"US Vulnerability to an Oct 7 style attack" Topic

Please – stop the "both sides" argument on this issue. We don't need additional funds, all we need is the President to direct Border Patrol, which is part of a Federal Administration he controls, to seal the border and it will be done. All the president needs to do is to direct DHS to STOP flying and bussing illegal aliens from the border to cities across the country. And it stops.

Legion +1. If you saw today's job numbers, the economy keeps humming along and looking for labor. It's just one factor in the big picture, like demand for illegal drugs.

Yes I saw that but how many are jobs being taken by illegal aliens … somehow … ?

We don't need additional funds, all we need is the President to direct Border Patrol, which is part of a Federal Administration he controls, to seal the border and it will be done. All the president needs to do is to direct DHS to STOP flying and bussing illegal aliens from the border to cities across the country. And it stops.

Exactly … But the rich, woke, progressive Lib, Left, socialist minority gave a lot of money to election campaigns. So those who took that money are beholden to those rich socialists now …

Your one side argument is simply wrong, IMO. You will not stop the sheer number of entries nationwide. There are not enough resources, human, tech, logistics. The number of migrants worldwide is at a near record high. Sure it's been badly handled, ignored, fumbled by the left. It's also been abused by the right. No solutions allowed, just blame, because they need it to compete in the election. No governance in the House for the past year, just politics.

My conspiracy theory is just as valid as yours. The Uniparty includes everybody, including you know who.

We could have used those 12,00 new agents last fall. We should also do everything you said. IMO, If we do not return to compromise, imperfect though it is, in government, this will not begin to be fixed.

It comes down to logistics and national security. If given the order, by POTUS, etc. the Army could support the LEOs shutting down the border tight. And along with the USAF to deport these illegal aliens.

Your one side argument is simply wrong, IMO. You will not stop the sheer number of entries nationwide.

Wrong. When we had a president commit to a secure Border, we got one. Furthermore, the current presidency is PROMOTING AND HELPING PAY FOR MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION! Yes, far from just not securing the Border the Biden Admin is helping fund migrant caravans through USAID.

The Uniparty includes everybody, including you know who.

The Uniparty includes Schumer, Pelosi, McConnell and Biden. It does not include Orange Man Bad.

I alone do not know how to fix this. IMO, it was just way easier to act like you did get it pre 2020. Way smaller numbers of migrants before the collapse of governments and social order to our south, followed by the pandemic across the globe. A leader could watch cable news most of the morning, follow their lead with some tweets, put the minions on it, tee off after lunch.

But then disaster struck and suddenly we had no toilet paper, and no room in the hospital morgues. And everything got worse across the globe.

The use of the professional standing military is not a free lunch. It will cost billions to fund any major operation. And in IMO a bad look by itself for America. Like we could not think of anything a little more comprehensive.

We need a functioning Congress. Painful, actual give and take. As if everyone had had enough and agreed to compromise. Like we used to.

My Uniparty includes anyone using government for personal gain. There is one bottom line for them, and it's them. Only a generational change can get this back under control, I think.

My take :

Close the border. Stop giving all this support to illegal aliens as it just makes more of them to try to cross the border. So many illegal aliens have crossed the border under the US leaders open border policies, somewhere e.g. 7-12+ millions. No more … there are too many here to handled logistically. And many are criminals, etc.

If they want to be Americans, and many don't, they just want the freebies. They must do it legally.

Start deporting military age males especially from China, the Mid East, Haiti, South & Central America.

Anyone arrested for crossing the border more than once/had been deported previously. They go to Gitmo.

Any criminals, drug runners, human traffickers, known or suspected terrorists, any illegal aliens that attacks, rapes, injures or kills an American they go to Gitmo.

Sanctuary cities, towns and states are outlawed. If they resist, they will get no funding/support of any kind, until they are no longer are a sanctuary.

Let LEOs, ICE, CBP, etc. do their jobs. Primarily deporting illegal aliens. Use the US ARMY, NG, USAR and USAF to be involved in this deportation operation.

Any defunding of LEOs, etc. by any city, town, state, they receive 0 support, funding, etc. from the Fed Gov't.

Designate the cartels and gangs as terrorists and treat them as such.

Draconian … well … maybe … but this gov't sanctioned open border policy has gone beyond the crisis level. More like an invasion …

I am okay with nearly all of this…. I would have some words with the military age males to find out what's happening.

LEOs have gotten federal funds. The sanctuary cities have never seemed legal to me. But then Texas does whatever it wants too, it appears.

But all of this takes more resources than scrapping together Exec Order draw downs.

Yes, the military age males should be thoroughly interrogated. Before they are deported or sent to Gitmo. Some of the suspicious female should get the same treatment.

LEOs got funding but they don't have the orders to do what has to be done. Sanctuary cities should not be allowed to exist. But some in DC, etc. will fight that.

TX IMO is an example of what those border states should do. Regardless of what some in DC and the WH say, gov't is breaking the law. TX has to defend its people from this invasion. Even if the Fed Gov't won't.

Exec orders may be the quickest and best way to get a lot of this done, and more on DAY 1. But again, some will fight this. But their agenda is not pure. We know their plans. They have to be stopped.

