Trumpwatch 2.0

[MWmetalhead]

I wasn't on the ballot, wise guy.

If Trump would have said in his campaign that he was going to threaten peaceful European nations with military action and throw college students in federal prisons without due process, I wonder if he would've won the election?

[teetoppz28]

Writing a viewpoint in a college newspaper that aligns with much of the rest of the world and doing a sit-in protest is not terrorism.

Your thoughts regarding Trump's "not off the table" remarks?

It's merely the way he negotiates.

Everyone would be much better off if they took a look at what he accomplishes more so than what he says.

It wasn't so long ago that everybody on the left said they needed to pass legislation to solve the border problem. Now the problem is solved. No legislation needed. Just the new president.

I don't consider inhumane abductions of college students here on visas an "accomplishment."

I also don't consider disgusting verbal threats to peaceful nations a desirable negotiating tactic.

Not worth your time responding to Hugh Jidiot... s/he never has an intelligent response for anything.

[Chrocket87]

I wasn't on the ballot, wise guy.

If Trump would have said in his campaign that he was going to threaten peaceful European nations with military action and throw college students in federal prisons without due process, I wonder if he would've won the election?

Detaining college students, especially foreign ones, is red meat for Trump’s white trash base.

Keep in mind you’re replying to the biggest Israel apologist on this board, and I’m sure he considers anyone who criticizes Israel to be a “Nazi” or “terrorist”.

[Hugh Jorgan]

I wasn't on the ballot, wise guy.

If Trump would have said in his campaign that he was going to threaten peaceful European nations with military action and throw college students in federal prisons without due process, I wonder if he would've won the election?

You have to admit, it was a funny retort.



Students grated green cards to come here to study, should not be involved activities which are contrary to our national interests. People granted the privilege of access to our educational institutions that support terrorist organizations should indeed have that privilege revoked and sent home.

[Rate This]

I wasn't on the ballot, wise guy.

If Trump would have said in his campaign that he was going to threaten peaceful European nations with military action and throw college students in federal prisons without due process, I wonder if he would've won the election?

You have to admit, it was a funny retort.



Students grated green cards to come here to study, should not be involved activities which are contrary to our national interests. People granted the privilege of access to our educational institutions that support terrorist organizations should indeed have that privilege revoked and sent home.

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

[Hugh Jorgan]

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is a law that allows the U.S. president to detain or deport non-citizens from countries that are considered enemies during times of war or conflict. Is there not a war and or conflict going on between one of our staunchest allies and Hamas?

[Matt]

This administration is shit: https://www.mlive.com/politics/2025/03/ ... -cuts.html

[Rate This]

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is a law that allows the U.S. president to detain or deport non-citizens from countries that are considered enemies during times of war or conflict. Is there not a war and or conflict going on between one of our staunchest allies and Hamas?

That is war or conflict between us and some other country and it has to be a declared war to boot. Israel fighting some war with somebody does not meet that test.

[Rate This]

This administration is shit: https://www.mlive.com/politics/2025/03/ ... -cuts.html

Those children have a strong case that their rights to due process are being violated.

[Hugh Jorgan]

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is a law that allows the U.S. president to detain or deport non-citizens from countries that are considered enemies during times of war or conflict. Is there not a war and or conflict going on between one of our staunchest allies and Hamas?

That is war or conflict between us and some other country and it has to be a declared war to boot. Israel fighting some war with somebody does not meet that test.

Nope. It also includes a predatory incursion.

Would you have been against invoking that act against the "students" that perpetrated 911?

[Rate This]

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is a law that allows the U.S. president to detain or deport non-citizens from countries that are considered enemies during times of war or conflict. Is there not a war and or conflict going on between one of our staunchest allies and Hamas?

That is war or conflict between us and some other country and it has to be a declared war to boot. Israel fighting some war with somebody does not meet that test.

Nope. It also includes a predatory incursion.

Would you have been against invoking that act against the "students" that perpetrated 911?

Debating you is like shooting fish in a barrel…

The president may invoke the Alien Enemies Act in times of “declared war” or when a foreign government threatens or undertakes an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” against U.S. territory. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war, so the president must wait for democratic debate and a congressional vote to invoke the Alien Enemies Act based on a declared war. But the president need not wait for Congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion. The president has inherent authority to repel these kinds of sudden attacks — an authority that necessarily implies the discretion to decide when an invasion or predatory incursion is underway.

