US Citizen / Military Vet detained in ICE raid

[yankees60]

https://x.com/CollinsforTX/status/1883953643369685008

Except if it is true that there have been quotas for how many to arrest and deport each day ... then it's not been as promised ... the criminals being the first to go. Instead, it's been whoever it's been easiest to get at. It'd be completely no surprise if the quotas are true.

[dualstow]

Yes, WSJ says

Employees were told they would face consequences for poor performance, the people said. Former ICE officials said that the approach, which is rare for the agency, would likely eventually lead officers to pursue more immigrants with no criminal backgrounds, as they are easier to find and arrest.

also:

For now, according to people familiar with ICE’s operations, the agency is still conducting arrests by pursuing immigrants on what are called “target lists” of criminals developed by the agency, many of which were made before Trump took office.

and:

ICE arrested approximately 310 people a day during former President Joe Biden’s last year in office.

src of all: https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/tru ... t-546d9954

[yankees60]

Watching Trump's spokeswoman.

She just clarified that every illegal immigrant is an illegal criminal since they broke the law. Somewhat of a step back from the focus being first on the heinous criminals. The difference between campaign promises and actual governing.

She IS a True Believer. Good choice for him. She fiercely defends. Of course, whether she defends with truth is not an expectation if you are in the Trump administration.

[Mountaineer]

Watching Trump's spokeswoman.

She just clarified that every illegal immigrant is an illegal criminal since they broke the law. Somewhat of a step back from the focus being first on the heinous criminals. The difference between campaign promises and actual governing.

She IS a True Believer. Good choice for him. She fiercely defends. Of course, whether she defends with truth is not an expectation if you are in the Trump administration.

Or the predecessors.

[dualstow]

I would hope that they would focus on the worst criminals despite any campaign promises made or not made.

However, the thought of deportations of noncriminal aliens who are here illegally — not going to ruin my day.

[yankees60]

Watching Trump's spokeswoman.

She just clarified that every illegal immigrant is an illegal criminal since they broke the law. Somewhat of a step back from the focus being first on the heinous criminals. The difference between campaign promises and actual governing.

She IS a True Believer. Good choice for him. She fiercely defends. Of course, whether she defends with truth is not an expectation if you are in the Trump administration.

Or the predecessors.

Not even in the same universe as Trump's. In the pantheon of liars and deceivers he is sui generis.

[yankees60]

She used a tactic that the despicable Ari Fleisher would use at every single press conference .... after the 4th time being asked the same question which he kept refusing / dodging answering ... he'd then say I've already addressed that! She's already mastered it.

[dualstow]

Not even in the same universe as Trump's. In the pantheon of liars and deceivers he is sui generis.

What was it that Gomez Addams used to say? I love it when you speak French, Morticia.

I love it when you speak Latin, Vinny

[yankees60]

Listening to Sunday Face to Nation interview with Vance.

Host obviously confused like the rest of us as to how we are to interpret whatever Trump says ...

Host: So we are not to take him literally (on this FEMA matter)?

Vance: You are to take the president at his word


??!!!!!

What IS his word??!!

Sad to see an obviously highly intelligent, talented person such as Vance use it all to obfuscate.

[Mountaineer]

Watching Trump's spokeswoman.

She just clarified that every illegal immigrant is an illegal criminal since they broke the law. Somewhat of a step back from the focus being first on the heinous criminals. The difference between campaign promises and actual governing.

She IS a True Believer. Good choice for him. She fiercely defends. Of course, whether she defends with truth is not an expectation if you are in the Trump administration.

Or the predecessors.

Not even in the same universe as Trump's. In the pantheon of liars and deceivers he is sui generis.

I think I have mentioned before about B’s wife’s car accident and subsequent cover up and non-facts told to me by a top hospital manager and state police officer. Corrupt to the toenails. T is a lightweight compared to B in things that are corrupt. T is mainly a blow hard with bad hair and good ideas for the people. Of course you are free to see it your way. . I am just here in the land of B.

[dualstow]

I think I have mentioned before about B’s wife’s car accident and subsequent cover up and non-facts told to me by a top hospital manager and state police officer.

