tequila4kapp said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.

---

This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.

---

Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

---

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?

---

American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.

---

I don't think you understood the question.

---

I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.

---

The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

---

Not fine/good. There's no evidence thus far that he "led" the protests, only that he served as a negotiator for the student group. The government has openly admitted that they are not charging him with a crime. It would be unprecedented to deport a green card holder for this.

EU liberal insanity.

🇪🇺🇸🇾 Ursula von der Leyen: “Syria can become a country where everybody can speak their mind and everyone is equal, men and women alike!”

LMAO … Baerbock can’t even get a handshake and her chair was put far away from the Syrian president, not very alike? pic.twitter.com/nLHdx21wOE

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) March 21, 2025

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.

---

This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.

---

Couldn't agree more sycasey...An overreach to be sure...Spell out how what he is being charged with relates to why he is being deported...I disagree strongly with what he has said, not his right to say it...

Future Democrat voters?

There is a hearing at 2:30 pm ET today on the Govt motion to vacate the TROs entered last Saturday by Judge Boasberg in the case involving the removal of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua members as "alien enemies."

"Why are these guys smiling?" pic.twitter.com/IF1VFYKbEe

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) March 21, 2025

Stop at four margaritas, but VallejoWags loves those five margarita gals!

🇺🇸 Feminist anti drug/alcohol activist tries to make the students stop drinking.

But it went wrong I think

Activists these days … LMAO pic.twitter.com/xyFsmsXySy

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) March 21, 2025

tequila4kapp said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.

---

This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.

---

Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

---

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?

---

American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.

---

I don't think you understood the question.

---

I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.

---

The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.

---

What's a hroip?

movielover said:

---

Stop at four margaritas, but VallejoWags loves those five margarita gals!

🇺🇸 Feminist anti drug/alcohol activist tries to make the students stop drinking.

But it went wrong I think

Activists these days … LMAO pic.twitter.com/xyFsmsXySy

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) March 21, 2025

---

Stoney Burke's niece?



lol, Stoney rips into Tedford, must have been towards the end of JT's tenure...

SFCityBear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.

---

This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.

---

Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

---

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?

---

American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.

---

I don't think you understood the question.

---

I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.

---

The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.

---

What's a hroip?

---

She is the reincarnation of Holy Hubert.


"God Bless your dirty heart."

If I had to see it, you have to as well…

Students are strangely protesting President Trump and Elon Musk at Georgia State University.

What is wrong with these people?
pic.twitter.com/mdB4UG6KRz

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) March 21, 2025

Cal88 said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

A UW fellow and Georgetown PHD candidate have been detained for deportation. Based on what I'm seeing so far they have 'supported' Hezbellah (with words) and associated with Hamas (the PHD candidates' father in law was an advisor to a Hamas leader). Unless there are additional facts indicating something more than thoughts/words/family members...this is a step too far, wrong and un-American.

---

This fits with the same pattern as the Columbia student who got arrested. The government still has not presented any evidence of actual material support for terrorism from him either . . . again, it's all just speech. This all sets a very, very bad precedent.

---

Yes, speech is the link. Why do you think green card and visa holders can say anything they want? They cannot. If they would have told the government they were pro-hamas before entering they would have been denied entry. Green card holders are not naturalized citizens. Their entrance into the United States comes with responsibility. We do not want to be importing people into the USA that cause social disruption, that would be catastrophic.

---

Would you feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot, and permanent residents were getting deported by a Democrat administration for protesting against say, covid mandates, or other activities deemed "socially disruptive" by the administration in office?

---

American born citizens are not the same as GUESTS to the USA. They literally can not do that.

---

I don't think you understood the question.

---

I understand the question, but I'm not falling to appeals of emotion. The law is pretty clear here. If Democrats had a way to deport conservatives they would 100% do it. but they don't.

---

The first guy led demonstrations that denied Jews access to education, distributed pro-Hamas materials, Jews were threatened at protests. That's not exactly plotting the next 9/11, but fine. Affirmative actions were taken that denied other's rights and advocated for a terrorist hroip. Fine / good, get rid of him.

The Georgetown guy has a father in law that advised a Hamas leader. We are America. This isn't 1950s McCarthyism - we don't punish people for mere associations and beliefs. Even for green card holders.

---

What's a hroip?

---

---

"Thanks ever so."

Marilyn M.

Totally Organic protests are happening in 75% red states to tell those dastardly Senators off!!'

Cal88 said:

---

---

Narrator: "When Virgil Starkwell was released from prison, he made a meager living, selling meagers door to door."

RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

Greenpeace loses lawsuit over Dakota Access Pipeline for $667 million in Mandan, North Dakota (not far from Minot ) (I just copied the first few paragraphs, you can click if you want to read the rest)

Link to story


Greenpeace backed radical protesters who tried to block a North Dakota pipeline. Now the pipeline company has won huge damages in a lawsuit against the iconic NGO. Other nonprofits should take notice.

On Wednesday, a jury in Mandan, North Dakota returned a stunning verdict against Greenpeace for its role in the violent protests and misleading PR campaign that disrupted construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016. The jury hearing the civil lawsuit found Greenpeace USA and two other Greenpeace entities liable for civil conspiracy, defamation, trespass, and other misdeeds. If the verdict stands, the storied environmental nonprofit will have to pay $667 million in damages to plaintiff Energy Transfer, the pipeline company that built and owns the DAPL.

The decision wasn't entirely unexpected. In fact, Greenpeace had tried (and failed) to get the trial location changed, asserting that a jury in that oil-producing region would be biased in favor of the plaintiff. Nonetheless, the sheer size of the damages awarded will send shock waves through the loose networks of nonprofit groups that support disruptive protests around the nation.

In a City Journal article about the case, I noted similarities between the anti-pipeline protests near North Dakota's Standing Rock Indian Reservation and other mass actions, including Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and the anti-Israel demonstrations that erupted around the United States after the October 7 attacks. Making an analogy to hybrid warfare, I described these as "hybrid protests," in which masses of peaceful demonstrators are joined by smaller groups of trained agitators who tip the events toward violence. As Park MacDougald has reported, these loose networks of troublemakers are often financially supported "by a vast web of progressive nonprofits, NGOs, foundations, and dark-money groups."

Energy Transfer's suit against Greenpeace represents the first major success in exposing and penalizing the putatively legitimate nonprofits that funnel money and material support to the lawbreakers embedding themselves in these hybrid protests. If the enormous verdict survives the inevitable appeals, it will be a major shot across the bows of progressive organizations that quietly foment political mayhem while maintaining plausible deniability.

Don't forget to carry your papers, everyone!

ICE arrested US-born citizen Julio Noriega. He spent most of the night in immigration detention.

But Noriega was lucky - he carried his Social Security card on him. If he didn’t, he could have been there much longer.

Americans carry their papers and still get detained by ICE. pic.twitter.com/S2sjkWBJsa

— The Alex Nowrasteh (@AlexNowrasteh) March 21, 2025

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Totally Organic protests are happening in 75% red states to tell those dastardly Senators off!!'

---

I assume you mean "totally organic", as Schumer has admitted it's a coordinated effort by the D party and NGOs

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

find your next Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

Chelsea?

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

find your next Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

Chelsea?

---

I am not dialed in enough to name names. Newsom has a chance. He's a governor and he's got time to create a different narrative about his politics. Everyone else on that list is virtually unelectable at the national level.

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.

---

Which is a big deal in politics.

Kamala has the experience, she needs time to put her team together, she is a proud POC, a woman, three oppressed groups rolled into one... I'm for her.

Kamala 2028!

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.

---

Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.

movielover said:

---

RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.

---

Paging concordtom. Paging concordtom:

I found this on the "Breaking News" thread instead of the "Obituaries" thread, which you created just for this purpose.


(Rather than thinking of myself as a snitch, I am helping concordtom to keep this forum organized. You're welcome.)

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.

---

Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.

---

Likewise Barack Obama in 2005. You don't know who might emerge when there's an open primary.

Big C said:

---

movielover said:

---

RIP George Foreman 76.

His comeback was the best, but I never understood naming all his sons George.

---

Paging concordtom. Paging concordtom:

I found this on the "Breaking News" thread instead of the "Obituaries" thread, which you created just for this purpose.


(Rather than thinking of myself as a snitch, I am helping concordtom to keep this forum organized. You're welcome.)

---

I get so many media alerts that I can usually post an obit within a few minutes after it is announced….and I am very afraid of concordtom.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/100433/replies/2479240

Doesn't sound pleasant.

Most insufferable person on the planet pic.twitter.com/q0ObsRdwCH

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 22, 2025

This would be huge.

For too long, corrupt Big Law attorneys violated the law and defrauded the U.S. via their dishonest representation in and statements to federal courts.

Trump has not nuked them here—not yet—but he is making abundantly clear that the missiles are armed and locked on target. pic.twitter.com/LqgqIt7wyh

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 22, 2025

Trump has mediocre loyalist legal minds advising him. He is going to cost the federal government millions of dollars in damages awarded because of his unlawful conduct.

He has the additional problem of having few, if any, competent prosecutors in the DOJ. His crew of incompetent demagogue loyalist prosecutors are already f@ucking up during law and motion proceedings. They have never tried substantive cases in their careers.

On the SCOTUS, he can only rely 100% on the corruption of Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch to back his unlawful conduct.

That being the case, Trump has to go full dictator to exact revenge on his enemies. He has replaced the generals with loyalists. He can and will pull it off, and his base will fully embrace it. The gateway to dictatorship would be anti Vietnam War level national protests where he declares Martial Law.

Trump certainly can't count on his enemies paying extortion money like this one did:

Law firm Paul Weiss makes deal with Trump to escape executive order


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/21/paul-weiss-law-firm-trump-executive-order/82589374007/

Why are Democrats so eager to give child molesters light sentences?

🚨🇺🇸WISCONSIN JUDGE DEFENDS 4-YEAR SENTENCE FOR CHILD MOLESTER WHO RAPED 7-YEAR-OLD

Judge Susan Crawford sentenced a repeat child molester to just 4 years in prison for sexually assaulting a 7-year-old girl—then defended her decision: “I don’t regret that sentence.”

Crawford is… https://t.co/vdbaQiVMQm pic.twitter.com/QWcj3NkghZ

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 22, 2025

sycasey said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

NEW 2028 Poll: Kamala in 1st place, 36%. Buttigieg 2nd, 10%. AOC, Walz, Newsom statistical tie for 3rd, 5%.

Inject this directly into my veins

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025

---

OMG, D's just never learn. Get rid of these people and find your next Bill Clinton blue dog Democrat. Please.

---

This poll is little more than a name-recognition contest at this early stage. IMO whoever emerges to be the new leader/nominee will probably be someone who isn't near the top of that list right now.

---

Yeah, I haven't researched it, but I expect Trump had microscopic poll numbers in 2013.

---

Likewise Barack Obama in 2005. You don't know who might emerge when there's an open primary.

---

AOC.

movielover said:

---

Why are Democrats so eager to give child molesters light sentences?

---

And why are they so eager to read to children dressed in women's clothes and makeup?

Don't knock it until you've tried it!

KIDDING! (^)