As the Supreme Court and past presidents have acknowledged, the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime authority enacted and implemented under the war power. When the Fifth Congress passed the law and the Wilson administration defended it in court during World War I, they did so on the understanding that noncitizens with connections to a foreign belligerent could be “treated as prisoners of war” under the “rules of war under the law of nations.” In the Constitution and other late-1700s statutes, the term invasion is used literally, typically to refer to large-scale attacks. The term predatory incursion is also used literally in writings of that period to refer to slightly smaller attacks like the 1781 Raid on Richmond led by American defector Benedict Arnold.

Today, some anti-immigration politicians and groups urge a non-literal reading of invasion and predatory incursion so that the Alien Enemies Act can be invoked in response to unlawful migration and cross-border narcotics trafficking. These politicians and groups view the Alien Enemies Act as a turbocharged deportation authority. But their proposed reading of the law is at odds with centuries of legislative, presidential, and judicial practice, all of which confirm that the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime authority. Invoking it in peacetime to bypass conventional immigration law would be a staggering abuse.

You are wrong as usual. Predatory incursion and invasion are meant in the context of an action against the U.S. by a foreign government. That has not occurred.

[Rate This]

Politico:
The new FDA commissioner agreed to remove the agency’s top vaccine official shortly after being quietly sworn in last week.

[Rate This]

MarketWatch:
Dow closes up over 400 points as U.S. stocks shake off tariff jitters.

[Hugh Jorgan]

Any person regardless of citizenship or legal status has due process rights under the constitution. We extend that to any person no matter what.

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is a law that allows the U.S. president to detain or deport non-citizens from countries that are considered enemies during times of war or conflict. Is there not a war and or conflict going on between one of our staunchest allies and Hamas?

That is war or conflict between us and some other country and it has to be a declared war to boot. Israel fighting some war with somebody does not meet that test.

Nope. It also includes a predatory incursion.

Would you have been against invoking that act against the "students" that perpetrated 911?

Debating you is like shooting fish in a barrel…

The president may invoke the Alien Enemies Act in times of “declared war” or when a foreign government threatens or undertakes an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” against U.S. territory. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war, so the president must wait for democratic debate and a congressional vote to invoke the Alien Enemies Act based on a declared war. But the president need not wait for Congress to invoke the law based on a threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion. The president has inherent authority to repel these kinds of sudden attacks — an authority that necessarily implies the discretion to decide when an invasion or predatory incursion is underway.

As the Supreme Court and past presidents have acknowledged, the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime authority enacted and implemented under the war power. When the Fifth Congress passed the law and the Wilson administration defended it in court during World War I, they did so on the understanding that noncitizens with connections to a foreign belligerent could be “treated as prisoners of war” under the “rules of war under the law of nations.” In the Constitution and other late-1700s statutes, the term invasion is used literally, typically to refer to large-scale attacks. The term predatory incursion is also used literally in writings of that period to refer to slightly smaller attacks like the 1781 Raid on Richmond led by American defector Benedict Arnold.

Today, some anti-immigration politicians and groups urge a non-literal reading of invasion and predatory incursion so that the Alien Enemies Act can be invoked in response to unlawful migration and cross-border narcotics trafficking. These politicians and groups view the Alien Enemies Act as a turbocharged deportation authority. But their proposed reading of the law is at odds with centuries of legislative, presidential, and judicial practice, all of which confirm that the Alien Enemies Act is a wartime authority. Invoking it in peacetime to bypass conventional immigration law would be a staggering abuse.

You are wrong as usual. Predatory incursion and invasion are meant in the context of an action against the U.S. by a foreign government. That has not occurred.

Ah, so you don't recognize the Palestinians as having a valid government.
Did we or did we not have a war on terror?

I noticed you didn't answer my question about the perpetrators of 9/11

[MWmetalhead]

Are you honestly equivocating jet hijackers who willfully crashed into a skyscraper to kill as many people as possible with college students who criticized the Israeli government (over the fact the IDM's bombings have killed thousands upon thousands of civilians and whose blockades created famine)?

You're fucking insane if that is indeed the case.