Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
T___A

US Politics Thread: Year 2 of 1000 of the TrumpenReich

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Funny, I haven't heard much about the big scary migrant caravan ever since the election ended.  It almost makes me think the President used the US Military as an election prop.  

 

You mean certain big name outlets have chosen to not talk about it?

 

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Stunning-Images-Show-Migrant-Caravan-Reaching-Border-Fence-San-Diego-500497121.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Funny, I haven't heard much about the big scary migrant caravan ever since the election ended.  It almost makes me think the President used the US Military as an election prop.  

 

I’m almost certain the migrant caravan was used as an election prop, as well. 

 

 

On that note: what does international law say about immigration, if anything? I can’t find anything pertaining to general immigration; just asylum and international labor. I would think it is dependent upon the countries involved, but I could be wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 The media is not talking about it because Trump is not talking about it.  He has only tweeted about it once since the election, despite tweeting about it many times leading up to the election.  

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-migrant-caravan-twitter-immigration-midterm-elections-tweets-republican-a8634191.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Ulric said:

 

Yeah, using a group of people as an election prop to counter another group of people being used as an election prop, how terrible. The difference is that the military was being deployed to do their job, at the request of CBP. I love how a bunch of media people flipped out about the military being deployed to secure a national border.

 

Pretty sure that enforcing immigration law is not actually the role of the US Military.  This is obvious from the many restrictions placed on them when they do attempt this role.

 

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/10/31/federal-law-limits-what-us-troops-deployed-at-the-border-can-do/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the US military forbidden from operating as law enforcement on US territory without specific authorization by Congress?

 

Posse something or other...

 

Edit: Yeah, that's what I get for not reading Walt's article before posting. " Posse Comitatus Act"

 

Even the lefty Canuck knew this was posturing of the worst sort... The caravan is still weeks away from the US if they are on foot.  :/

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I literally just listened to a report on the radio about the caravan reaching the San Diego border, climbing on the fence, and assaulting immigration agents by throwing bottles and debris at them.

 

@Belesarius Posse comitatus. And that governs the military's role in law enforcement regarding American citizens. Not doing its actual duty by patrolling the border so foreign invaders can't cross. Legally, it is akin to when the US Cavalry was used to prevent Poncho Villa from crossing over the border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Donward said:

I literally just listened to a report on the radio about the caravan reaching the San Diego border, climbing on the fence, and assaulting immigration agents by throwing bottles and debris at them.

 

@Belesarius Posse comitatus. And that governs the military's role in law enforcement regarding American citizens. Not doing its actual duty by patrolling the border so foreign invaders can't cross. Legally, it is akin to when the US Cavalry was used to prevent Poncho Villa from crossing over the border.

Different smaller group Don. About 200 that came through the Tijuana/San Diego crossing. Not the big caravan that Trump was talking about.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Belesarius said:

Different smaller group Don. About 200 that came through the Tijuana/San Diego crossing. Not the big caravan that Trump was talking about.

 

It's because the "caravan" has splintered into smaller groups. As has literally been reported on the news several days ago.

 

Admittedly the coverage has been reduced, what with news about a certain fire, a trip to France, a shitlord at CNN scrabbling over a microphone with a female intern knocking it down a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 The media is not talking about it because Trump is not talking about it.  He has only tweeted about it once since the election, despite tweeting about it many times leading up to the election.  

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-migrant-caravan-twitter-immigration-midterm-elections-tweets-republican-a8634191.html

 

I can only imagine the pearl clutching if Trump had tweeted about it during the time of the WWI ceremonies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

I can only imagine the pearl clutching if Trump had tweeted about it during the time of the WWI ceremonies.


Oh God, the WW1 ceremonies. Another red letter day for the the Left and media. The White House pilots don't want to fly marine 1 to the ceremonies because visibility is too low and the Secret Service nixxed the idea of driving a Presidential Convoy through the narrow roads to get to Bellau Wood.

 

And the Leftists and media start REEEEEEE'ing about Trump being afraid of the rain.

 

Literally 8 hours later, the President appears in the pouring rain at Suresnes.

 

*Silence*

 

There is literally no way to have an adult conversation with the political Left and most of the media. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Pretty sure that enforcing immigration law is not actually the role of the US Military.  This is obvious from the many restrictions placed on them when they do attempt this role.

 

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/10/31/federal-law-limits-what-us-troops-deployed-at-the-border-can-do/

 

That is why customs and border protection requested their assistance for logistical tasks as well as other roles. There is nothing preventing the military from conducting surveillance operations along the border and passing that information off to border patrol. Basically, if the military forces there can relieve CBP from having to perform secondary tasks, that frees up CBP agents to enforce immigration laws. It's very simple concept.

 

At what point is the US military being used to help secure our national borders controversial? I thought that was explicitly their job. Or are they only allowed to be deployed overseas to shoot brown people in the face with no clear strategic objectives in endless "war on terror" or "peace keeping" operations?

