President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

[LouderVol]

I simply do not believe that a person with an abnormality is an abnormal human.
Nor to I believe that a person with a lesser IQ is a lesser human.

You may view it as simply semantics, but it seems to have deeper relevance to me.

then what WOULD you consider an abnormal human if it doesn't include abnormalities?

because there is a probably a better word you should be using.

 

[85SugarVol]

Entering a dwelling to arrest someone when there's no warrant or immediate probable cause can reasonably be called abduction. If he's released because the charges are bunk he will have still been abducted. Remember, our freedoms are rare and unique. Let's not be in a rush to discard them just because we dn't like someone's views.
We should know more about the other story before long. At any rate there are other examples there.

Did they enter without a warrant?

 

[utvolpj]

Yikes

He did this last time too. Aipac tried to take him out as well and failed. Massie is pretty popular and stays that way because he's consistent

Comparing him to Cheney is ridiculous. Trump has zero clue what he's talking about

 

[midnight orange]

Yikes

Brilliant! Let’s primary the only congressman who is worth a damn.

 

[jwells]

It was a great analysis. Short, concise and on point.

Perhaps you can google the word "analysis" and get back to us.

 

[NCFisher]

yeah, and we should not be comfortable no knowing what it is.

if Biden's goons pulled a republican out of their home, made up a law on the spot that they were guilty of that denied them their rights, didn't provide a warrant, or a cause for arrest, this forum would be up in arms and bringing up Rudy Ridge.

but yall lap it up when Daddy Trump does it. yall's Gadsden flags need to be changed to "Please tread on me"

"but yall lap it up when Daddy Trump does it. yall's Gadsden flags need to be changed to "Please tread on me"

After making an objective factual statement to you, this is what you devolve to because you'd already made up your mind about shite you don't know shite about. How about just f'ing off.

 

[jwells]

Brilliant! Let’s primary the only congressman who is worth a damn.

I disagree with Massie often, but he's on point about the current GOP and their budgets BS. That Trump and his cucks don't like him shows exactly what side of history Trump & Co are on.

 

[LouderVol]

Cops dont need a warrant to arrest bud. Dont even need probable cause. Reasonable suspicion is all they need...and guess who gets to decide what is Reasonable at that moment? You guessed it...the cop.

A cop believed he broke the law and arrested him. He will get his day in court like everyone does. If this dude was abducted, then i have been abducted and later found not guilty myself. Never got reimbursed for my bond money, lawyer fees etc either despite being cleared on those charges in court. What reallly sucks is when i get pulled over for a tail light, go thru a DUI checkpoint etc and a cop types my license # into their computer, those arrest charges pop up on my record despite the fact I was never convicted on the crime. One of them was a drug charge that came back negative for any illegal drugs when the sample was sent to the state crime lab. So when cops see that arrest on my record from 30 years ago as a teenager they always want to search my vehicle. I have let them 3 times as an adult. If you say NO to the search, they will just call the K9 and make him "hit" on your vehicle so they can search it anyway...just without your consent.

There are definitely some problems with our legal system and cops being able to violate our personal rights, but I don't see a better solution to enact as of now. I also dont think this dude got some gross mistreatment...he got treated the same way my buddies and I usually were treated growing up when we encountered LEOs.

they arrested him at his house. he wasn't at a checkpoint. he wasn't at a rally/protest stirring up trouble. what reasonable suspicion is there? as far as I have found its not like he fled a protest and went home and the cops were in pursuit and only caught him at home.

This was the argument I had from the very beginning. the MAGA crowd laughed it down, "they are only going after the violent, its not like they are arresting legal immigrants on the streets".

I point out that this case is precisely that, and the next MAGA argument is "we just need to wait and see how bad it actually is"

 

[McDad]

Perhaps you can google the word "analysis" and get back to us.

I just recently learned i can highlight a word in post or article and my phone prompts a few actions. One of them is "dictionary". We ain't even gotta Google no more!

 

[jwells]

After making an objective factual statement to you, this is what you devolve to because you'd already made up your mind about shite you don't know shite about. How about just f'ing off.

Arresting someone and revoking their permanent status because you don't like their words is absolutely wiping your butt with the Bill of Rights.

It doesn't matter *what* he said or whether we don't like it. Short of seeking violent acts, it's protected speech. If Trump can have a guy arrested for words, any president can.

Anyone supporting this arrest because they don't like what he said is anti-Constitution. But hell, if all it took was not liking it, I guess Biden missed an opportunity to round the anti-vaxxers and MAGA folks up, huh?

 

[jwells]

I just recently learned i can highlight a word in post or article and my phone prompts a few actions. One of them is "dictionary". We ain't even gotta Google no more!

For this forum, you can file that new thing on the list of things people don't have to do right under "thinking independently".

 

[LouderVol]

"but yall lap it up when Daddy Trump does it. yall's Gadsden flags need to be changed to "Please tread on me"

After making an objective factual statement to you, this is what you devolve to because you'd already made up your mind about shite you don't know shite about. How about just f'ing off.

you are the one ignoring most of what I post just to focus on small parts. its easy to think things are on the up and up if you ignore the stuff that is questionable.

 

[luthervol]

then what WOULD you consider an abnormal human if it doesn't include abnormalities?

because there is a probably a better word you should be using.

I would avoid using that terminology altogether.

abnormal
adjective

1. deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying.
"participants with abnormal results were invited to undergo further diagnostic testing"

Maybe a Jeffery Dahmer type - or trumpers (jk)

 

[McDad]

For this forum, you can file that new thing on the list of things people don't have to do right under "thinking independently".

Well, that's not very nice. We happen to have many independent thinkers who coincidentally all think the same way.

