Biden cancels all Pentagon money used for Trump's Mexico border wall

[jayem]

So in your view, technically we should have sent Homeland Security and the DoJ to the Middle East?

You need to brush up on your knowledge of how our government works. Since 9/11, there has been a separate agency, the National Counterterrorism Center, to deal with both foreign and domestic terrorists. It coordinates with the CIA and other agencies. Including the military. Whose job is to carry out counterterrorist missions on foreign soil, i.e., the bin Laden takedown. But domestic operations are the job of DHS and the FBI.

Who We Are

 

[TLK Valentine]

So in your view, technically we should have sent Homeland Security and the DoJ to the Middle East?

You understand the word "domestic," right?

 

[HARK!]

You understand the word "domestic," right?

You do understand that invaders are not "domestics," right?

 

[TLK Valentine]

You do understand that invaders are not "domestics," right?

Incidents which happen on U.S. soil are, by nature, "domestic." It's the location, not the person, that makes the distinction.

You do under-- oh, never mind...

 

[HARK!]

Incidents which happen on U.S. soil are, by nature, "domestic." It's the location, not the person, that makes the distinction.

If the military was on the border; I'm sure that the vast majority of the invaders wouldn't be able to cross to U.S. soil.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If the military was on the border; I'm sure that the vast majority of the invaders wouldn't be able to cross to U.S. soil.

If the military was on the border, Commander-in-Chief Biden could order them to use Donald's wall for target practice.

There's not a whole lot more they could actually do that wouldn't violate the Knott Amendment.

 

[HARK!]

If the military was on the border, Commander-in-Chief Biden could order them to use Donald's wall for target practice.

There's not a whole lot more they could actually do that wouldn't violate the Knott Amendment.

Nope.

If Congress authorizes it, the military could stop this invasion almost immediately.

Aside from that, If Biden himself authorized it, the military could aid Border Patrol in locating the invaders.

Our government is getting exactly what it wants.

Who does it help the most? The wealthiest, by devaluing labor, by saturating the market. Yes, the value of labor conforms to supply and demand, just like anything else.

Who gets hurt? The little guy.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Nope.

If Congress authorizes it, the military could stop this invasion almost immediately.

Aside from that, If Biden himself authorized it, the military could aid Border Patrol in locating the invaders.

Assuming for a moment that the Supreme Court wouldn't shoot this down as a violation of the Knott Amendment, what would the military do with these "invaders" if they caught one?

Shoot to kill?

 

[HARK!]

Assuming for a moment that the Supreme Court wouldn't shoot this down as a violation of the Knott Amendment, what would the military do with these "invaders" if they caught one?

Shoot to kill?

Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it?

Article IV
Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Article IV Section 4 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Might that not be a wee bit on the extreme side?

How about put them to work, building a wall, for retribution for their crime?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it?

For someone who claims not to be an authoritarian, you seem awfully fond of making the same old error.

Article IV
Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Article IV Section 4 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Might that not be a wee bit on the extreme side?

We have a border patrol who already does that.

How about put them to work, building a wall, for retribution for their crime?

How about you (not we) explain how the military is going to supervise this?

Besides, if Donald could've gotten away with using slave labor, don't you think he would've tried it?

It's been tried before...

Armed Mexicans Were Smuggled In to Guard Border Wall, Whistle-Blowers Say

 

[jayem]

Nope.

If Congress authorizes it, the military could stop this invasion almost immediately.

Aside from that, If Biden himself authorized it, the military could aid Border Patrol in locating the invaders.

Our government is getting exactly what it wants.

Who does it help the most? The wealthiest, by devaluing labor, by saturating the market. Yes, the value of labor conforms to supply and demand, just like anything else.

Who gets hurt? The little guy.

AFAIK, there’s no need to involve Congress. State governors can activate their National Guard units to assist with law enforcement during natural disasters and for emergency homeland defense. If undocumented immigrants at the southern border really constitute an “invasion,” why haven’t the governors of CA, AZ, NM, and TX done this?

BTW: Have you heard of Kinky Friedman? He’s a TX country singer. Very funny and satirical. Some might say offensive. I think he’s great. I believe he once ran for governor of TX. He has the best plan for healing with illegals. We hire a team of Mexican Army generales to be in charge of border security. They’ll be paid big time—like $100 million. But they’re paid in arrears. And for every illegal who’s apprehended, their pot is reduced by $10,000. Pretty cool idea.

 

[TLK Valentine]

AFAIK, there’s no need to involve Congress. State governors can activate their National Guard units to assist with law enforcement during natural disasters and for emergency homeland defense. If undocumented immigrants at the southern border really constitute an “invasion,” why haven’t the governors of CA, AZ, NM, and TX done this?

Because if it was an "invasion," Donald would be impeached for treason for threatening to inflict the "invasion" on his own citizens.

Fortunately, nobody honestly thinks it's an actual "invasion."

 

[HARK!]

For someone who claims not to be an authoritarian, you seem awfully fond of making the same old error.

It seems that you don't understand the difference between a Libertarian, and an Anarchist.

This short video might help you to get a start in that understanding:

We have a border patrol who already does that.

If they were doing that; we wouldn't be having this conversation.

How about you (not we) explain how the military is going to supervise this?

Besides, if Donald could've gotten away with using slave labor, don't you think he would've tried it?

It's been tried before...

So you consider paying restitution for one's crime as slavery?

I suppose you believe that the taxpayer should pay for the crimes that he had no part in?

Why wouldn't you consider that slavery?

The Federal Government already has a highly effective prison system in place. Why do you feel that the Military must be in charge of managing the Federal BOP?