I wish we knew more about the agenda….I think you are giving too much credit to the alleged conspiracy leaders as named by SB. Many uber wealthy people are apolitical. They support those who keep them wealthy, pretend to be on one side or the other, hedge their bets by supporting both.

IMO this has always been about incompetence and mistaken views about getting it right. Too much kumbaya and ignoring reality on one side, too much send in the army on the other.

But now it's too big to fix without the military, I think. Exec orders are a starting point but change will fail in the end without some unity in Congress. We may get this in the next election. That could create some movement, but in what direction? It takes courage and integrity to be bipartisan. Any nut jobs can rant and pose for the media. Character, honor, needed in Congress.

Well, it seems pretty certain to me … there is a very rich, very progressive, very woke, very socialist, etc. minority that wants to "fundamentally change America" … And IMO not for the better …

That seems the only reasons I'd think to have an open border and pretty much let everyone in. With almost No vetting, etc. Change the make-up of the US population and demographics, etc. To suit their needs … Which is not most of "we the people's" needs.

They ignore the deaths caused by the Chinese supplied drugs, the murders, rapes, robberies, sex trafficking [those people count too!] etc., etc. They are willing to let those Americans die "for the greater good" … The good of the woke, progressive socialists left wing, liberals, etc. Who follow the corrupted dogma of DEI, CRT/1619, BLM, Antifa, etc.

And yes, a crisis this big has to have the military involved. As I said it is an invasion. Which has to be stopped. And again, it really has little to go with being humane. Or they would me more concerned about all the deaths and crime this crisis has brought to the USA. It is all about logistics and national security. It really has little to do with the race, ethnicity, religion etc. of those who cross illegally into the USA.

If the average American was really important to our elected and appointed leaderships … the border would already been shutdown. Plus, massive deportations starting with military age males from PRC/CCP, many from South & Central America, known Med East and African nations that are failed states, etc. Is that profiling ? … Maybe … but it is more about eliminating the clear and present threat. The priority is easy to see.

What about the innocent illegal aliens ?

It has to do more about the innocent Americans …

Yes, it is about "us" or "them" … That is the reality … like it or not …

Of course I respect your beliefs. And the problem is serious. We can theorize but it's still hard to back up anything on any side regarding a conspiracy.

Are they citizens? If no, deport them. Citizens? We better monitor them.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees potential danger here. But then again, maybe I am. These people never plan on assimilating. 😔

Subject: Protesters in Michigan chant ‘Death to America, Israel': ‘They are Nazis'

link

This is not on you 35th, I agree that this has been an ugly trend. But…the Fox article..

Not sure how significant this demonstration was. I did some checking. Less than 1% of Dearborn was there, 2% of the Muslims living there showed up, assuming there were no outsiders. In the article Fox used photos of demonstrators there from 2021.

"Hotbed of hate" is wrong in this case, based on the numbers, IMO. In my opinion these guys are nuts. But they still have First Amendment rights. And on this day they were not representing the people of Dearborn. Much of the hate they spread, with most people there not involved, would not have been possible without Fox.

We can theorize but it's still hard to back up anything on any side regarding a conspiracy.

Well … much of what I have heard and read. Some may call some of it a conspiracy … But in evaluating the horrible situation, I can find no other reasons for this over 3 years of a Gov't sanctioned open borders. Allowing 7-10-12(?) illegal aliens running around the USA without being vetted etc.

It's crazy, I know. The getaways are the biggest security issue for me. Why tolerate this? It's wrong, whatever the reason. Having watched both parties run the government, incompetence must play some role. There is no official sanctioned open border, Half the illegal encounters have been sent back. But the system just can't handle the processing volume.

Those underage illegal kids cleaning the blades at the meat processing facility on the night shift may indicate one reason why we don't act.

I give the discussion on TMP credit for getting me to look at data and numbers and get focused. The right ignores the apprehension and expulsion rates under Biden, which are essentially slightly better than Trump's as a percentage of encounters. More than half of all illegals have been expelled. But the scale of the numbers is too big for the system. A couple of million getaways is a failure.

Tort I understand your views, this is my response.

Fox this morning mentioned Dearborn, saying the assembly was not large. But that really is not the question.

First should it have been reported on the MSM? My response, yes of course. There were calls for the "death of America". Any small gathering of right wing radicals, wearing swastikas, is covered ad nauseam by the MSM, with hysterical screams of "right wing takeovers" and "threats to democracy" and of course their association to the "Evil One". We both know this is true.

You sited 1%. So let's say it is just 1%. What can 1% do and accomplish if they want the downfall of the United States? How many did it take for 9/11? For the Boston Marathon bombing? For the explosion at the Federal Building? For the shootings in Vegas? If these are illegals, if they are here on visas, green cards, or given asylum, they should be deported as a danger to the population as a whole. Better safe than sorry. By advocating for the downfall and death of the United States, they have lost any rights they might have. This of course is my opinion, but I have read and heard many others advocate the same thing.

First amendment rights.

"Unauthorized immigrants and the First Amendment
While the Constitution speaks broadly about "the people," there is legal uncertainty about who that includes – and importantly, who it excludes.

The group with the most questions around whether and how the First Amendment applies to them are those with no legal status: unauthorized immigrants.