 

[NCFisher]

Arresting someone and revoking their permanent status because you don't like their words is absolutely wiping your butt with the Bill of Rights.

It doesn't matter *what* he said or whether we don't like it. Short of seeking violent acts, it's protected speech. If Trump can have a guy arrested for words, any president can.

Anyone supporting this arrest because they don't like what he said is anti-Constitution. But hell, if all it took was not liking it, I guess Biden missed an opportunity to round the anti-vaxxers and MAGA folks up, huh?

Got another live one here...

You have no idea why DOJ sent ICE to get this specific guy. Whose CUAD group has been at the basis of violent demonstration, property damage, intimidation and assault of Jewish students at Columbia. He's a mouthpiece for the Hamas-run Quds News Network. We damn well should investigate everyone with, at minimum these affiliations, and being an agitator for these types of actions. Biden's DOJ should have been on Columbia's campus; that is now being done. DOJ task force to visit Columbia, other colleges to investigate allegations of antisemitism

You're a perpetual hysteric here. If it's not cutting pediatric cancer research, it's cutting VA funding, or cutting Medi. People like you subsist on being wrenched back and forth by the intellectually devoid in your party, movement, or whatever you term the sad thing it has become. Whatever that is, it's not much concerned with being American, or constitutional; see Election 2024.

 

[Sudden Impact]

Fear mongering. Its all the left has. You guys have no solutions only complaints.
Your party is wasting away. No leader & no vision. Hate is the democrat motto.

Wait a minute both parties do fear mongering well. It is a matter of which party you want to buy into or not buy into. Neither for men. Fear mongering is the basis of both parties. Why would it not be. Some choose parties and candidates like it was a pick up game.
This cycle it was a choice of the last 2 picks. Rebecca lost and Hulk won.

 

[Boston Vol]

Yikes

Trump is a big government stooge and doesn’t like that an actual conservative is voting against an abomination of a spending bill.

 

[NCFisher]

you are the one ignoring most of what I post just to focus on small parts. its easy to think things are on the up and up if you ignore the stuff that is questionable.

What "small parts"? I clearly state the DOJ has some interest in this specific guy, you and I don't know what that basis is, nor what Khalil's rights of representation are in relation to that basis. It's literally THE fundamental core of the scenario.

That's why I don't imply it is or is not 'on the up and up'.

 

[utvolpj]

Trump is a big government stooge and doesn’t like that an actual conservative is voting against an abomination of a spending bill.

Massie had said he's against it because it keeps federal funding at 2024 levels without enshrining the cuts DOGE has made. How is he the bad guy in this?

 

[LouderVol]

I would avoid using that terminology altogether.

adjective

1. deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying.
"participants with abnormal results were invited to undergo further diagnostic testing"

Maybe a Jeffery Dahmer type - or trumpers (jk)

its not common place by any means, but not using it all together wasn't your initial point.

 

[LouderVol]

What "small parts"? I clearly state the DOJ has some interest in this specific guy, you and I don't know what that basis is, nor what Khalil's rights of representation are in relation to that basis. It's literally THE fundamental core of the scenario.

That's why I don't imply it is or is not 'on the up and up'.

we start with the assumption of innocence. the government has to prove our guilt. that is where the conversation should always start, with innocence. thats why I am saying this doesn't seem to be on the up and up.

especially if the government can't publicly communicate a reason. right now it sounds like a Biden-esque witch hunt, where they are looking for a crime to stick on him. and while they haven't been able to do that just yet, they yanked his valid green card, to give them justification after the fact. again hasn't been proven guilty of anything that would revoke his green card. hasn't been charged with anything that could revoke his green card. they just revoked his green card, so they could make him "an illegal".

 

[LSU-SIU]

Trump is a big government stooge and doesn’t like that an actual conservative is voting against an abomination of a spending bill.

The obvious observation seems to be the opposite of this.

 

[hog88]

Brilliant! Let’s primary the only congressman who is worth a damn.

Every politician should have to face tough primaries every cycle.

 

[NCFisher]

we start with the assumption of innocence. the government has to prove our guilt. that is where the conversation should always start, with innocence. thats why I am saying this doesn't seem to be on the up and up.

especially if the government can't publicly communicate a reason. right now it sounds like a Biden-esque witch hunt, where they are looking for a crime to stick on him. and while they haven't been able to do that just yet, they yanked his valid green card, to give them justification after the fact. again hasn't been proven guilty of anything that would revoke his green card. hasn't been charged with anything that could revoke his green card. they just revoked his green card, so they could make him "an illegal".

It's a court case now, where it was always going to end up and where it belongs. DOJ will have to make its case for denaturalizing & deporting Khalil. I'm fine with this.

 

[Orange_Crush]

we start with the assumption of innocence. the government has to prove our guilt. that is where the conversation should always start, with innocence. thats why I am saying this doesn't seem to be on the up and up.

especially if the government can't publicly communicate a reason. right now it sounds like a Biden-esque witch hunt, where they are looking for a crime to stick on him. and while they haven't been able to do that just yet, they yanked his valid green card, to give them justification after the fact. again hasn't been proven guilty of anything that would revoke his green card. hasn't been charged with anything that could revoke his green card. they just revoked his green card, so they could make him "an illegal".

What in the constitution demands that the feds "publicly communicate" their reasons? I haven't really followed the story terribly closely, but it seems some aren't starting with the assumption of innocence. They are starting with other assumptions.

IF they burst into his home and arrested him, with no warrant, for words that did not include inciting violence or other unprotected speech, then I agree with you. But all this argumentation can probably simmer for a bit until and unless we get a lot more facts than media claims.