give land-based mercenaries that kind of power, as you are creating a legally-authorized bandit troop.

It is possible that giving, say, an outlaw Biker gang a letter of Marque would, at least temporarily, have a minor positive effect... right up until the newly-wealthy force realizes it's way more profitable to prey on Americans than on coyotes.

Don't make the same mistake as the pope made with the German Crossmen.

Blogger Akulkis June 26, 2018 9:21 AM  

@Gen Kong

Epstein's Island went up in smoke. Literally.

Blogger Akulkis June 26, 2018 9:41 AM  

A war with Mexico would be perfect right now
* Troops on the border
* Punish Mexican army for escorting drug mules
"
* All remittances to Mexico halted immediately.
* No more Moslem jihadis sneaking in via Mexico -- unholy korans have been found by farmers on the border going back to at least the 1990s.
* Stops every other countries Invaders from using southern border
* Stops 95%of the narco traffic immediately
* Perfect reason to round up EVERY Hispanic, and sort out who is who -- all Mexicans will be enemy nationals and can be detained LEGALLY .for the duration until a peace treaty is signed. It would suck for them if we had a Korean-style armistice for 60 years with no peace treaty.
* Anybody who complains about rounding up the illegals reveals himself to be a traitor and can be shot as soon as the words come out of their treasonous mouths.
* All talk of AMNESTY will be dead for at least 3 generations.
* We don't say his name will have blood shooting out of his ears BEFORE the brain cancer gets him.

I'm having a real difficult time coming up with even one downside.

Blogger Akulkis June 26, 2018 10:45 AM  

Ryan G

Shooting IN-Duh-Viduals who are infiltrating the border is not mass murder.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts