Trump confirms plan to declare national emergency and use military for deportations

Politesse said:

If anyone is surprised by this, they're an idiot. This was always the plan, he even tried to implement it during his first term. So of course they'll be doing it again.

Click to expand...

The question, again is the viability and his ability to actually pull such a large scale thing off, or at least the Trumpeteers doing it. There are laws in this country. And in other countries. It isn't as simple as dumping them magically in another place. And the cost to house, feed (starve?) these people if they do round them up, has to come from somewhere. Doesn't mean he can't do it, but it isn't quite as simple as he wants to believe.

Derec said:

Jimmy Higgins said:

Well, the Newscorp investment looks to have done the job. Allowing people who can't vote into our country in order to help us in elections would be a pretty dumb idea. And generally, people have tendency to vote the pocket book than other reasons.

Click to expand...

It's a longer term plan (illegals given a "path to citizenship" can eventually vote, as can their children due to misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment), even if it is a pretty dumb idea as the 2024 election showed. But you will often hear arguments that "browning" of America is a good thing for Democrats electorally. Before Trump made inroads with blacks and Hispanics, and even Muslims, you would often hear terms like "demography is destiny" and "permanent majority". Republican long term electoral chances were dismissed because they were all "male, pale and stale", not considering the sexism, racism and ageism inherent in that quip.

So no, the Democrats aren't allowing hoards of migrants into the US for electoral purposes. In general, they aren't letting in hoards to begin with.

Click to expand...

Hordes, not hoards. And they certainly are.

Yes, many... let's just name two though.

Click to expand...

Those two are examples.

Dude, the liberals are the ones that generally don't have the 'monolith' feel with ethnic groups. We know that some Hispanics are socially conservative. We understand that some Muslims can be socially conservative to even backwards. You keep repeating this like we never understood it.

Click to expand...

You don't seem to. Whenever I discussed mass Muslim migration for example, my concerns about, e.g. 98% of Afghans being Sharia supporters, have always been dismissed.
Europe is doing worse in that regard, since they have been invaded by Muslims much harder in recent decades. Now there are protests in Hamburg by Muslims demanding a Caliphate.

A big problem with Muslim mass migration is also that they have huge birthrates and will outbreed Europeans.
US would be well-advised not to let the same happen to us.

Click to expand...

"Muslim" is a religion, not a race. That said, what a disgusting thing to say. What horrible thing will happen? YOU won't be in the majority anymore? Oh the horror. You've enjoyed all that privilege and don't want to let it go? or are you afraid they may treat you the way you've treated them?

Derec said:

TomC said:

It's a good thing for America!. [...] I don't care about their skin tone.

Click to expand...

You claim to not care about the skin tone, and yet you say fewer whites and more "browns" in America is a good thing? Your words betray you.

Why do you?

Click to expand...

I don't. I care about culture. Islamism should be out, whether the Islamist is from Bosnia, Syria, Afghanistan, Indonesia or Somalia.

Often though lily-white people are referred to as "brown" and are given POC privileges in the US simply because of the language they (or their ancestors) speak and what religion they are.

Click to expand...

Christo-fascists' are just as bad. Just keep religion out of politics and you'll be fine.

Derec said:

Jimmy Higgins said:

Well, the Newscorp investment looks to have done the job. Allowing people who can't vote into our country in order to help us in elections would be a pretty dumb idea. And generally, people have tendency to vote the pocket book than other reasons.

Click to expand...

It's a longer term plan (illegals given a "path to citizenship" can eventually vote, as can their children due to misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment), even if it is a pretty dumb idea as the 2024 election showed.

Click to expand...

Again, that isn't actually happening. It is, oddly enough, an anti-Semitic trope.

Derec said:

But you will often hear arguments that "browning" of America is a good thing for Democrats electorally.

Click to expand...

I have never heard that, otherwise than from far-right-wing people.

Derec said:

Before Trump made inroads with blacks and Hispanics, and even Muslims, you would often hear terms like "demography is destiny" and "permanent majority".

Click to expand...

Well, it was heading that way. You might have noticed that northerners and CA'ers were migrating south to Virginia, North Carolina, Texas / east to Arizona, Texas. This was impacting state majorities. This wasn't simply "the browns".

Derec said:

Republican long term electoral chances were dismissed because they were all "male, pale and stale", not considering the sexism, racism and ageism inherent in that quip.

Click to expand...

What the fuck do you get your news?

Derec said:

So no, the Democrats aren't allowing hoards of migrants into the US for electoral purposes. In general, they aren't letting in hoards to begin with.

Click to expand...