In 2015, the Department of Justice argued in a federal class action lawsuit that unauthorized immigrants do not get First Amendment protections. The DOJ reasoned that the Supreme Court previously suggested First Amendment and other protections apply only to immigrants who enter legally and who have "sufficient connection" to the U.S. To date, the Supreme Court has not ruled definitively on the question. Some legal scholars and federal judges have argued it does not apply to this group of people. Others have argued the opposite, citing the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling that opposed restrictions on political donations based on identity rather than content.

Legal scholar and constitutional law professor Michael Kagen wrote in a 2016 Boston College law review article: "As the court explained (in Citizens United vs. FEC), the First Amendment protects the rights of marginalized people to have a voice and does not allow the government to prefer some speakers over others based on their identity.""

——
"CAN THE GOVERNMENT TURN AWAY ANARCHIST IMMIGRANTS? (1904)

The Immigration Act of 1903, also called the Anarchist Exclusion Act, sought to deport immigrants with anti-government views. John Turner, from England, was one such anarchist who advocated for union organizing. Lawyers for Turner argued his views were political speech protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court (U.S. ex rel. Turner v. Williams) disagreed, saying Turner held views seeking to overthrow the U.S. government, and Congress has broad power to deport non-citizens. The legal standard for limiting anti-government views for U.S. citizens is higher."
—
"CAN THE GOVERNMENT DEPORT SOMEONE OVER COMMUNIST PARTY MEMBERSHIP? (1954)

At the height of the anti-communist era, Congress passed laws effectively outlawing the Communist Party in the country and making it legal to deport non-citizens who were members. The case Galvan v. Press centers on Robert Galvan, who was born in Mexico and came to the U.S. in 1918 at age seven. His wife and four children were all U.S. citizens. When questioned by immigration officials, he said he had been a member of the Communist Party for two years in the 1940s, before Congress passed its anti-communist laws. The government tried to deport Galvan, and lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court, citing his First Amendment right to political speech and association. The court sided with the government's decision to deport Galvan.

Justice Hugo Black, joined by William O. Douglas, dissented, saying it was possible the deportation did not violate the First Amendment. But Black disagreed that Galvan should be punished for being a member of a political party that was "perfectly legal" when he was a member."

—
"DOES THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION OUTWEIGH IMMIGRATION CONCERNS? (1972)

Known as the "Belgian Socialist" case, this Supreme Court ruling (Kleindienst v. Mandel) affirmed that while First Amendment interests are important, they do not overrule federal authority to deny people legal entry into the country. Belgian journalist Ernest E. Mandel led a socialist publication and sought entry into the U.S. to lecture at Stanford University. He was denied, and faculty and students sued, saying the government violated their First Amendment rights (though Mandel spoke to them by telephone). The court said those First Amendment concerns were valid, but the federal government has broad power to decide who is allowed to enter the U.S."

—
"CAN THE GOVERNMENT SELECTIVELY ENFORCE IMMIGRATION LAWS BASED ON POLITICAL VIEWS? (1999)

The federal government sought to deport eight people who were members of a U.S.-based Palestinian liberation group. They were legal U.S. residents but not full citizens. The group claimed they were being targeted with selective enforcement because of their political views and appealed to the Supreme Court (Reno v. American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee). When challenged, the government backed off the political grounds for deportation but proceeded on technical violations of immigration law. In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia addressed claims of First Amendment violations, saying, "An alien unlawfully in this country has no constitutional right to assert selective enforcement as a defense against his deportation.""

—
"The bottom line on First Amendment freedoms and non-citizens
The question of whether the First Amendment applies to non-citizens isn't easily answered with a satisfying yes or no. The Constitution leaves room to interpret that question, especially as it applies to unauthorized immigrants. The Supreme Court has not ruled in a direct way that neatly resolves it.

And the First Amendment itself does not make clear whether "the people" given the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition are a narrow group of citizens or a broader category, some of whom come to the United States to visit, learn and work in a country that prevents governments from restricting these five freedoms."

Also one of the exceptions to the first amendment, is a "true threat". IMO, these people represent a true threat. If one believes that those who did nothing more than "walk through the House" during the "Insurrection", should be sought for years after the event, arrested in the early morning by armed federal agents, leg chained and taken to federal offices and then charged with…. Misdemeanors. Then one should believe that those advocating for the downfall of our country, should be prosecuted as well. (Yes the above just happened again. The people did nothing but walk through the open door and walked around and left).

Yes, in Dearborn today the large molsem population is chanting " Death to America" is Arabic. Freedom of Speech makes this allowed. I support this freedom and right.

As it does when the Neo-Nazis, KKK, White Supremacists, BLM, Antifa, etc., etc. chant, etc. Personally, I'm not really too surprised with that. Hamas and other moslem groups exert too much of influence on some in the USA. Especially in our universities, etc.

Also, I hope that there are FBI agents, etc. there … As whom knows how many terrorists/jihadis, etc. are "swimming with the fishes" ? Mao would be happy to see his teachings being put to "good" use.

But what would LEOs, etc. do if e.g. the Nazis, KKK, etc. had a large rally chanting " Death to Hamas!", "Death to Iran!", "Death to Hezbollah!", etc., etc.

