Is This The New Normal?

[rjs330]

Are we now supporting arresting people before obtaining a warrant? This raises concerns about our country's commitment to the rule of law and explains why some on the left warn that the current administration threatens democracy.

We support it because it IS the rule of law.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

LOL. I have no problem defending the actions of the current administration. It’s fun to compare and contrast though. You know, a treasonous shadow administration vs. the most transparent administration in history.

So I am guessing that no, you felt none of the burning angst that you are feeling for the poor illegals who are NOT being deprived of their due process, for the Jan. 6ers who were deprived of it.

Great to know that you are “not on the left”.

Fake outrage, no more no less.

In 2024, when President Biden lost his mental faculties, the GOP controlled both chambers of Congress. Instead of pursuing impeachment, they focused on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

If you want to discuss President Biden's “treasonous shadow administration” , the GOP also shares responsibility for Biden administration.

 

[A New Dawn]

In 2024, when President Biden lost his mental faculties, the GOP controlled both chambers of Congress. Instead of pursuing impeachment, they focused on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

If you want to discuss President Biden's “treasonous shadow administration” , the GOP also shares responsibility for Biden administration.

Wow. This is really grasping.

In 2024, the GOP did not control the senate. They won the senate in the election in November and didn’t take office till January 3. So, no, Trump’s administration isn’t responsible for anything regarding Biden’s shadow administration.

And Biden didn’t lose his mental facilities in 2024, he was pretty far down that path when he campaigned in 2020, which was very obvious to people with their eyes open the whole four years. It wasn’t till the debate in 2024 that everyone who had their eyes closed finally couldn’t look away anymore.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

We support it because it IS the rule of law.

If masked federal agents accompanied by military can arrest people door to door without warrants, and it is the law, then welcome to United States of IRAN!

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Wow. This is really grasping.

In 2024, the GOP did not control the senate. They won the senate in the election in November and didn’t take office till January 3. So, no, Trump’s administration isn’t responsible for anything regarding Biden’s shadow administration.

And Biden didn’t lose his mental facilities in 2024, he was pretty far down that path when he campaigned in 2020, which was very obvious to people with their eyes open the whole four years. It wasn’t till the debate in 2024 that everyone who had their eyes closed finally couldn’t look away anymore.

The GOP controlled the House with Mike Johnson as Speaker, but did not impeach President Biden despite having the opportunity.

 

[A New Dawn]

The GOP controlled the House with Mike Johnson as Speaker, but did not impeach President Biden despite having the opportunity.

You do know how impeachment works, right?

The House can vote to impeach someone but it has to move on to the Senate where it then is voted on. With Chuck Schumer in charge of the Senate, do you honestly think that would have happened? Honestly.

The ONLY way it could have been addressed is by invoking amendment 25, do you know how that works?

 

[A New Dawn]

If masked federal agents accompanied by military can arrest people door to door without warrants, and it is the law, then welcome to United States of IRAN!

View attachment 367290


View attachment 367291

Actually you are right here. The police cannot go into someone’s house without a warrant. But how many times did that happen here? Please present evidence that this happened since YOU brought it up.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

You do know how impeachment works, right?

The House can vote to impeach someone but it has to move on to the Senate where it then is voted on. With Chuck Schumer in charge of the Senate, do you honestly think that would have happened? Honestly.

The ONLY way it could have been addressed is by invoking amendment 25, do you know how that works?

Chuck Schumer was not the Speaker of the House; that position belonged to Mike Johnson, who prioritized politics over principle.

President Biden could have been impeached by the House in 2024, but political considerations took precedence over principle.

 

[A New Dawn]

Chuck Schumer was not the Speaker of the House; that position belonged to Mike Johnson, who prioritized politics over principle.

President Biden could have been impeached by the House in 2024, but political considerations took precedence over principle.

To what end? It is just political grandstanding to impeach someone without the support of the Senate. Trump was impeached twice by the house because of political grandstanding and he continued to be president and even got a 2nd term because it was not supported by the senate.

Again, amendment 25 would have been the only way, but it would not have worked either. Why?

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Actually you are right here. The police cannot go into someone’s house without a warrant. But how many times did that happen here? Please present evidence that this happened since YOU brought it up.

Finally, we agree on something, so I'd prefer to build on that agreement instead of continuing the debate.

I do not support President Trump's immigration policy. Instead, I am more aligned with the approach of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" as advocated by President W. Bush.

However, President Trump was elected by the American people and is entitled to pursue his campaign promises. Unlike some of his predecessors, President Trump took effective measures to reduce illegal border crossings, and he deserves recognition for this achievement. Even major media outlets have reported a significant decline in illegal border crossings. I attribute this success to President Trump.

President Trump has the right to uphold his campaign promise by enforcing immigration laws, as long as he acts within legal boundaries. While some Democratic mayors, governors, or citizens oppose his policies, their dissent is a part of American democracy. Similarly, Governor Abbott challenged President Biden’s immigration policy in court and implemented state measures at the Texas border, reflecting how democracy functions amid disagreement. Despite obstacles, President Trump must adhere to legal procedures and should not deploy the military or send masked ICE agents into communities without warrants. Such actions go against American values symbolized by Reagan’s “shining city on a hill.” If we resort to these measures, it undermines our credibility to lead by example globally.

 

[A New Dawn]

Finally, we agree on something, so I'd prefer to build on that agreement instead of continuing the debate.

I do not support President Trump's immigration policy. Instead, I am more aligned with the approach of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" as advocated by President W. Bush.

However, President Trump was elected by the American people and is entitled to pursue his campaign promises. Unlike some of his predecessors, President Trump took effective measures to reduce illegal border crossings, and he deserves recognition for this achievement. Even major media outlets have reported a significant decline in illegal border crossings. I attribute this success to President Trump.

President Trump has the right to uphold his campaign promise by enforcing immigration laws, as long as he acts within legal boundaries. While some Democratic mayors, governors, or citizens oppose his policies, their dissent is a part of American democracy. Similarly, Governor Abbott challenged President Biden’s immigration policy in court and implemented state measures at the Texas border, reflecting how democracy functions amid disagreement. Despite obstacles, President Trump must adhere to legal procedures and should not deploy the military or send masked ICE agents into communities without warrants. Such actions go against American values symbolized by Reagan’s “shining city on a hill.” If we resort to these measures, it undermines our credibility to lead by example globally.

Comprehensive immigration reform is not needed if the border is wide open. And I do agree we need it, but it’s not going to happen. Why not?, you ask. Because if the issue is actually resolved, it cannot be a campaign issue/promise. And we all know that getting re-elected is more important that solving important problems like this.

But be that as it may, the current problem caused by the past administration needs to be dealt with, and since the leftist politicians have decided to break the law and harbor violent criminals as well as non-violent criminals, then this current administration bears the brunt of cleaning it up. And since no laws are being violated in the process and the Supreme Court has greenlighted the program, then it is what it is, no matter how much you dislike it.

Me? I’d prefer that all the politicians who agreed to uphold the Constitution and swore to protect their citizens would do just that. We owe NOTHING to the illegals who are here ILLEGALLY. In fact they have already received more money from our government than the veterans and the people who’ve lost everything catastrophically have received.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Comprehensive immigration reform is not needed if the border is wide open. And I do agree we need it, but it’s not going to happen. Why not?, you ask. Because if the issue is actually resolved, it cannot be a campaign issue/promise. And we all know that getting re-elected is more important that solving important problems like this.

But be that as it may, the current problem caused by the past administration needs to be dealt with, and since the leftist politicians have decided to break the law and harbor violent criminals as well as non-violent criminals, then this current administration bears the brunt of cleaning it up. And since no laws are being violated in the process and the Supreme Court has greenlighted the program, then it is what it is, no matter how much you dislike it.