I missed that! I'll look for it

[Dieter]

On the bright side, President Trump has done nothing yet that personally adversely affects me, my neighborhood, my family or 99.99% of the United States citizens.

Lucky you. My wife's oncologist can no longer communicate with her colleagues at NIH. Her life depends on surfing the waves of the latest thing in blood cancer research.

Everyone thinks they're not going to be affected, until suddenly they are. She didn't plan to have cancer. No one plans that. Yet

here. we. are.

There are no "other people". I know people who personally knew US Presidents - on both sides of the aisle. We're all separated by a few degrees. If you start arbitrarily running roughshod over large groups of people, eventually those standing on the sidelines are going to lose a toe or an eye.

I'm not advocating anarchy. I believe in laws. But I believe they should be administered fairly and humanely.

Back to the original topic... illegal immigration... sweeping up migrants is a lot like arresting sex workers. What about the Johns? Where are the CEOs of meatpacking companies who are employing these people? I don't see them on the news... oh, I get it... 1099 contractors (wink, wink).

I guarantee you, if the money evaporates, workers will lose interest and go home. But right now it's just putting on a Hunger Games cruelty show to throw enough red meat to the audience to keep their blood lust satisfied, whilst not really going after the root cause... which is always money flows.

Agree 100% -- should go after those who hire them.

Shocking (SHOCKING) that it's always targeting the little guy or the other

[yankees60]

Watching Trump's spokeswoman.

She just clarified that every illegal immigrant is an illegal criminal since they broke the law. Somewhat of a step back from the focus being first on the heinous criminals. The difference between campaign promises and actual governing.

She IS a True Believer. Good choice for him. She fiercely defends. Of course, whether she defends with truth is not an expectation if you are in the Trump administration.

Or the predecessors.

Not even in the same universe as Trump's. In the pantheon of liars and deceivers he is sui generis.

I think I have mentioned before about B’s wife’s car accident and subsequent cover up and non-facts told to me by a top hospital manager and state police officer. Corrupt to the toenails. T is a lightweight compared to B in things that are corrupt. T is mainly a blow hard with bad hair and good ideas for the people. Of course you are free to see it your way. . I am just here in the land of B.

I do not think you have ever mentioned that here.

I've had no use for Biden since the Clarence Thomas hearings.

I'm aware of Biden's mischaracterizations. But he's just a journeyman liar compared to Trump's first ballot unanimous Hall of Fame election.

His ideas? Surely you as an engineer cannot accept the bizarre lack of facts ideas he comes up with?

"They are eating cats and dogs!"

[yankees60]

I think I have mentioned before about B’s wife’s car accident and subsequent cover up and non-facts told to me by a top hospital manager and state police officer.

I missed that! I'll look for it

On the Sunday new show -- This Week -- Chris Christie stated that Trump and Biden are the most selfish of presidents in his lifetime.

[ochotona]

On the Sunday new show -- This Week -- Chris Christie stated that Trump and Biden are the most selfish of presidents in his lifetime.

Agreed... because they are both Boomers (sort of... Biden born in 1942). It's too bad the Greatest Generation has past.

[Xan]

Haven't there been several other Boomer presidents? Clinton, Obama, GW Bush? Clinton was president 32 years ago and is younger than Biden.

[glennds]

What's surprising is that we haven't had a Gen X president.
Obama is close, born in 1961, only four years before the start of Gen X.
Boomer presidencies have been going on for 30+ years when a generation is typically 15-18 years.

Thomas Jefferson devoted a lot of thought to the issue of generational independence and he worried about an earlier generation binding or governing a later generation. I wonder what he would say if he got a look at our recent presidents and especially the geriatric care facility we call Congress.

[boglerdude]

> “nazi” loses all meaning

Change your mind about the convoy?

edit1 for content https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v97F2YhLrY

[dualstow]

Thomas Jefferson devoted a lot of thought to the issue of generational independence and he worried about an earlier generation binding or governing a later generation.

Very interesting!

> “nazi” loses all meaning
Change your mind about the convoy?
edit1 for content

Code: Select all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v97F2YhLrY

I don’t know what you mean

[glennds]

Thomas Jefferson devoted a lot of thought to the issue of generational independence and he worried about an earlier generation binding or governing a later generation.

Very interesting!