Will the popular double standard that exists today in the US? Be in full effect arresting some of the Nazis, KKK, etc. But do nothing to the moslems chanting ?

Disclaimer – I do not support in any way shape or form the KKK, Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists, BLM, Antifa or group similar to those. I detest them and those like them.

However, I do not support in any way shape or form, islamic terrorism, jihadis, Iran, Hamas, etc., etc. I detest them and those like them. Especially those in our US Gov't who supports these islamic terrorists, jihadis etc.

Of course I can say all this as I do have the right of Freedom of Speech as I am an American and Veteran.

@Tort

We can theorize but it's still hard to back up anything on any side regarding a conspiracy.

OK, let's embark on a Logic Quest. What is the logical reason behind the Biden Admin's EO 13986 that directs the US Census to count illegals as well as lawful citizens and green card holders for Congressional Apportionment?

My concern is not just about the hideous content… the guy speaking is a UCLA grad who works in corporate banking. I don't know his citizenship. I assume he at least has a visa to live and work here. He drew 1000 people, not even 1% of the population, 2% of Muslim Americans there or outsiders. So it's not much of a "hotbed of hate" in Dearborn. That was my point, not whether it is newsworthy. Last years event was also small, but was covered by other networks. I don't like the idea that people believe a group like this was taking over Dearborn or the country.

Okay SB…. Here's what I think I know. The reason given for that EO is that the Constitution does not say that legal citizen status must be used as a way to measure the total number of actual residents in a given area. The total number of residents is required to be documented. Federal law prevents non citizens from voting. The citizenship question was asked before 1950, but did not affect the count, as I understand it. Residency is not citizenship.

The Supreme Court voted against the Trump EO which undid the long-standing practice of counting all residents, Roberts saying it appeared to be "contrived", suggesting it was political.

Okay SB…. Here's what I think I know. The reason given for that EO is that the Constitution does not say that legal citizen status must be used as a way to measure the total number of actual residents in a given area. The total number of residents is required to be documented. Federal law prevents non citizens from voting. The citizenship question was asked before 1950, but did not affect the count, as I understand it. Residency is not citizenship.

So you're arguing the same case that the SLAVE STATES did when they wanted to count non-citizens who could not vote (slaves) for Congressional Apportionment. How does that sit with you?

First, I said that this was the reason given for the EO. But it certainly appears to be a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Slaves were PROPERTY to the SLAVE STATES. Saying that someone cannot vote does not make him or her a slave.

The event in Dearborn was not the first. They were out within days of 10/7 shouting support for "the Palestinians", According to CBS, in the thousands. There were others that have followed.

From the NY Post
""Almost immediately after" Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, "people were celebrating the horrific events of that day in pro-Hamas rallies and marches throughout Dearborn," he wrote."

But when individuals are shouting "death to America!", that passes the point of acceptance, or free speech for me. At that point, they have become a potential threat to my country, my family, my friends and myself. They no longer have a right to be here.

When they saying things like this:

("It's not Genocide Joe that has to go," he continued, referring to President Biden.

"It's the entire system that has to go."

Bazzi said that "any system that would allow such atrocities and such devilry to happen and would support it — such a system does not deserve to exist on God's Earth.)

This just reinforces it for me.

I am not defending any of this talk. It borders on criminal. You are not wrong to take it as a threat. I don't know these days if he could be arrested.maybe for hate speech….

And he seems to have come here legally and enjoyed a good education and job. Now he calls for death to America? He is talking differently from last fall's event, when they said they supported Palestine, not Hamas.

If they had been yelling: "Death to Biden! Death to Harris! Death to Pelosi! They do not deserve to exist!". How would it have been handled? IMO this is more egregious than that. This is calling for death to us all and the destruction our country.

Not sure how much play this has had yet.

"18-year-old Alexander Scott Mercurio of Coeur d'Alene was arrested April 6 and "planned to attack individuals at churches in Coeur d'Alene on April 7, 2024, using weapons including knives, firearms, and fire," according to the affidavit in support of the criminal complaint.

Mercurio pledged his allegiance to ISIS and intended to commit these attacks on its behalf.

"I don't know how much longer I can take being here. I don't have the desire to do anything except jihad, a craving for mayhem and terror," he wrote in an online message. "

What was he planning on attacking? Christians at church.

Subject: CDA man arrested for attempting to provide resources to ISIS, planned to attack people at churches | News | kxly.com


link

I had also mentioned the waste of resources attempting to go after anyone who entered the Congress on "insurrection day", even though they are nothing more than misdemeanors. This is the best analysis of all this I've read and puts everything I've read and seen related to this together in one article.

Do we waste FBI and DOJ resources pursuing other misdemeanor crimes? Court resources? Try to use questionable law? Would these resources be better used pursuing and deporting those calling for death to America?

I copied the article, as it requires a subscription.

"Jan. 6 Arrests Continue Brisk Pace in 2024, Nearing 1,400 Mark
The 122 arrests through April 5 outpace the 70 arrests in 2023 and the 50 arrests in 2022, DOJ data show. Nearly 7 in 10 guilty pleas are for misdemeanors.

