ajaMD

@lsferguson Roberts will play his usually card that it is up to Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment. What’s he’s actually saying is that historically SCOTUS interpretations have fucked this up. But you know, stare decisis.

If the Supreme Court doesn't end birthright citizenship, it will have codified the largest invasion in world history

@Mark4XX You’ve lost your audience.. Could have just focused on PM. Viewership is dying

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attacks Trump now: “You must send your soldiers to Iran, as you said, to open the Strait of Hormuz if you are brave and stand by your word. Don’t talk so much, just send your powerful soldiers to Iran.” “And if you are afraid to send them by plane as happened before, we will send you an Iranian plane to transport them.” “I tell you: within 30 days, in front of the whole world, the Strait of Hormuz will be closed by order of Iranian sovereignty, and no one will dare to open it, not even after 100 years.” “Ask your friend Netanyahu what we are doing to him and his people every day; we are plunging them into a constant nightmare, and you will soon be rid of this nightmare.” “This is the first time he has spoken in this manner since the beginning of the war. Truly powerful words.”

@MDJD2 @JonathanTurley Moronic physician/attorney.

Birthright citizenship traces its origin back to 1608 British Common Law. The Supreme Court case Wong Kim Ark in 1898 affirmed it in the United States. We became the greatest power on earth with birthright citizenship. It's not an existential threat as white nationalists claim.

The Hill just posted my column on the possible need for a 28th amendment on citizenship after the Supreme Court rules in Trump v. Barbara. The combination of open borders and open-ended citizenship is an existential threat to this Republic...thehill.com/opinion/immigr…

In Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court decided that a native Indian who had renounced allegiance to his tribe did not become “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States by virtue of the renunciation. “The alien and dependent condition of the members of the Indian Tribes could not be put off at their own will, without the action or assent of the United States” signified either by treaty or legislation. Neither the “Indian Tribes” nor “individual members of those Tribes,” no more than “other foreigners” can “become citizens of their own will.” - Edward J. Erler, Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute and Professor Emeritus at California State, San Bernadino

@DrDCH @BarstoolUofM Need to dominate fast break points.

@BarstoolUofM If Michigan hits more 3s than Arizona tomorrow and limit turnovers to under 10, they win.

Enjoy this video of Michigan not missing from three at open practice

@amuse More Leonard Leo sh*t nominated by Trump? Donald is batting less than 33%.

SCOTUS: Thankfully Justice Alito was alright, but he really needs to retire. Same goes for Justice Thomas. They've done great work but we need to secure those seats for the next decade.

@ryanswalters73 Liberals can’t understand Jefferson’s prose..

Thomas Jefferson on Immigration: “Is rapid population growth by as great importations of foreigners as possible... founded in good policy?... They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass. If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship: but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements.” - Notes on Virginia

@QuixoteSword @JoeySchmittPhD @ReichlinMelnick 100% ,Sword…

@JoeySchmittPhD @ReichlinMelnick The writers of the Amendment stated, in no uncertain terms, that it would in no way apply to the children of aliens. They stated it in plain English. Here, I've attached it for you. Do you care at all about the truth, or do you just care about devaluing citizenship?

Ridiculous! The very fact that they CAN be arrested, charged, and hopefully sentenced for this planned attack means that they ARE subject to U.S. jurisdiction! Otherwise they'd be able to get away with their crime free!

@Notwokenow @dom_lucre Who really gives a shit. Life moves faster than her emotional feelings

@dom_lucre Anyone know who the hell she is? Without googling it.

🔥🚨JUST IN: Hollywood actress Laura Benanti was in complete disbelief as not nobody recognized her on a plane. Benanti: “Not a single one of them recognized me and I could not tolerate that obviously.”

@MorosKostas Do they become liberals on the bench or do they get sucked into the liberal extortion of the DC grift?

Another constant frustration with the judiciary is that often Republican-appointed judges end up being liberals on the bench. But it almost never goes the other way; I can't think of many examples of Democrat-appointed judges becoming reliably conservative on the bench.

@ASFleischman The U.S. government should perform tubal ligation on every foreign female coming into the U.S. Let’s call it “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”…..

The United States could pass a law tomorrow forbidding entry to any pregnant foreign national. Wouldn't require a constitutional amendment either.

@ArmstrongEcon This is what Hillary Clinton would have done . They are bookends.

Here we have Angela Merkel, who has also just ADMITTED that she deliberately flooded Germany with third-world migrants to “stop the far right.” It was demographic warfare. It is outright TREASON.

@PaulRChase @DrJStrategy Sour grapes from a limie? You Brits need some serious self analysis..