You want interesting? Get this - Jefferson argued to Madison that all laws, including the Constitution, should expire after 19 years. You can read his letter to Madison from September 6, 1789 from the national archives https://founders.archives.gov/documents ... 12-02-0248
(On a sidenote, just imagine any of our Members of Congress today being able to write such a letter. If this were the only litmus test, I'd say we've regressed considerably.)

Back to the topic though, here is the gist of Jefferson's position:

Yes, in his letter to James Madison on September 6, 1789, Thomas Jefferson suggested that all laws, including constitutions, should expire after approximately 19 years—which he estimated as the length of a generational cycle. He believed that no generation had the right to impose its laws or debts on the next, arguing that “the earth belongs to the living” and that each generation should have the freedom to establish its own legal and political structures.

We are not sure whether Jefferson was necessarily advocating for an automatic expiration of the Constitution. Instead, he was making a philosophical argument that each generation should have the opportunity to reconsider and, if necessary, revise or replace the Constitution to reflect contemporary needs. He saw this as a way to prevent one generation from permanently binding future ones to outdated laws and institutions. A case can also be made that Jefferson was arguing that the burden and responsibility lies with successive generations to create their own constitutions and laws.

Madison, in response, expressed concerns that such frequent changes could lead to instability and undermine the continuity of government. In practice, the U.S. Constitution was designed to be amended rather than regularly replaced, reflecting Madison’s more cautious approach to governance.

Where this gets interesting is those members of SCOTUS and members of Congress (mostly among the far right Republicans) that consider themselves "originalists" and treat the Constitution like a sacred near-biblical document that should be interpreted very literally and with what the framers specifically had in mind.
I'm not commenting on whether the originalists are right or wrong, but I'm making a point about just how different the originalist position is philosophically from Jefferson's position. And he WAS a framer.

[dualstow]

You really know your history, Glenn! I knew about the Romans conferring citizenship — as evinced by the post timestamp — but you fleshed it out in a way that I could never store in memory longer than a week after reading a history book.

Good recall!

(unrelated: I’m lovin’ the book on post-war Japan by John Dower, ‘Embracing Defeat’. Good stuff)

[Xan]

Where this gets interesting is those members of SCOTUS and members of Congress (mostly among the far right Republicans) that consider themselves "originalists" and treat the Constitution like a sacred near-biblical document that should be interpreted very literally and with what the framers specifically had in mind.
I'm not commenting on whether the originalists are right or wrong, but I'm making a point about just how different the originalist position is philosophically from Jefferson's position. And he WAS a framer.

I don't think that is a conflict with the originalist position. I would imagine that a lot of folks who don't like originalism would think differently about it if all laws expired after 19 years.

Having a law mean what it says is a different question from whether the laws should expire.

[glennds]

Where this gets interesting is those members of SCOTUS and members of Congress (mostly among the far right Republicans) that consider themselves "originalists" and treat the Constitution like a sacred near-biblical document that should be interpreted very literally and with what the framers specifically had in mind.
I'm not commenting on whether the originalists are right or wrong, but I'm making a point about just how different the originalist position is philosophically from Jefferson's position. And he WAS a framer.

I don't think that is a conflict with the originalist position. I would imagine that a lot of folks who don't like originalism would think differently about it if all laws expired after 19 years.

Having a law mean what it says is a different question from whether the laws should expire.

The rival of the originalist interpretation of the Constitution is the competing concept known as Living Constitution a/k/a judicial pragmatism.

Oxford Definition of Originalism: the principle or belief that a text should be interpreted in a way consistent with how it would have been understood or was intended to be understood at the time it was written.

Definition of Living Constitution: the idea that the meaning and application of the U.S. Constitution can evolve over time to adapt to new societal, technological, and political circumstances. This view holds that the Constitution is not a static document but rather a dynamic framework that must be interpreted in light of contemporary values and challenges. I am not suggesting one is right and the other is wrong btw.

All I'm trying to say is the philosophy behind Living Constitution lines up much more consistently with Jefferson's ideas, at least in his letter to Madison than originalism does - insofar as LC advocates interpretation in the context of the present time (or present generation if you will).
I am not suggesting one is right and the other is wrong btw.