 

Also, what do you think the Coast Guard does? Aren't they a branch of the military?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ulric said:

 

That is why customs and border protection requested their assistance for logistical tasks as well as other roles. There is nothing preventing the military from conducting surveillance operations along the border and passing that information off to border patrol. Basically, if the military forces there can relieve CBP from having to perform secondary tasks, that frees up CBP agents to enforce immigration laws. It's very simple concept.

 

At what point is the US military being used to help secure our national borders controversial? I thought that was explicitly their job. Or are they only allowed to be deployed overseas to shoot brown people in the face with no clear strategic objectives in endless "war on terror" or "peace keeping" operations?

 

Also, what do you think the Coast Guard does? Aren't they a branch of the military?

 

Honestly, I'm not sure about the Coast Guard.  Traditionally, they were part of the Dept of Transportation, unless it was wartime, in which case I think they fell under the jurisdiction of the Navy.  However, I think they are part of homeland Security.  But I could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Honestly, I'm not sure about the Coast Guard.  Traditionally, they were part of the Dept of Transportation, unless it was wartime, in which case I think they fell under the jurisdiction of the Navy.  However, I think they are part of homeland Security.  But I could be wrong.

Coast Guard is under Homeland Security. It can be turned over to the navy at any time by the President, and by Congress in a time of war.

 

"

 

 
 

Title 14 USC, section 2 authorizes the Coast Guard to enforce U.S. federal laws.[29] This authority is further defined in 14 U.S.C. § 89, which gives law enforcement powers to all Coast Guard commissioned officers, warrant officers, and petty officers.[30] Unlike the other branches of the United States Armed Forces, which are prevented from acting in a law enforcement capacity by 18 U.S.C. § 1385, the Posse Comitatus Act, and Department of Defense policy, the Coast Guard is exempt from and not subject to the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

I'm going to call foul on describing that as a day trip expense when the bill specifies a nearly two week period.

 

Yep, and the difference in staff size will make the current first lady much cheaper than the last one, but we know democrats don't actually pay any attention to this crap when their people do it. But HER DER, CNN and MSNBC said Orange man bad, so the NPCs have to act. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured the exact response I would get is "but what about Obama?"  Which is exactly why I posted it.  I spent eight years listening to conservatives whine and moan about Obama's vacation costs, including quite a bit of stuff that was made up (I remember the false claims about his India trip.)  Now that you got your own guy in there, not a peep about how fast he is burning through government money on travel to his own damn golf course.  Anyhow, the numbers on these things are really hard to compile since it's mostly done by watchdog groups with different methodologies and motives.  That said, it's probably fair to say that Trump is on pace to somewhat outspend Obama on travel, secret service protection, etc.  Part of this is that Trump has a bigger family with includes adult children.  Moving presidents around is expensive business.  However, people only seem to worry about it when it's a president they don't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

If you're worried about immigrants stealing US tax payer money, check out this lady!

 

Melania Trump racked up $174,000 in hotel bills for a day trip to Toronto

 

 

 

How many Bloomberg donations to anti gun bills is that? Like a third? A fifth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

I figured the exact response I would get is "but what about Obama?"  Which is exactly why I posted it.

 

I played right into your hands!

 

3 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Now that you got your own guy in there, not a peep about how fast he is burning through government money on travel to his own damn golf course.

 

Yes that's because I don't need to repeat what the media is already screeching loudly about all the time. If Trump lets out a raunchy fart, we'll know about it, I have full faith in that.

Meanwhile the amount of shit the media just let slide with Obama is ridiculous. That's why conservatives - which really, just means anyone not riding the same train - talked about it so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect
      After seeing the rampant crack down on speech in the UK, I decided that more should be done than just Thoughts and Prayers. 
       
      I know that it's a scary time for our UK members. Knowing that what you say on the internet can put you on the wrong side of a Bobby's nightstick, well, I find that despicable. 
       
      So I've created this place for all your impure or degenerate thoughts. Here's how it works. 
       
      Perhaps you want to say something "offensive". Instead of saying it yourself, you can message any US member of this forum and have them act as your avatar of avarice. 
       
      For example, say you had a particularly heinous fish and chips at the local pub. You may want to say, "Oi, that cheeky fucker Barnaby William can't do a proper chip if he had a fryer for hands!"
       
      This on it's own could send you straight to jail for defamation. Moreso, if instead of chips that sent you reeling it happened to be a kebab from Omar down the street. 
       
      Now your crime has gone from offensive to racially insensitive!
       
      Anytime such an urge comes along, call on your ex colonial friends. We will translate and post your complaint for all the world to revel in, free of charge!
       
      I personally think Omar should learn to pull the fucking kebab off heat before it's crisper than his wife's crotch and blacker than his beard. That tosser!
       
      See? Don't you feel better? And now, no one will be knocking on your door, serving you with a summons for being a racist git. 
       
    • By T___A
      Might as well make a new thread now that the election is over.
    • By Tied
      Yes
       
      i personally support it, by finding the KGB Felix Dzerzhinsky greatly improved state scurrility both inside the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and abroad (their jurisdiction was only domestic, but they kept the internationally influential people safe at night)   a dedicated defender of both the Revolution and all the Soviet peoples     what do you think of this news?
×