Hordes, not hoards. And they certainly are.

Click to expand...

No, they aren't. The word is used to present this ideas that massive groups of people are streaming into the border. That wasn't happening, that isn't happening.

Derec said:

Yes, many... let's just name two though.

Click to expand...

Those two are examples.

Click to expand...

Again... two.

Derec said:

Dude, the liberals are the ones that generally don't have the 'monolith' feel with ethnic groups. We know that some Hispanics are socially conservative. We understand that some Muslims can be socially conservative to even backwards. You keep repeating this like we never understood it.

Click to expand...

You don't seem to. Whenever I discussed mass Muslim migration for example, my concerns about, e.g. 98% of Afghans being Sharia supporters, have always been dismissed.

Click to expand...

The United States and Western culture have a tendency of moderating religious views. Old people whine about that shit all the time. Your posts on... many things... are wickedly biased and often... just appalling. Doesn't mean I think that women needing to wear full body gowns is a good thing. Or that women shouldn't be allow to work or drive or have a mortgage. The thing Derec, the right-wing is going in the direction at the moment, and are the real threat to the future of my daughter... not Muslims.

Jimmy Higgins said:

The question, again is the viability and his ability to actually pull such a large scale thing off, or at least the Trumpeteers doing it. There are laws in this country.

Click to expand...

Those laws didn't stop the original Operation Wetback from proceeding, so why would they prevent this sequel episode? Our society is marching backward, not forward. Trump and his people have little respect for the law in the first place, and what's left of the legal system is compelled to ignore most of their activities.

Now, do they have the organizing intelligence and monetary capital to meet their goals? That's another question.

Harry Bosch said:

Ford said:

"First they came for the migrants, and I did not speak out, because I was not a migrant..."

Click to expand...

Well I have been speaking out against Trump. I voted against him. Got involved in the race in Washington. Donated money to the Harris campaign. Debated many many times against Trumpers. However, at the end of the day, 46% of all Latinos voted for Trump. 55% Latino men voted for Trump. Call me a bitter asshole, but not sure how much political capital I’m going to spend when so many do so little for their cause. Elections have consequences…

Click to expand...

It might be the Hispanic men who voted for Trump thought of the illegal immigrants as unwelcome competition.

He just says things.

BH said:

Harry Bosch said:

Ford said:

"First they came for the migrants, and I did not speak out, because I was not a migrant..."

Click to expand...

Well I have been speaking out against Trump. I voted against him. Got involved in the race in Washington. Donated money to the Harris campaign. Debated many many times against Trumpers. However, at the end of the day, 46% of all Latinos voted for Trump. 55% Latino men voted for Trump. Call me a bitter asshole, but not sure how much political capital I’m going to spend when so many do so little for their cause. Elections have consequences…

Click to expand...

It might be the Hispanic men who voted for Trump thought of the illegal immigrants as unwelcome competition.

Click to expand...

It might be that they act against their own interest because they are captive audience to a firehose of RW lies.

TSwizzle said:

Millions of people entered the USA illegally on Brandon's watch

Click to expand...

Probably the average flow for decades, but overhyped by MAGAts.

laughing dog said:

Let's just hope in the rush and zeal to deport all the illegal or criminal immigrants, legal law-abiding immigrants are not swept up and sent out.

Click to expand...

Fat chance.

Derec said:

Illegal migrants. There is a difference between legal and illegal migration.

Click to expand...

As if Rump knows the difference.

Patooka said:

Derec said:

Illegal migrants. There is a difference between legal and illegal migration.

Click to expand...

Please list all the steps required to migrate legally and become a US citizen. The ways you gloss over the process makes it sound simple. I hope I'm not making any unwarranted assumptions here.

Click to expand...

I don't know the steps, but it takes YEARS.

Derec said:

A big problem with Muslim mass migration is also that they have huge birthrates and will outbreed Europeans.

Click to expand...

We've heard this about every group of immigrants. I've even heard it said about blacks.

Playball40 said:

are you afraid they may treat you the way you've treated them?

Click to expand...

I am afraid, that the is-lame-icks will treat us the way they treat their own people in there own countries.

With regard to the OP, there is a very real chance none of this is going to happen. I'll explain why;

Back in 2013, Australia had a Federal election. Kevin Rudd was leader for Labour (for the second time) and Tony Abbott was leader of The Coalition. To use very simplistic comparisons, Labor is like the Democrats, The Coalition is like the Republicans. And to add some further context, that fucking cunt Rupert Murdoch has an even tighter strangle hold on Australia's news outlets than he does in America. One of the Newspapers Mudroch (fucking cunt) owns is The Daily Telegraph.