The number of people arrested for alleged Jan. 6 crimes at the U.S. Capitol is nearing 1,400 as the rate of arrests showed a sharp increase in the first quarter compared to 2023 and 2022, a report shows.

The U.S. Department of Justice reported that as of the close of business on April 5, 1,387 people have been arrested since the breach and violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
In the first three months of the year, the 122 arrests logged in 2024 vastly outpaced the 70 arrests in the same period of 2023 and the 50 arrests in the first quarter of 2022, DOJ records show.

The FBI arrested 367 people on Jan. 6 charges since April 6, 2023, and 612 people since the same date in 2022.

Exactly 1,300 people have been charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds; a misdemeanor crime. Of those, 122 of the charges involved a deadly or dangerous weapon.

At least 353 people were charged with corruptly obstructing an official proceeding—the most commonly charged Jan. 6 felony—a controversial charge being challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Of arrests to date, 36 percent were for assaulting, resisting or impeding a law enforcement officers or employees. More than one-quarter of those arrests involved a deadly or dangerous weapon, the report said.
70 Percent Misdemeanors

Some 791 people have pleaded guilty to Jan. 6 charges, 69 percent of which were misdemeanors and 31 percent felonies, DOJ reported. Some 12 percent of the guilty pleas were for assault on a law enforcement officer.
Nearly 860 people have had their criminal cases adjudicated, with 61 percent sentenced to some period of incarceration and 20 percent assigned to home detention, the report said.

Arrests and prosecution of Jan. 6 cases took a pause during part of 2023, followed by an uptick that continued into 2024.

The DOJ prosecution of Jan. 6 defendants will face serious tests during the remainder of 2024.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on April 16 on a challenge to the controversial use of corporate fraud statutes to prosecute defendants for allegedly obstructing the joint session of Congress that gathered on Jan. 6, 2021, for the largely ceremonial counting of Electoral College votes.

The High Court agreed in December 2023 to take up the challenge from Jan. 6 defendant Joseph Wayne Fischer, 57, of Jonestown, Pennsylvania—one of 353 people charged with corruptly obstructing Congress on Jan. 6. A decision is expected by late June.

Many defense attorneys believe the Supreme Court will strike down the DOJ's novel use of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act to prosecute defendants for the hours-long delay of a joint session of Congress due to violence at the Capitol. The statute behind the charge was put in place to prevent the kind of evidence tampering seen in the Enron and Arthur Andersen scandals.

Another Jan. 6 case recently reached the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which ruled that for the purposes of federal sentencing enhancements, the joint session of Congress does not qualify as "administration of justice." The sentencing enhancers in some cases had resulted in vastly longer prison sentences.

A number of other potential constitutional challenges could be in the works among the nearly 900 completed Jan. 6 cases, defense attorneys say.

A likely challenge will address U.S. District Court judges' refusal to date to grant a change of venue in even a single Jan. 6 case. Defendants have argued that heavy pretrial publicity and the District of Columbia's almost monolithic Democrat jury pool make it nearly impossible for Jan. 6 defendants to get a fair trial.

Another common objection lodged by defense teams is the alleged withholding of exculpatory evidence by federal prosecutors. The 1963 Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland established that withholding of evidence that is material to guilt or punishment is a violation of a defendant's right to due process.

Defense attorneys have complained for more than three years about the DOJ's "global discovery" database that contains millions of documents, photographs, and video clips.

The system can make it nearly impossible to find exculpatory evidence that prosecutors are supposed to provide to defendants in the first place, they say.

One attorney called the federal evidence database a "tsunami of garbage."
"

This is a hard thing to get into on TMP, maybe too much.

I am certain that on 1/6 Mike Pence felt just as threatened as anyone who read the Fox News website about "Death to America" recently. Likewise Pelosi and her staff on 1/6, as they huddled in locked rooms under tables, while the mob called for her in the hallways of the Capitol. Everybody there was scared, many called families, tried to get help. "Hang Mike Pence". Just a joke? What about "Fight like hell" earlier that day? Could someone have been inspired by that?

"A tsunami of garbage" Too many lawyers….

So we need to look at who fans the flames. Tarik Bazzi was inciting people to violence. At the very least, he needs to be watched, but maybe should have been arrested for making death threats. "Hang Mike Pence", not okay either then.

The church in Idaho you cite, or the church Dylann Roof shot up in SC. Or the El Paso Walmart, largest mass shooting of Latinos ever. Delusions from where?

"When John Nassif surged into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, he was among the hundreds chanting "Whose house? Our house!"

But that's not exactly true, a federal appeals court countered Tuesday, rejecting Nassif's challenge to his conviction for "demonstrating" inside the Capitol and ruling that the building itself — as opposed to the spacious parkland outside — is not legally a "public forum" for protest activity.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a statute that criminalizes "parading, picketing or demonstrating in a Capitol building," a law that has been used against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants who breached the building that day.

"The record before us contains no evidence that Congress intended to open any portion of the Capitol buildings as a public forum for assembly and discourse," the panel wrote in a unanimous 27-page ruling."

Subject: ‘Whose house?' Congress' house, appeals court rules, rejecting Jan. 6 defendant's challenge – POLITICO


link

Now, are not these people guilty of the same thing? Are not those who participated in the other 2, also as guilty? Will the ones today be prosecuted as those on January 6th have been? Did any of those in the first 2 serve time? Were they held in jail without hearings for excessive amounts of time? My bet is, No and No. But we will see if there are two standards of justice.

