Should the President suspend habeas corpus and arrest those invading our borders?

[Publius]

If it wasn’t necessary when immigration levels were much higher than now (like ten years ago), why would it be necessary now?

[Publius]

I’m glad to see that you are advocating arresting and prosecuting Donald Trump for harboring invaders at his golf clubs.

[H_Arendt]

Johnwk2:

What you state is lack of attention actually is a disagreement over the facts.

President Trump agreed to a CR that would have funded the parts of the government that currently are shut into February. There would not have been a shutdown if he had kept his word. But the President reversed his position under pressure from conservative news commentators.

We all saw the President state on TV that he would be proud to shut down the government over the issue of the wall, that he would take responsibility for the shutdown and not try to place the blame on the Democrats. Paul Ryan passed wall funding through the House, Mitch McConnell refused to invoke the nuclear option to get it through the Senate, and then Trump had the shutdown he promised.

Having gotten it, President Trump reversed his position and tried to shift blame to the Democrats.

Just because Trump changed his position, he does not get to shirk the responsibility he claimed. He failed to get Mexico to pay for the wall, as promised. He failed for two years with Republican majorities in both Houses to convince Congress to make Americans pay for the wall. He has failed to convince a majority of Americans to support the wall. When one pays attention one sees that the President has been a failure on this issue. Now, sadly, he is throwing a temper tantrum at the expense of a lot of hard working employees.

The shutdown occurred because Donald Trump refused to sign any funding bill that could have passed Congress, most notably the one he originally agreed to sign. Real conservatives believe in individual responsibility… an ethical position the Republican Party has largely abandoned in favor of whining. Paying attention to the facts can wreak havoc with talking points.

Happy New Year

[Blackwolf]

Accurate and on point, well done.

Unfortunately the response, if any, can be summed up as follows:

“Democrats! Congress! Fifth Column!”

[Insert yooge cut and paste]

[H_Arendt]

BlackWolf

Thanks for your comments.

I know Johnwk2 is never going to concede any of his talking points.

My advice to johnwk about chatting up a TSA agent was sincere. Let me extend that advice. Talk to the TSA agent as you check into a flight to Berlin. Then go to Checkpoint Charlie (since the wall is gone but Checkpoint Charlie memorializes that era) and post a few times about how effective walls are.

[johnwk2]

@Bodecea

@johnwk2

Under our Constitution [Article 1, Section 9] we find "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

We have seen how local public servants and judicial activists on our courts have ignored the very intentions of our Constitution, turned the Constitution into a suicide pack, and are now allowing our country to be overrun with the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries. The social and economic consequences of allowing this invasion to take place have been devastating to American citizens and their communities, and yet, our courts and local public servants continue to ignore the general welfare of the United States and her citizens by blocking every reasonable means to end this invasion in its tracks.

And so, the question ought to be discussed if it is reasonable for the president to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, as applied to the current invasion of our borders, which in turn would stop, among other impediments, judicial meddling when our president executes a fundamental duty written into our Constitution which is to repel invasions.

In exercising this power, not only can this swarm of invaders be detained indefinitely with minimal necessities for life, but those who actively ignore federal statutory law, such as 8 U.S. Code § 1324, [harboring] can likewise be arrested and immediately prosecuted for their criminal conduct.

Keep in mind extra ordinary circumstances sometime demand extraordinary actions. And under our present circumstances, where the flood of invaders has overwhelmed ordinary protective measures and policies designed to protect our borders and the general welfare of the United States and her citizens, and to such a degree that thousands upon thousands of foreigners are now being introduced into our population without knowing who they are or what their real motive are, it seems to be only a matter of self-preservation that our President suspend habeas corpus, with regard to immigration, and assume his responsibility to repel this ongoing invasion.

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, subdue and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.

Why aren’t you on our Southern Border, camped out with your little pop gun, protecting us from the big bad invaders instead of wanting to attack our own Constitution because it’s too hard for you to comply?

In case you missed it, our Constitution obligates our federal government to “repel invasions”. I suggest you read the Constitution before posting.

JWK

American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance the economic needs of millions of poverty stricken, poorly educated, low and unskilled aliens who have invaded America’s borders.

[johnwk2]

@H_Arendt

Johnwk2:

What you state is lack of attention actually is a disagreement over the facts.

President Trump agreed to a CR that would have funded the parts of the government that currently are shut into February. There would not have been a shutdown if he had kept his word. But the President reversed his position under pressure from conservative news commentators.

We all saw the President state on TV that he would be proud to shut down the government over the issue of the wall, that he would take responsibility for the shutdown and not try to place the blame on the Democrats. Paul Ryan passed wall funding through the House, Mitch McConnell refused to invoke the nuclear option to get it through the Senate, and then Trump had the shutdown he promised.

Having gotten it, President Trump reversed his position and tried to shift blame to the Democrats.