Me? I’d prefer that all the politicians who agreed to uphold the Constitution and swore to protect their citizens would do just that. We owe NOTHING to the illegals who are here ILLEGALLY. In fact they have already received more money from our government than the veterans and the people who’ve lost everything catastrophically have received.

I share your view on unauthorized entry into the US and border security. If people want to come to US, they should come here legally.

The question remains regarding how to address the 13-15 million undocumented immigrants currently residing in the USA. It is important to note that this situation has developed over the past 50 years, with undocumented immigrants crossing the border or overstaying visas under various presidential administrations from both major political parties. Both parties have addressed this as a political issue rather than taking comprehensive steps toward a solution, contributing to the current circumstances.

The practicality of deporting 13 million undocumented individuals from the United States is highly questionable, particularly when considering the necessity to adhere to legal procedures and due process. While I was unable to locate a definitive source, some media outlets report that the Trump administration is deporting approximately 15,000 undocumented immigrants per month. At this rate, around 720,000 individuals would be deported by the end of the administration’s term, demonstrating that removing 13 million people is not a feasible objective.

Additional factors warrant consideration. For instance, approximately 45% of undocumented immigrants are employed in the U.S. food industry, spanning agriculture, restaurants, and meat processing facilities. Another 20% are reported to work in construction. Even if it were logistically possible to deport all undocumented immigrants rapidly, it remains unclear whether there is a viable plan to replace these workers with legal immigrants or American citizens. Currently, there are over seven million unfilled positions in the U.S., and since 2021, the monthly average has exceeded eight million vacancies, largely due to labor shortages. Should mass deportation occur within one or two years, substantial challenges would arise in filling these roles without causing significant harm to the U.S. economy.

Debate on this issue often polarizes into two camps: one advocating for the deportation of all undocumented immigrants and the other supporting an open-door approach. However, neither side appears focused on crafting a balanced, practical solution that promotes the nation’s best interests, maintains security, upholds compassion for vulnerable populations, and respects the rule of law.

 

[A New Dawn]

I share your view on unauthorized entry into the US and border security. If people want to come to US, they should come here legally.

The question remains regarding how to address the 13-15 million undocumented immigrants currently residing in the USA. It is important to note that this situation has developed over the past 50 years, with undocumented immigrants crossing the border or overstaying visas under various presidential administrations from both major political parties. Both parties have addressed this as a political issue rather than taking comprehensive steps toward a solution, contributing to the current circumstances.

The practicality of deporting 13 million undocumented individuals from the United States is highly questionable, particularly when considering the necessity to adhere to legal procedures and due process. While I was unable to locate a definitive source, some media outlets report that the Trump administration is deporting approximately 15,000 undocumented immigrants per month. At this rate, around 720,000 individuals would be deported by the end of the administration’s term, demonstrating that removing 13 million people is not a feasible objective.

Additional factors warrant consideration. For instance, approximately 45% of undocumented immigrants are employed in the U.S. food industry, spanning agriculture, restaurants, and meat processing facilities. Another 20% are reported to work in construction. Even if it were logistically possible to deport all undocumented immigrants rapidly, it remains unclear whether there is a viable plan to replace these workers with legal immigrants or American citizens. Currently, there are over seven million unfilled positions in the U.S., and since 2021, the monthly average has exceeded eight million vacancies, largely due to labor shortages. Should mass deportation occur within one or two years, substantial challenges would arise in filling these roles without causing significant harm to the U.S. economy.

Debate on this issue often polarizes into two camps: one advocating for the deportation of all undocumented immigrants and the other supporting an open-door approach. However, neither side appears focused on crafting a balanced, practical solution that promotes the nation’s best interests, maintains security, upholds compassion for vulnerable populations, and respects the rule of law.