Well, here are my thoughts... Firstly, I doubt that Trump has ever heard of Hegel or would have the slightest inkling of what 'dialectic' means. But the picture you present is essentially Trump's narrative - that NATO allies and others are free-riders on American hard power. But your analysis is ahistorical. You write as if America has no skin in the game - like they're doing the rest of us a big favour keeping the bad guys at bay. You don't mention the petrodollar system that replaced the Bretton-Woods Agreement that was repudiated by the 'Nixon-shock' in 1974. That new system was a deal between the US and Saudi Arabia, and then the other Gulf petrostates, whereby in return for American guarantees of security and investment these states would price and sell oil in US Dollars - and then recycle the Dollar surplus back into the US economy by buying US debt. It is this arrangement that has created an almost limitless demand for US loan notes and funded 50 years-worth of US budget deficits. Part of that US security guarantee was to keep the Hormuz Strait open so the oil exports could keep flowing. But in this present conflict America has failed to defend its Gulf allies from Iran's retaliatory strikes and now the Hormuz Strait is closed. This is a strategic catastrophe for the US - proving themselves to be unreliable allies to the very states that buy their debt. This could be the fulcrum on which the petrodollar system is undermined or even collapses and the Yuan becomes the currency for pricing oil. This isn't some Trump-genius Hegelian dialectic working its way through, it's a god-almighty cock-up by a President being manipulated by a Zionist Israeli leader. The tail wagging the dog nearly always leads to disaster.

Food for thought. Trump, Hormuz and the End of the Free Ride For half a century, Western strategists have known that the Strait of Hormuz is the acute point where energy, sea power and political will intersect. That knowledge is not in dispute. What is new in this war with Iran is that the United States, under Donald Trump, has chosen not to rush to “solve” the problem. In Hegelian terms, he is refusing an easy synthesis in order to force the underlying contradiction to the surface. The old thesis was simple: the US guarantees open sea lanes in the Gulf, and everyone else structures their economies and politics around that free insurance. Europe and the UK embraced ambitious green policies, ran down hard‑power capabilities and lectured Washington on multilateral virtue, secure in the assumption that American carriers would always appear off Hormuz. The political class behaved as if the American security guarantee were a law of nature, not a contingent choice. Their conduct today is closer to Chamberlain than Churchill: temporising, issuing statements, hoping the storm will pass without a fundamental reordering of their responsibilities. Trump’s antithesis is to withhold the automatic guarantee at the moment of maximum stress. Militarily, the US can break Iran’s residual ability to contest the Strait; that is not the binding constraint. The point is to delay that act. By allowing a closure or semi‑closure to bite, Trump ensures that the immediate pain is concentrated in exactly the jurisdictions that have most conspicuously free‑ridden on US power: the EU and the UK. Their industries, consumers and energy‑transition assumptions are exposed. In that context, his reported blunt message to European and British leaders, you need the oil out of the Strait more than we do; why don’t you go and take it? Is not a throwaway line. It is the verbalisation of the antithesis. It openly reverses the traditional presumption that America will carry the burden while its allies emote from the sidelines. In this dialectic, the prize is not simply the reopening of a chokepoint. The prize is a reordered system in which the United States effectively arbitrages and controls the global flow of oil. A world in which US‑aligned production in the Americas plus a discretionary capability to secure,or not secure, Hormuz places Washington at the centre of the hydrocarbon chessboard. For that strategic end, a rapid restoration of the old status quo would be counterproductive. A quick, surgical “fix” of Hormuz would short‑circuit the dialectic. If Trump rapidly crushed Iran’s remaining coastal capabilities, swept the mines and escorted tankers back through the Strait, Europe and the UK would heave a sigh of relief and return to business as usual: underfunded militaries, maximalist green posturing and performative disdain for US power, all underwritten by that same power. The contradiction between their dependence and their posture would remain latent. By declining to supply the synthesis on demand, and by explicitly telling London and Brussels to “go and take it” themselves, Trump forces a reckoning. European and British leaders must confront the fact that their energy systems, their industrial bases and their geopolitical sermons all rest on an American hard‑power foundation they neither finance nor politically respect. The longer the contradiction is allowed to unfold, the stronger the eventual synthesis can be: a new order in which access to secure flows, Hormuz, Venezuela and beyond, is explicitly conditional on real contributions, not assumed as a right. In that sense, the delay in “taking” the Strait, and the challenge issued to US allies to do it themselves, is not indecision. It is the negative moment Hegel insisted was necessary for history to move. Only by withholding the old guarantee, and by saying so out loud to those who depended on it, can Trump hope to end the free ride.

@dom_lucre That's a doppelganger.

🔥🚨BREAKING: Buckingham Palace just confirmed King Charles will not issue an Easter message this year. This comes after he addressed Islamic holidays instead.

Worth the read. Trump’s foreign policy motives are not exactly what you read in the media. nofilterjustfacts.substack.com/p/the-empire-t…

@feb2ndday @blargh373362 @USronaldcarter You have no fucking clue here ,Sparky nofilterjustfacts.substack.com/p/the-empire-t…

Trump doesn't give two fucks about what the US pays to NATO. He's pissed off because he hasn't figured out how he personally can grift off the European allies to enrich himself. When he can make money off of leaving NATO, when he can extort them to make himself or his buddies richer, that's when he'll do it. Otherwise it's nothing but his same old bullshit.