Just because Trump changed his position, he does not get to shirk the responsibility he claimed. He failed to get Mexico to pay for the wall, as promised. He failed for two years with Republican majorities in both Houses to convince Congress to make Americans pay for the wall. He has failed to convince a majority of Americans to support the wall. When one pays attention one sees that the President has been a failure on this issue. Now, sadly, he is throwing a temper tantrum at the expense of a lot of hard working employees.

The shutdown occurred because Donald Trump refused to sign any funding bill that could have passed Congress, most notably the one he originally agreed to sign. Real conservatives believe in individual responsibility… an ethical position the Republican Party has largely abandoned in favor of whining. Paying attention to the facts can wreak havoc with talking points.

Happy New Year

My goodness. That sure was a lengthy post. Unfortunately, it ignores a few facts. The primary one being, Congress has not sent a spending bill to President Trump to be signed into law which would end the ongoing partial shutdown.

Regardless of the silly things President Trump says, it is Congress’ duty to agree upon a spending bill and then send it to the president to be signed into law. Has Congress sent such a bill to be signed into law? If the answer is no, then place the blame on Congress where it rightfully belongs.

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, subdue and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.

JWK

[wiley8425]

Can’t lock them up, can’t deport them. Why even have laws? People should just do whatever the ■■■■ they want apparently regardless of how much it costs those of us who end up having to pay for it.

[Publius]

When we have an “invasion” as the framers understood invasions, let us know.

[H_Arendt]

You’re complaining about post length? Come on johnwk, be serious!

I do note that you are blaming the shutdown on “Congress” and not on a particular political party. I will point out that it is the Republican controlled Congress that has failed to put a bill in front of Donald Trump, after he reversed his original position that he would sign the CR that did not fund the wall.

What I read in the papers is that the Democratic majority in the House will introduce a bill to end the shutdown once they are seated. Can I count on you to support Congress when it decides to do its ‘duty’ as you put it? I’m sure you don’t want to be bound by the silly things the President says.

[johnwk2]

@Publius

When we have an “invasion” as the framers understood invasions, let us know.

Are you really suggesting our forefathers, when adopting our Constitution, did not intend for our federal government to be obligated and charged with protecting the homeland from any kind of incursions at our borders, and especially those which threaten the general welfare of the United States and her citizens? If you do, I suggest you read the opening clause of Article 1, Section 8 which states:

Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States . . .

Subjoined to this clause is a list of particulars expressing the limited actions to be taken to fulfil the general intention of the opening clause of Section 8, one of which expressly states “to repel invasions”.

Thus the only legitimate question to be answered is, would our founders, if alive today, expect the federal government to protect the United States from the ongoing invasion of her borders. I cannot imagine them sitting idle while the United States is being swarmed with the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries. As a matter of fact, let us recall what Representative BURKE says during our Nations` first debate on a RULE OF NATURALIZATION, FEB. 3RD, 1790

Mr. BURKE thought it of importance to fill the country with useful men, such as farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers, and, therefore, would hold out every encouragement to them to emigrate to America. This class he would receive on liberal terms; and he was satisfied there would be room enough for them, and for their posterity, for five hundred years to come. There was another class of men, whom he did not think useful, and he did not care what impediments were thrown in their way; such as your European merchants, and factors of merchants, who come with a view of remaining so long as will enable them to acquire a fortune, and then they will leave the country, and carry off all their property with them. These people injure us more than they do us good, and, except in this last sentiment, I can compare them to nothing but leeches. They stick to us until they get their fill of our best blood, and then they fall off and leave us. I look upon the privilege of an American citizen to be an honorable one, and it ought not to be thrown away upon such people. There is another class also that I would interdict, that is, the convicts and criminals which they pour out of British jails. I wish sincerely some mode could be adopted to prevent the importation of such; but that, perhaps, is not in our power; the introduction of them ought to be considered as a high misdemeanor.

So, as it turns out, allowing the kind of foreigners who are now invading our borders should be considered as a "high misdemeanor" which happens to be an impeachable offense!

JWK

Illegal immigration is now costing American citizens over $18 billion a year in healthcare costs alone, far more than the measly $5 billion asked for to build a wall! LINK

[Publius]

You realize that Rep. Burke was but one of the representatives speaking his mind, yes? And that shortly after he spoke this, the House adjourned without deciding anything? That’s true of most of your quotes (and indeed, the Federalist Papers) - representing one side of a debate. You can’t look at one quote out of the full context.

[johnwk2]

@H_Arendt

I do note that you are blaming the shutdown on “Congress” and not on a particular political party. I will point out that it is the Republican controlled Congress that has failed to put a bill in front of Donald Trump, after he reversed his original position that he would sign the CR that did not fund the wall.
.