In the 10 weeks leading up to the election, a radio host named Ray Hadley (think Sean Hannity with less charisma) posted a "Top 10 important stories from this week" every Friday in the editorial section of the newspaper. This was then copied into The Australian, and also read out on radio stations like 2UE, 2GB and Macquarie Radio. And every week, the 1st story was always a running tally on ,"the number of asylum seekers who have invaded Australia because Kevin Rudd believes in open borders". I'm sure to everyone here has heard familiar rhetoric during the last election in the US.

Then the election occurred, Rudd lost handily and Abbott became Prime Minister. Literally overnight every Murdoch (fucking cunt) news outlet stopped reporting on the invasion of boat people and Ray Hadley's top 10 editorial once again became predications on who would win the footy on the weekend. The change of tone was so pronounced it was fucking jarring. Abbott then appointed a guy named Scott Morrison as his Immigration Minister.

A few months later, Morrison claimed victory and stated loudly and proudly that he has stopped the boats. And everybody agreed. Even Labor agreed, which was fucking stupid of them.

Because the reality wasn't the boats were stopped, it was the Abbott government stopped releasing any information about them.

So what does this mean with regards to Trump? I think we can all agree Trump is a lazy cunt. The fucker has never done a full days work in his life. The US media is already in his back pocket - I fucking gaurantee you will not here anything about the border from any news outlet until just before the mid terms, like what happened in Australia incidentally. And mass deportations is a huge logistical task - Trump doesn't have the brains or the stamina to follow through. It would be far simpler for him to sack all the people in government reporting on border crossing than it is actually fixing the problem.


So TLDR; I think it is possible Trump will order Musk to eviscerate the CBP, have a bunch of fake military parades happen in Texas because he loves that shit, and then a few months later when the number of incidents at the border nose dives because there's no border patrol anymore the media will call it a success and claim Trump has changed and he is actually being presidential this time around.

And too many people are going to fucking fall for it, again.

Patooka said:

It would be far simpler for him to sack all the people in government reporting on border crossing than it is actually fixing the problem.

Click to expand...

Well we know Rump is going to dismantle the Weather Service to stop bad news about climate change.

I still question his or his potential administration's ability to use the military to achieve this outcome. The United States Department of Defense is not some concealed weapon that you get to pull out and point at all of your perceived problems.

aa

SCOTUS will fully back him on defining migrants as a national emergency and using the military to meet the crisis. We're going to be seeing this in 9 weeks or so. The courts martial on all the generals who didn't kiss Trump's orange ass, who knows, late spring? Morale in the forces should just skyrocket. MFC, ever'body! (C = Christmas.)

Alcoholic Actuary said:

I still question his or his potential administration's ability to use the military to achieve this outcome. The United States Department of Defense is not some concealed weapon that you get to pull out and point at all of your perceived problems.

aa

Click to expand...

Well that's the question, isn't it? Allegedly, he's planning to remove leadership that refuses to follow his orders no matter what. Will he be able to pull this off? He wants to put a Fox News host in charge of DoD. Will the "generals" that Trump has such disdain for step aside at the whim of the wannabe dictator and his puppet?

This idea that a slight numerical majority in the voting box somehow equals unequivocal support for Trump, especially when so many of those most concerned lack the right to vote, pisses me off. "Winner takes all" is a fundamentally anti-social and also fucking stupid philosophy. What are we, fifteen year olds duking it out for control of the student body government? 2%? 5%? Those aeen't numbers indicating a clear mandate from the body politic, or justification for political inaction when evil actions are planned.

Ford said:

Alcoholic Actuary said:

I still question his or his potential administration's ability to use the military to achieve this outcome. The United States Department of Defense is not some concealed weapon that you get to pull out and point at all of your perceived problems.

aa

Click to expand...

Well that's the question, isn't it? Allegedly, he's planning to remove leadership that refuses to follow his orders no matter what. Will he be able to pull this off? He wants to put a Fox News host in charge of DoD. Will the "generals" that Trump has such disdain for step aside at the whim of the wannabe dictator and his puppet?

Click to expand...

I would estimate that to be no fewer than 750 individuals in senior leadership positions (O-6 and E-8 or above) throughout the US Military, regardless of the cheesedick he wants to appoint to the Secretary of Defense, that would have to be on board to pull this off. SCOTUS only has discretionary review of cases appealed by UCMJ so once any one commander says 'we're standing down' it could take years before the determination of the outcome and potential replacement of that commander comes to pass.

He's better off using the federal resources at his disposal like ICE and DEA (if the immigrants are actual 'drug dealers').

aa