 

[Pommer]

So you consider paying restitution for one's crime as slavery?

So will these folk be given “duties” right off the bat, or will you allow them due process before the slavery begins?

Also it would violate international treaty to “conscript” asylum seekers to work in labor farms camps.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It seems that you don't understand the difference between a Libertarian, and an Anarchist.

This short video might help you to get a start in that understanding:

No, thanks. Argumentum ad Youtube bores me. (Besides, my internet connection is a bit spotty)

If a person can't say it in their own words, I'm not going to bother listening to someone else's.

Besides, whether you are a libertarian or an anarchist is irrelevant. You could be a Klingon for all I care. You claim not to be an authoritarian, and I believe you. But, you persist in making a common mistake that they tend to make -- to wit, you seek out the highest authority on a subject, and assume that only what it explicitly says is relevant to the discussion.

Clearly you've overlooked that the Constitution also says that not only it, but also "the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land..."

This would include the Knott Amendment, which forbids the army from being used to enforce domestic
policy... and as immigration is a domestic issue, that pretty much takes care of that.

If they were doing that; we wouldn't be having this conversation.

They are doing it -- in fact, by all accounts, they've been quite busy at it.

If you want to argue that they need to do more, or that they're overwhelmed and need assistance, then we can have a meaningful conversation. As it is, you insult the United States Border Patrol by implying that they do nothing.

So you consider paying restitution for one's crime as slavery?

"Payment" means money. You pay the cost of repairing any damage caused in the commission of your crime... so unless the migrants dismantled the wall with a blowtorch, you're stretching.

You're talking about forced labor -- which, while it is allowed as per the 13th Amendment, was only included as a concession to the slave states, whose economy would've collapsed without slave labor.
The slave states quickly exploited this loophole and codified the "Black Codes" (the precursor to Jim Crow) to keep the now free blacks in line... and to get quasi-slave labor out of the lawbreakers.

Legal, yes, but I would hope that as a Christian, you would follow a higher law.

I suppose you believe that the taxpayer should pay for the crimes that he had no part in?

I suppose that they had no part in damaging a wall that doesn't even exist.
A reasonable supposition... don't you think?

Why wouldn't you consider that slavery?

Consider what slavery? Paying taxes?

The Federal Government already has a highly effective prison system in place. Why do you feel that the Military must be in charge of managing the Federal BOP?

I don't. You do.
You want the military in the business of arresting civilians, which makes said civilians their responsibility.

Again, for someone who claims not to be an authoritarian, you've very vague on the issue of responsibility... and while I still believe you're not one, that is a common trait among them.

 

[wing2000]

So now you deny that illegals are even invading our country?

Your agenda is showing.

As I recall, Jesus wasn't impressed with those who use national identity as an excuse to mistreat the foreigner. Reference - the parable of the Good Samaritan.

I wonder what He thinks of those who call fellow human beings escaping persecution - invaders?

After all, Americans have been exploiting the labor of hardworking Latin Americans for decades. We employ them to care for our children and aging parents, build our houses, pick our fruit, package our meat, clean our homes and hotel rooms.....

 

[Aryeh Jay]

No, thanks. Argumentum ad Youtube bores me. (Besides, my internet connection is a bit spotty)

If a person can't say it in their own words, I'm not going to bother listening to someone else's.

Besides, whether you are a libertarian or an anarchist is irrelevant. You could be a Klingon for all I care. You claim not to be an authoritarian, and I believe you. But, you persist in making a common mistake that they tend to make -- to wit, you seek out the highest authority on a subject, and assume that only what it explicitly says is relevant to the discussion.

Clearly you've overlooked that the Constitution also says that not only it, but also "the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land..."

This would include the Knott Amendment, which forbids the army from being used to enforce domestic
policy... and as immigration is a domestic issue, that pretty much takes care of that.




They are doing it -- in fact, by all accounts, they've been quite busy at it.

If you want to argue that they need to do more, or that they're overwhelmed and need assistance, then we can have a meaningful conversation. As it is, you insult the United States Border Patrol by implying that they do nothing.



"Payment" means money. You pay the cost of repairing any damage caused in the commission of your crime... so unless the migrants dismantled the wall with a blowtorch, you're stretching.

You're talking about forced labor -- which, while it is allowed as per the 13th Amendment, was only included as a concession to the slave states, whose economy would've collapsed without slave labor.
The slave states quickly exploited this loophole and codified the "Black Codes" (the precursor to Jim Crow) to keep the now free blacks in line... and to get quasi-slave labor out of the lawbreakers.

Legal, yes, but I would hope that as a Christian, you would follow a higher law.



I suppose that they had no part in damaging a wall that doesn't even exist.
A reasonable supposition... don't you think?



Consider what slavery? Paying taxes?



I don't. You do.
You want the military in the business of arresting civilians, which makes said civilians their responsibility.

Again, for someone who claims not to be an authoritarian, you've very vague on the issue of responsibility... and while I still believe you're not one, that is a common trait among them.

Not to worry, there are some people who would have no problem doing away with the Knott Amendment and have armed troops patrolling our streets and borders and support their vision of what the land of the free should be.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Not to worry, there are some people who would have no problem doing away with the Knott Amendment and have armed troops patrolling our streets and borders and support their vision of what the land of the free should be.

By "their" you must mean the armed troops. The people with the guns tend to make those decisions.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

By "their" you must mean the armed troops. The people with the guns tend to make those decisions.

Since when has an armed mob ever made a bad decision.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Since when has an armed mob ever made a bad decision.

Are you crazy? What kind of nonsense would you have me bel--

Um... I mean, yes... we should never doubt the wisdom and good judgement of an armed mob...