And, I will point out to you in order for H.R.695 ___ a bill in the Senate to finance the federal government which would end the shutdown ___ needs ten democrats for its passage. And, as minority leader, Schumer is threatening fellow democrats in the Senate to not vote for H.R.695, because of Sec. 141 which reads:

”Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, there is appropriated for ‘ U.S. Customs and Border Protection—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’ $5,710,357,000 for fiscal year 2019, to remain available until September 30, 2023. The bill would pass”

It’s a darn shame the hatred Schumer has for President Trump is so acute that he prefers to block passage of this bill, and ignores the invasion taking place at our southern border after the Democrat Party Leadership promised to secure it in 1985 when a compromise was made granting amnesty to 2.5 million illegal entrants in return for securing the border.

JWK

American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.

[blueapplepaste]

This is very true. “Small government” cons love them some government if they can dictate to others how to run their lives.

“Freedom for me, none for thee!”

[H_Arendt]

Your argument has nothing to do with the shutdown. If a clean bill were offered to end the shutdown, the Democrats would vote for it. Rather, the Republicans are holding the government closed as ransom to get Trump his wall. President Trump is saying do what I want or the government will be shut down. And when the Democrats say that’s not how a democracy works, then you come in and say it’s all the Democrats fault. But even you say the issue is the wall funding, so you contradict yourself about the shutdown.

Trump is trying to govern by blackmail backed by tantrums and it is not working. He owns this travesty despite every effort to pretend otherwise. He made it clear last week when he said the wall had to be in place for the 2020 election, that this is entirely about his re-election and has little or nothing to do with border security.

You claim Schumer is “threatening” Democrats. Any evidence of that claim or just a bit more rhetoric?

In 1985, a bi-partisan effort led to providing a path to citizenship to the 2.5 million undocumented aliens. You are correct that compromise could probably be crafted about providing a pathway to citizenship for the current undocumented population. Otherwise why bring it up as a touchstone. Tell me more about how you would see that working because now you are talking sensible compromise.

[ComfortablyNumb]

@johnwk2

So, as it turns out, allowing the kind of foreigners who are now invading our borders to stay here should be considered as a “high misdemeanor” which happens to be an impeachable offense!

So this invasion (it’s not an invasion) is of foreigners pouring out of British jails and into our land? So it really is another British Invasion? Lol

[BlueTex]

@johnwk2

And, I will point out to you in order for H.R.695 ___ a bill in the Senate to finance the federal government which would end the shutdown ___ needs ten democrats for its passage. And, as minority leader, Schumer is threatening fellow democrats in the Senate to not vote for H.R.695, because of Sec. 141 which reads:

”Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, there is appropriated for ‘ U.S. Customs and Border Protection—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’ $5,710,357,000 for fiscal year 2019, to remain available until September 30, 2023. The bill would pass”

The senate is free to change their rules and only require a majority vote…

[johnwk2]

@blueapplepaste

This is very true. “Small government” cons love them some government if they can dictate to others how to run their lives.

“Freedom for me, none for thee!”

Cons? Seems to me it was the Democrat Party Leadership which adopted Obamacare which meddles in the personal choices and decisions of American citizens with respect to their healthcare needs.

Political partisanship is aiding the creation of an iron fisted, authoritarian FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

JWK

Reaching across the aisle and bipartisanship is Washington Newspeak to subvert the Constitution and screw the American People.

[johnwk2]

@BlueTex

@johnwk2

And, I will point out to you in order for H.R.695 ___ a bill in the Senate to finance the federal government which would end the shutdown ___ needs ten democrats for its passage. And, as minority leader, Schumer is threatening fellow democrats in the Senate to not vote for H.R.695, because of Sec. 141 which reads:

”Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, there is appropriated for ‘ U.S. Customs and Border Protection—Procurement, Construction, and Improvements’ $5,710,357,000 for fiscal year 2019, to remain available until September 30, 2023. The bill would pass”

The senate is free to change their rules and only require a majority vote…

You are absolutely correct, and they should!

I think it’s safe to say the Democrat Party Leadership if in control of the Senate, would not hesitate in changing the 60 vote requirement to a mere majority vote to pass their socialist, authoritarian type of legislation.

But tell me, why, when we have almost 50 percent of American citizens receiving some form of welfare, why on earth should we open our borders to tens of thousands more poverty stricken, poorly educated, low skilled foreigners who will immediately be receiving some form of taxpayer financed welfare?

JWK

Illegal immigration is now costing American citizens over $18 billion a year in healthcare costs alone, far more than the measly $5 billion asked for to build a wall! LINK

[wiley8425]

This is very true. “Small government” cons love them some government if they can dictate to others how to run their lives.
“Freedom for me, none for thee!”

Uh huh, and were you against the government mandating people buy health insurance as long as your party was behind it or were you not the constant bastion of freedom and liberty you’re pretending to be now? I wonder.