Subject: Anti-Israel agitators shut down Senate cafeteria, around 50 arrested


link

Tort, as to January 6th, Robert Kennedy sums up my views on it.

"Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. issued a statement on the January 6 prosecutions Friday, saying that while violent rioters deserved to be punished, many prosecutions of non-violent protesters were excessive."

"It is quite clear that many of the January 6 protestors broke the law in what may have started as a protest but turned into a riot. Because it happened with the encouragement of President Trump, and in the context of his delusion that the election was stolen from him, many people see it not as a riot but as an insurrection.

I have not examined the evidence in detail, but reasonable people, including Trump opponents, tell me there is little evidence of a true insurrection. They observe that the protestors carried no weapons, had no plans or ability to seize the reins of government, and that Trump himself had urged them to protest "peacefully."

Like many reasonable Americans, I am concerned about the possibility that political objectives motivated the vigor of the prosecution of the J6 defendants, their long sentences, and their harsh treatment. That would fit a disturbing pattern of the weaponization of government agencies — the DoJ, the IRS, the SEC, the FBI, etc. — against political opponents."

So I, as he, have not viewed it as an insurrection. It WAS a riot, and as such, was wrong. Those who committed violence or vandalism, should be punished. But In the exact same way other rioters were punished. Those who burned and pillaged cities during the previous administration. The sentences should be no higher, nor worse.

If one believes it was an insurrection, then one has to believe "Monty Python" did the planning and it had all the coordination of the 2 Jewish rebel groups in the "Life of Brian". 😉

Subject: 12ft – Kennedy on Jan 6

link

And just in case you are unfamiliar with "The Life of Brian" here are the combined scenes of, The Judean People's Front, the People's Front Of Judea and what happens when they attempt an insurrection. Enjoy.😉

Subject: United against a common ememy – YouTube


YouTube link

But In the exact same way other rioters were punished. Those who burned and pillaged cities during the previous administration. The sentences should be no higher, nor worse.

We did have an Insurrection Event in DC -- but it was May 30, 2020 when BLM and Antifa mobs attempted to storm the White House. This forced the evacuation of the President to the secure bunker, and the intervention of large numbers of Secret Service and Park Police…not DC or Capitol Hill cops because the Democrats REFUSED REQUESTS FOR ASSISTANCE! Hundreds of police were injured, multiple cars burned, fireworks thrown, people tried to scale the fence to enter White House grounds and the mob burned a historic church across the street from the White House.

What arrests were made? Did the Democrats convene a 5/30 Commission to find out how a violent Leftist mob was able to get resources, organize and try to storm the White House??

First, I said that this was the reason given for the EO. But it certainly appears to be a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Slaves were PROPERTY to the SLAVE STATES. Saying that someone cannot vote does not make him or her a slave.

1. That's a novel interpretation of the Constitution. The Census is supposed to log everyone and differentiate between CITIZENS who count towards apportionment and NON-CITIZENS who do not. Biden's EO would overturn this an dictate the Census count NON-CITIZENS for Congressional seats.

2. Slaves were NON-CITIZENS, and now the Democrats want to once again count NON-CITIZENS to boost the number of seats they get in Congress to obtain more power.

"Actual enumeration" in Article 1 has long been the standard used in the census, counting everyone living in an area. Biden upheld the practice of "actual enumeration," as have other Presidents.

I don't but the connection to slavery or the Democrats on this. As I have said the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court explained their decision that Trumps proposed change to actual enumeration seemed "contrived.

35th,it's a lot to digest! I need to sleep on it😴

Tort, may it not give you indigestion. 🙂

Here is some more. You've commented a few times about "Fox" in this thread, in shall we say, a less than positive mode. 😉

Well here is a confirmation of how myself and others in TMP feel about and view the MSM.

Subject: I've Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here's How We Lost America's Trust. | The Free Press

A little long but worth the read.

I found this especially insightful:

"In recent years I've struggled to answer that question. Concerned by the lack of viewpoint diversity, I looked at voter registration for our newsroom. In D.C., where NPR is headquartered and many of us live, I found 87 registered Democrats working in editorial positions and zero Republicans. None. "

link

Juan Williams on Fox(former NPR) confirms this. I disagree with most of his views, but he is perspective from the other side. The worst of the left perspective on Fox, in my opinion, is Jessica Tarlov. The best left wing perspective on Fox, again IMO, is Harold Ford.

Subject: Juan Williams responds to expose on NPR bias: 'Insulated cadre of people who think they're right'


link

But we are all digressing from the threat to the US, but I know how we got here too.

FYI , I heard last night that the "protesters" in the Congress yesterday, were not being charged with the same law as the January 6th walk ins. I hope that changes, that is wrong if true.