Yes, it has developed over time, and it likely will continue to develop because of the current political divide. Trump, in his first term, offered to give the people here under the DACA program citizenship if the left agreed to help fund the border wall. Guess what the answer was. It was obviously a no because they didn’t want to help fund Trump’s border wall OR solve the problem. Trump was willing to compromise, the left wasn’t. So I don’t see any hope of there being a resolution on this issue.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Yes, it has developed over time, and it likely will continue to develop because of the current political divide. Trump, in his first term, offered to give the people here under the DACA program citizenship if the left agreed to help fund the border wall. Guess what the answer was. It was obviously a no because they didn’t want to help fund Trump’s border wall OR solve the problem. Trump was willing to compromise, the left wasn’t. So I don’t see any hope of there being a resolution on this issue.

The left repeatedly refuses to compromise on immigration. Democrats often campaign on this issue, but do not address it once in office.

The same applies to the GOP. Last year, a bipartisan immigration bill written by James Lankford stalled in the Senate because candidate Trump wanted to keep it as a campaign issue.

Both parties bear responsibility for the situation.

Furthermore, our strong partisanship often prevents voters from acknowledging that our own group shares equal accountability with the opposing side.

 

[A New Dawn]

The left repeatedly refuses to compromise on immigration. Democrats often campaign on this issue, but do not address it once in office.

The same applies to the GOP. Last year, a bipartisan immigration bill written by James Lankford stalled in the Senate because candidate Trump wanted to keep it as a campaign issue.

Both parties bear responsibility for the situation.

Furthermore, our strong partisanship often prevents voters from acknowledging that our own group shares equal accountability with the opposing side.

Bipartisan in that respect really just means what I can’t say here (those who side with the democrats more than they side with their own.). Nobody really on the right wanted to pass that bill last year precisely because the bill had a quota on how many illegals the left wanted to allow in on a daily basis, and that number precisely mirrored the number they were currently allowing in without the bill. It was a win-win for the Democrats and a lose-lose for the Republicans. That is why.

But to a certain extent, I agree. It’s never been a high priority for the right, but it appears now that the issue has been thrust onto a front burner that the citizens of the country want them, as many as possible, to be deported. They are tired of having to give places like NY and California extra seats in government since at present they base representation on total number of residents instead of the number of citizens. They are tired of having to compete with non-residents for jobs, especially when the illegals will do a job for way less than minimum wage, which is hilarious since the left is the proponent for higher minimum wage. You can’t speak out of both sides of your mouth. If you are pushing higher minimum wage, then you need to knock off supporting illegals working for pennies in the dollar. Choose which side of the issue you want to be on.

 

[Pommer]

It is indeed a sad day that After 250 years of democracy, some Americans believe it is acceptable for the government to deploy the military door to door to apprehend individuals.

Thank goodness for the 3rd Amendment!

 

[DaisyDay]

And I’m sure you watch CNN and MSNBC for your news.

Why? Do you believe your own propaganda? This is nothing other than a vapid swipe at the generic left which indicates your beliefs but none of my own.

Kamala Harris raised money to bail them out so they could go back to rioting when they were picked up and released.

That is not actually true but if you believe it, then it is not your lie. She tweeted out support for the Minnesota bail fund back in 2020, but did nothing further.

Did Kamala Harris Donate to The Bail Project?

Did Kamala Harris donate to The Bail Project? Her entry into the presidential race has inspired misinformation about charitable bail funds.

bailproject.org

Back when she sent this tweet, after George Floyd was killed, the country was gripped in the largest protests since Vietnam. There was widespread support from both sides of the political aisle for criminal justice reform. Then-President Trump signaled his support, saying, “All Americans were rightly sickened and revolted by the brutal death of George Floyd. My administration is fully committed that, for George and his family, justice will be served.” J.D. Vance, in recently leaked emails, said, “I hate the police. Given the number of negative experiences I’ve had in the past few years, I can’t imagine what a black guy goes through.”


The Minnesota Freedom Fund has denied that Harris has donated any money herself, stating, “It is not correct that then-Sen. Harris has donated to our organization. We have no relationship with Harris beyond a single four-year-old tweet.”
​

I am not mentioning BLM, I specifically said Antifa who was masked, who caused $20M in damages, and who killed 48 people over the course of the summer. Nothing was done. Nobody was prosecuted. Looting was legalized because somehow stealing large screen TVs is the appropriate way to address the problem.

Check your facts before posting, maybe? Antifa caused damage, but so did the counter-protesters such as the Proud Boys. Biden disclaimed Antifa while Trump told the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by" but not "stand down".

It is untrue that no one was prosecuted or that nothing was done. Tens of thousands of protesters were arrested and prosecuted.

Records rebut claims of unequal treatment of Jan. 6 rioters

It’s a common refrain from some of those charged in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and their Republican allies: The Justice Department is treating them harshly because of their political views while those arrested during last year’s protests over racial injustice were given leniency.

Court records tell a different story.
​

My opinion is that everyone who breaks the law should pay for their crime.

Do you include the current president and administration in this?

But the only ones who paid for their crimes were people on the right side of the aisle.

That is either ignorant or a lie as that is contrary to actual, documented fact.

And since you are alluding to Jan 6, ...

I wasn't. Nowhere in my post did I allude to the insurrection of 2021. Why did you say that?

But, since you bring it up, all the insurrectionists convicted for J6, including the cop beaters, were pardoned without regard to the seriousness of their crimes.

And since you are alluding to Jan 6, not one person on the left was held accountable for their roles in the fiasco from Nancy Pelosi who refused to utilize the National Guard when offered by Trump because of optics to the FBI embedded in with the proud boys who actually started the formulation of the plan to storm the Capitol to the Capitol cop who killed an unarmed woman who was not a danger to him to the DC cop outside the Capitol who shot into the crowd CAUSING the stampede of people running for cover which has been incorrectly labeled a riot. But yes, if the proud boys did something illegal, they should be held accountable.

Nancy Pelosi had nothing to do with whether the National Guard were deployed or not - that was Trump's call. There is no proof that any FBI agents were embedded with the Proud Boys although there were informants. Babbitt was a traitor bent on overthrowing the legal election; as the person at the head of the mob who was actively climbing through a broken window to get to the Senators on the other side, she was taken out as the threat she was. Many Proud Boys (and Three Percenters) were arrested and convicted, but they all got pardoned by the very instigator.

 

[A New Dawn]

Why? Do you believe your own propaganda? This is nothing other than a vapid swipe at the generic left which indicates your beliefs but none of my own.

Me? I read everything that comes before me, even in this post. But most people on the left refuse to hear anything that runs counter to the leftist narrative, even when it comes from their own side. Case in point, they are trying to cancel Jake Tapper because of his book on Biden's mental health cover-up.

That is not actually true but if you believe it, then it is not your lie. She tweeted out support for the Minnesota bail fund back in 2020, but did nothing further.

Did Kamala Harris Donate to The Bail Project?

Did Kamala Harris donate to The Bail Project? Her entry into the presidential race has inspired misinformation about charitable bail funds.

bailproject.org

The Minnesota Freedom Fund has denied that Harris has donated any money herself, stating, “It is not correct that then-Sen. Harris has donated to our organization. We have no relationship with Harris beyond a single four-year-old tweet.”​

There was a credible report that came out during the presidential campaign that she did support them, I will try to find it.

It is untrue that no one was prosecuted or that nothing was done. Tens of thousands of protesters were arrested and prosecuted.

Thanks for the link. Has interesting stuff on it.

Records rebut claims of unequal treatment of Jan. 6 rioters

It’s a common refrain from some of those charged in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and their Republican allies: The Justice Department is treating them harshly because of their political views while those arrested during last year’s protests over racial injustice were given leniency.​

Court records tell a different story.​

Can you be more specific, because according to the persons who were detained, themselves, they spent months at a time in solitary confinement and were abused by the prison staff. Most were incarcerated without charges ever being filed.