🚨 NOBODY KNOWS HOW FUCKED NATO ACTUALLY IS RIGHT NOW. In the last 72 hours, watch who walked away: 🇫🇷 France: Blocked US military overflight for weapons to Israel — FIRST TIME since war began Feb 28. Israel cut ALL defense procurement from France. 🇮🇹 Italy: Denied Sigonella air base landing to US bombers. Defense Minister said relations are "solid and loyal." DAYS after blocking US planes. 🇪🇸 Spain: Closed ENTIRE airspace to US operations. Blocked Naval Station Rota AND Morón Air Base. PM Sánchez called it "not NATO collective defense." 🇵🇱 Poland: Refused to redeploy Patriot batteries. US burned through 1,200+ interceptors in 16 days. Poland said no. 🇨🇭 Switzerland: Denied 2 US reconnaissance flights. Suspended $120,000,000 in weapons exports under "neutrality laws." 🇬🇧 UK: PM said "this is not our war." Trump told them to "build up some delayed courage." 🇩🇪 Germany: President Steinmeier called war "possibly illegal." WHILE hosting Ramstein — largest US base outside America. That is: France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Switzerland, UK, and Germany. All in ONE week. When this many allies abandon you at once, it's not a disagreement. It's a collapse.

@feb2ndday @USronaldcarter Bend over for the Bank of England, the City of London and Lloyd’s, Rickie. Another shill for the EU technocrats and oligarchs

@USronaldcarter NATO isn't fucked. Trump is. Because he's always been a fucking asshole. The whole world knows it. They're telling him to go fuck himself.

@superbucks2050 @shipwreckedcrew Surely, SCOTUS can..

@shipwreckedcrew I've been arguing this for a while now. Surely, SCOTUS can't be that stupid or venal, can they?

Nightmare: Eventually 10 million Chinese nationals become U.S. citizens via birthright citizenship. Vote by mail adopted nearly nationwide. Vote by mail ballots forwarded en masse to US citizens who are actually Chinese nationals. CCP directs mass mail-in of ballots all in favor of the same candidate. CCP controls outcome of U.S. POTUS elections.

@PulseOrbit @EricLDaugh The Left has become originalists today for 14 A and birthright citizenship. Now do the 2A…

Alito and Sauer are doing legal gymnastics to rewrite the 14th Amendment. The framers wrote “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” after the Civil War to guarantee citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil. They knew exactly what they were doing. Comparing illegal immigration to a “microwave oven” is a cute analogy, but it doesn’t erase the plain text or 150+ years of settled law. This isn’t about originalism; it’s about Trump needing a culture war win while ignoring real crises. Get that through y’all’s heads. SCOTUS should uphold the Constitution, not bend it for today’s political panic. Republicans are like little children, you have to keep reminding and teaching them the same lessons over and over. Lord have mercy.

🚨 BREAKING: SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito says it PERFECTLY on birthright citizenship He suggests that just because illegal aliens were not a problem at the time the 14th Amendment was adopted does NOT mean they shouldn't be addressed today Nailed it. ALITO: "Justice Scalia had an example that dealt with this situation. He imagined an old theft statute that was enacted well before anybody conceived of a microwave oven, and then afterwards someone is charged with the crime of stealing a microwave oven, and this fellow says, well, I can't be convicted under this because the microwave oven didn't exist at that time." "And he dismissed that. There's a general rule there, and you apply it to future applications. And what we're dealing with here is something that was basically unknown at the time when the 14th Amendment was adopted, which is illegal immigration. So how do we deal with that situation when we have a general rule?" JOHN SAUER: "Yeah, I strongly agree with the way that you framed it, that there is a general principle that's a broad principle that's adopted in the phrase, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, and we submit that our theory of allegiance and domicile-based allegiance is what explains those specific exceptions that everybody was aware of, but it is broad enough to sweep in future situations, and as you pointed out, illegal immigration did not exist then." You can almost ALWAYS count on Alito!

Meh, the Left answers to no one.. Both parties in Congress are satisfied to eat away at the carcass of the country like maggots consuming a gangrenous appendage . Those leaving Congress know that their grifting gig has been well exposed to a critical mass. Those that remain are either brain dead (think Turtle)or just so early in their heist that they have not adequately monetized the dying fiat.

The birthright citizenship case this morning is really more about politics than it is the law. If the Administration loses nothing of substance will change. But the debate has been joined, and taken to the very highest level of discourse. Two years ago no one would have even imagined this issue would be before the Supreme Court. But Pres. Trump FORCED it there. As is true in many areas of his second term, he has swung for the fences on this topic. It is worth the effort but it falls in the category of "Nothing ventured, nothing gained." Even an adverse decision won't end the debate. It will simply redirect the debate to a different forum where the political branches will need to confront it. The Democrats and open border advocates among the socialists and communists never imagined that the building of their constituencies would come under attack in this fashion. But the debate has exposed that this is about so much more that migrant illegals coming to the US and starting families, with their children being citizens. This is about a vulnerability to our country, our governance, and our culture to the deliberate and purposeful colonization via mass third-world migration with malicious political, cultural, and religious goals.