Anti-Israel agitators shut down Senate cafeteria, around 50 arrested

Why ? They weren't serving pita & hummus ? 😯😫

IIRC saw the footage … Is that the right to free speech and right to peaceful assembly ? They should have round them all up and put them in jail for at least 24 hrs. If nothing really happens to them … these sort of things will continue …

Legion, if you read my earlier link on this page about the DC appeals court ruling, these protesters would and should fall under the "exact" same law used against many January 6th individuals who did nothing but walk through the capital halls (no violence or vandalism). Read specifically paragraphs 3 and 4. If they do not fall under it, we indeed have a two tier justice system.

The link is at timestamp 09 Apr 2024 12:30 p.m. PST

"When John Nassif surged into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, he was among the hundreds chanting "Whose house? Our house!"

But that's not exactly true, a federal appeals court countered Tuesday, rejecting Nassif's challenge to his conviction for "demonstrating" inside the Capitol and ruling that the building itself — as opposed to the spacious parkland outside — is not legally a "public forum" for protest activity.

The ruling by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a statute that criminalizes "parading, picketing or demonstrating in a Capitol building," a law that has been used against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants who breached the building that day.

"The record before us contains no evidence that Congress intended to open any portion of the Capitol buildings as a public forum for assembly and discourse," the panel wrote in a unanimous 27-page ruling."

these protesters would and should fall under the "exact" same law used against many January 6th individuals

Yes, another double standard in DC …

35th..I admit I have a hard time with Fox and the Murdochs. But I have also have the same trouble with MSNBC, and most of CNN's people now. Fox is certainly part of the MSM, it is an empire with a wide reach and has altered American life, language, politics, agenda, culture. I don't like the sarcasm especially, but it's freedom of speech.

NPR has an obvious liberal bias, good article from you. Public television and BBC news less so. But all opinion hosts are divisive and stoke anger for ratings.

After thinking about whether some of these other demonstrations are equivalents of 1/6, I just don't see it for the most part. The issues of assault are much broader on 1/6, breaking and entering, physical threats to elected officials, destruction of property, directly forcing the postponement of the certification of our election, psuedo military organizers, thousands of hours of detailed video. Dozens of injuries, a deadly shooting. There has never been such a sight at our Capitol.

But the hardest part for me was the sight of these people disrespecting the epicenter of American civic life and history. The heart of democracy. This is everybody's house. Everybody…a unity word. Grievances are okay, but not like this. "Hang Mike Pence" is not a grievance.

Nothing else mentioned here is quite the same, especially for the symbolic pain. 1/6 caused. You can argue points of law for some and unfair outcomes will occur. There are similarities and arrests were made at these events. But the Capitol?

50 people yelling and carrying signs were arrested yesterday. I don't think they destroyed property or threatened to hang anyone. They did not break in through locked entrances, assault police, destroy widows, etc.

1/6 was a slap in the face like no other. And…we all saw it as it happened, an afternoon of disbelief. Historic, will not be forgotten. It is reasonable to argue that some resulting convictions were harsh. But so was the action itself, both physically and as a symbol of our disappearing civic values, respect, and unity.

"Actual enumeration" in Article 1 has long been the standard used in the census, counting everyone living in an area. Biden upheld the practice of "actual enumeration," as have other Presidents.

I don't but the connection to slavery or the Democrats on this. As I have said the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court explained their decision that Trumps proposed change to actual enumeration seemed "contrived.

yes, we're all suddenly Google experts, and if you do Google you find that for much of US history, while the Census logged everyone the could (citizen, non-citizen), Congressional seats were based on the citizen and lawful resident population, not non-citizens (which includes illegals). Then it was changed, and then Trump changed it back -- and now Biden wants to flip it again and count non-citizens for Congressional Apportionment. Given how Biden and team have engineered mass illegal immigration of some 9+ MILLION people in his time in office, combined with the massive number of illegals already present, you have the potential to give the Democrats 20+ seats in Congress.

This is exactly what happened in our early history during the writing of the Constitution. The Slave holding States (which became dominated by the Democrat Party) wanted to count all non-citizens (Slaves in this case) for Congressional Apportionment. Northern states objected, and the result was the "3/5ths" Compromise where Slave states could only count 3/5ths of their slave population for Congressional seats.

Now the Democrats want to count all non-citizens, who are defacto serfs and slaves, for Congressional seats to give themselves more power in the House.

1/6 was a slap in the face like no other.

It was a riot with a lot of responsibility falling on the Democrats who controlled Capitol Hill and DC for not only rejecting the offers of National Guard troops made by Trump, but who also failed to coordinate on any plan among themselves for the protest, and responding with poorly trained officers who escalated the situation with the first use of violence.

In contrast we saw BLM/Antifa try to storm the White House on May 30th, setting fires, attacking police, burning a church, trying to enter White House grounds and forcing the President to seek shelter in the WH bunker.

link

50 people yelling and carrying signs were arrested yesterday. I don't think they destroyed property or threatened to hang anyone. They did not break in through locked entrances, assault police, destroy widows, etc.

You should be as much if not more concerned! The Jan 6 event was a spontaneous riot with a lot of inputs that inflamed things. In contrast, this recent House fracas was a *planned infiltration* of the Capitol buildings – either with inside help or no, with the express intent of causing a disruption. This same ability to infiltrate the Capitol could easily be used to commit a terrorist attack.

1/6 There is no doubt in my mind that it was at least partly planned after seeing and hearing so much evidence. And it is my opinion that it was far more significant than the other events, especially for its symbolism.