Thanks for the AP article, from one of the leading left-leaning publications in the country. But speaking to the "dozens of people charged have been convicted of serious crimes and sent to prison." That's great, but there were 1700+ that were arrested. And most of them were not convicted or jailed. Only the "dozens" who committed arson, or other really serious crimes. Compared to the majority who were thrown in jail for January 6 for walking around looking and taking pictures of the building, only a handful actually committed a crime.

But, since you bring it up, all the insurrectionists convicted for J6, including the cop beaters, were pardoned without regard to the seriousness of their crimes.

You all harp on the one cop who was beaten but refuse to acknowledge that one of the cops shot and killed an unarmed woman who was no danger to him, or that another woman was trampled to death from the hysteria (absolutely not a riot) that ensued from a cop shooting into the crowd outside. Neither of them were charged with anything. But nobody else was killed, just 2 Trump supporters. And the person who beat the cop served time in jail for it. The rest served 2-3 years with no charges being filed. THEY are the ones who did not get due process.

Nancy Pelosi had nothing to do with whether the National Guard were deployed or not - that was Trump's call. There is no proof that any FBI agents were embedded with the Proud Boys although there were informants. Babbitt was a traitor bent on overthrowing the legal election; as the person at the head of the mob who was actively climbing through a broken window to get to the Senators on the other side, she was taken out as the threat she was. Many Proud Boys (and Three Percenters) were arrested and convicted, but they all got pardoned by the very instigator.

Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House was in charge of the security of the Capitol. The Sergeant at Arms (who is a member of the Capitol Police Dept.)) reports directly to her. Trump offered her the National Guard, TWICE, and she refused on the grounds of "optics" (because she had recently appeared to support defunding the police, and it wouldn't look good. She, Nancy Pelosi, admitted that very thing to her daughter, who recorded it and turned it over. So there is audio evidence for that.)

The proud boys themselves, said that two "new members" came in and proceeded to ask if there were plans to storm the Capitol, but there weren't, and the "new members" came up with the plan. The FBI refuses to speak to Congress about it because of "ongoing investigations". I believe the proud boys over the swamp.

Please support the statement about Babbitt. She wanted to make her voice heard (her right), and was in the process of climbing through a window when she was shot. She was unarmed and the other cops around the one who shot her lowered their weapons because they deemed that she was no threat. Your comments are so biased that it is unbelievable. Do you mean to tell me that 4 armed men couldn't subdue one small woman? Really?

And, for the record, I believe nothing that comes out of the DoJ's office, him being the person who weaponized the DoJ.

And Trump, The person who offered the National Guard twice, who told the people who came to his speech to peacefully and patriotically go to make their voices heard. I can see how that is instigating. j/k It's OK to have an opinion about something. That was Trump's only fault. It's certainly not nearly as much of an instigation as Biden saying someone has to take out Trump who is a threat to democracy and someone taking him at his word and actually trying to assassinate him. But sure, go peacefully and patriotically can be quite threatening.

 

[Pommer]

Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House was in charge of the security of the Capitol.

Did this get changed, because Mike Johnson isn’t “in charge” of Security at the Capitol?

 

[wing2000]

Yes, it has developed over time, and it likely will continue to develop because of the current political divide. Trump, in his first term, offered to give the people here under the DACA program citizenship if the left agreed to help fund the border wall. Guess what the answer was. It was obviously a no because they didn’t want to help fund Trump’s border wall OR solve the problem. Trump was willing to compromise, the left wasn’t. So I don’t see any hope of there being a resolution on this issue.

That is not correct.
On January 2018, at an open WH meeting with congressional leaders from both parties, President Trump offered to support a "Clean DACA Bill" as proposed by Sen Feinsten at the meeting:

He later reneged and demanded funding for a border wall and ending what he called "chain migration."

He had an opportunity to resolve the DACA issue....and refused.