The possibility of a terrorist infiltration was enhanced by the example set on 1/6, although security is supposed to be tighter. These people yesterday did not break in, or behave in a violent manner, and they were arrested. But it will always be a serious concern, and you are right about this, even if access for the public is reduced to mitigate the threat.

Googlism – I am guilty, especially for checking my failing memory.

It's just not very convincing to me that Democrats have engineered all this plotting and conspiring. Nor is the right wing version of some these events. The classic turnabout on blame does not work well here for me, based on what I think I know. There is plenty of blame to spread around. Don't forget your Uniparty theory.

I think we do share the concern that we are losing our country
in ways we never expected.

1/6 There is no doubt in my mind that it was at least partly planned after seeing and hearing so much evidence.

Planned by whom? Have you seen the video footage from Capitol security cams where Capitol police escort the "Qanon Shaman" around and help him enter the chambers?? Or of police opening the doors on one side of the building to let in the crowd, while on the other side of the building the police instigated violence by firing volleys of tear gas into the crowd before the crowd tried to breach any barricades? The FBI had dozens of assets in the crowd as well as other agencies, and won't say what they were doing?

Some folks planned something, others followed along or got swept along. And the Justice Department is hunting down people who, in one case, literally popped their head into the building for 30sec to prosecute them -- yet I don't know of any arrests when Antifa/BLM tried to storm the White House on May 30, 2020 and injured 150 Secret Service and Park Police. What do you think, should the May 30 assault have been swept under the rug like that?

"in one case, literally popped their head into the building for 30sec to prosecute them "

SB, think on this. We can spend god knows how much money and hours, researching and finding these misdemeanor cases. Send armed FBI agents, fully armed in the dawn hours to get these people. Lead them off in leg chains to be booked.

But

This same FBI and Justice department.

Cannot find the individual who leaked the Roe VS Wade decision, before the Supreme Court announced it. Even though the amount of potential suspects is extremely limited.

Cannot find and arrest the individual who brought Cocaine into the White House. Even though there is surveillance everywhere as well as armed guards.

Can't find or are ignoring the January 6th pipe bomber. They can find you if you stuck your head in the door of the Capital with a hoodie on, but can't find this one? 🤔

"FBI still looking for person who planted pipe bombs ahead of Jan. 6 Capitol riot
By Robert Legare, Catherine Herridge, Andres Triay
Updated on: January 6, 2024 / 9:34 AM EST / CBS News

The unsolved mystery continues to elude investigators three years later, even amid a public campaign providing detailed maps, security camera video and potentially identifying information. Investigators made public over two years ago footage showing the suspect walking through the Capitol Hill neighborhood around the time that the devices were believed to have been placed and published photos of the devices and photos and descriptions of some of the apparel the person was wearing.

The FBI said the bombs were placed outside the RNC and DNC the night before the attack, between 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m., and according to a report obtained by CBS News in March 2021, the bombs contained only one method of detonation — a 60-minute kitchen timer. The report — which was written by the National Explosives Task Force, a multi-agency group that coordinates explosive expertise for law enforcement and intelligence agencies — suggested there was no evidence of a second or remote detonation method, such as a cellphone."

They still refuse to release the fully Un-redacted Tennessee Transexual school shooter's manifesto, even though over one year has passed.

Yes just a few things to ponder. 🤔

Just one of many indicators of premeditated action. From Bannon's Jan 6 radio broadcast.

The day before the attack, former top Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon said on his podcast, "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. Just understand this: All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. It's going to be moving. It's going to be quick."

He added: "So many people said, ‘Man, if I was in revolution, I would be in Washington.' Well, this is your time in history."

And: "It's all converging, and now we're on the point of attack tomorrow. … And all I can say is: Strap in. You have made this happen, and tomorrow it's game day

And -- Trump offered Pelosi 10,000 National Guard, and she refused. Trump offered Mayor Brower of DC 10,000 National Guard, and she refused. And Pelosi just "happened" to have a documentary film crew on hand on 1/6…sure…

SB +1 … albeit some may find that information questionable and "upsetting". But AFAIK all that is true …

"1/6 was a slap in the face like no other."

Except, maybe, that day when a British Admiral stood in the Speaker's Chair and directed that the Capitol be burned?

What arrant nonsense. As if the country hadn't seen riots galore for the eight preceding months, with courthouses attacked and occupied and police stations burned.

Right, except it was in reference to the contemporary demonstrations we were comparing.

Errant nonsense, huh? Good luck with the revisionist history. Gotta run, just got a signal from earth…

While you're talking to them, make sure to ask for an explanation of the difference between "arrant" and "errant."

Well, you could be an Arrant Knight Errant, which is a perfectly fine description in English language.

Congresswoman: were those shouting "Death to America!", Irish dancers, Chinese celebrating New Year, connecticut Huskies celebrating their victory? No Congresswoman, they were Muslims. It does not matter if it was Fox asking the question or not. We know CNN, MSNBC or the rest, would never ask you this question. If you can't condemn the words, what does that say about you?

Subject: Jesse Watters on X: "Rashida Tlaib REALLY doesn't want to talk to Fox News! t.co/7HAXXn7SKR / X


link