It's Actually Helping Them....Let's Stop It Now!

[Pioneer1]

"We're going to make America great again!
We're going to send federal officers around America to round up the illegal immigrants!
We're going to send in the actual military itself to major cities around this nation to round up Black criminals and lock them up and out of our society!
That'll make these liberals and these blue city mayors squirm and cry....but we don't care!"



After sending them in................

 

 

 

 

 

     
 

 

 

"Uh....wait a minute.
You mean Black resident were actually HAPPY to see a reduction in crime and violence?
We were hoping for riots and rebellions against this....not "thank you" notes and fucking love letters.

STOP THE OPERATIONS!

STOP THEM NOW!

 

STOP THE ICE RAIDS AND PULL THE TROOPS OUT OF THE CITIES!

And guys....
The next time we come up with plans to institute draconian laws and policies to oppress people....make sure they don't fucking BENEFIT them at the same time....jeez!"
 

[ProfD]

The stunts were mainly done to satisfy racist white folks in rural America. 

 

ICE raids and National Guard troop deployment in major Black cities made white folks feel like law and order was being restored in their country.

 

Funny thing is white folks living in Blue cities were not adversely affected by crimes there. 

 

Just like anywhere else in the USA, the victims and perpetrators of crime are usually of the same race.

 

I find it amusing that folks can mind somebody else's business instead of cleaning up their own backyard. 

 

White folks living in red states have crystal meth drug addicts with teeth falling out and living on SNAP benefits. NO shortage of crime there.

 

But, white folks are more worried about Black folks shooting each other in major cities.

[Pioneer1]

2 hours ago, ProfD said:

 

ICE raids and National Guard troop deployment in major Black cities made white folks feel like law and order was being restored in their country.

 

They weren't deployed in Michigan.
My handful of relatives in the DMV said...as you...they were only deployed in the tourist areas of the city.
I imagine the same is in Chicago and Memphis.
My relatives in Chicago said they haven't seen them.

What I think happened was the GANGSTAS....who aren't very politically aware and don't focus on the news much...heard Trump was sending the troops in and assumed they were going to slide through the hood like an avalanche with automatic weapons crushing everything in sight...so they ran up in the house and hid, lol.

Well....
Whatever the hell their intention and strategy was, it made a lot of these fools get some ACT RIGHT.

And just like announcing their deployment made some of these clowns put the gats away and go into hiding....announcing their departure will probably have the OPPOSITE effect.
 

[ProfD]

6 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

They weren't deployed in Michigan.

Detroit might have come up at some point after testing in DC, Chicago and Memphis.

 

6 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

What I think happened was the GANGSTAS....who aren't very politically aware and don't focus on the news much...heard Trump was sending the troops in and assumed they were going to slide through the hood like an avalanche with automatic weapons crushing everything in sight...so they ran up in the house and hid, lol.

Sure.  Folks are smart enough to chill out until the dust settles. 

 

No different from someone stomping out a cigarette or weed when authority figures show up.

 

6 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Well....
Whatever the hell their intention and strategy was, it made a lot of these fools get some ACT RIGHT.

Not really.  30 days isn't long enough for permanent change.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

And just like announcing their deployment made some of these clowns put the gats away and go into hiding....announcing their departure will probably have the OPPOSITE effect.

Folks will go back to business as usual. 

 

The real question is why can't the local police instill the same level of fear.

[Pioneer1]

10 minutes ago, ProfD said:

 

The real question is why can't the local police instill the same level of fear.

Since I know that's a rhetorical question, I won't waste your time or intelligence with an answer.

But I sincerely thought that they were going to stay much longer.
They aren't even TRYING to look sincere anymore.

Like I said earlier, I'm not Trump's biggest fan....but I thought atleast the ONE benefit I would see with him would be a crack-down on crime and illegal immigrants...even if it were just for show.
 

[ProfD]

3 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Like I said earlier, I'm not Trump's biggest fan....but I thought atleast the ONE benefit I would see with him would be a crack-down on crime and illegal immigrants...even if it were just for show.

Well, the crack down was definitely for show.  The circus came and went; packed up their clowns and tent.

[Pioneer1]

Some National Guard troops being withdrawn from Chicago and Portland, official says

 

The Trump administration sent the troops to those cities last month, saying they were needed to support domestic immigration enforcement personnel who were being confronted by activists and protesters.

However, the troops never joined immigration operations in those cities because of lawsuits challenging their deployment.

 

 

Some National Guard troops being withdrawn from Chicago and Portland, official says

 

 

 -Yeah right......"lawsuits" stopped him from actually deploying troops to crime ridden areas or helping round up illegal immigrants.

Since when did Trump or any other president let "lawsuits" stop them from deploying troops to do whatever they wanted done?

They sent in the National Guard to KILL people in the Los Angeles riots.
The Army and Marines too.

Like we suspected.
A fucking dog and pony show.

[ProfD]

Deploying National Guard troops in US cities is a show.

 

US government blowing up fishing boats in international waters under the guise of narco-terrorism is very real with about 80 people unalived.

[Pioneer1]

ProfD

Talk about being a mind reader..........

When I first read your post I thought it was in response to MY giving the recent military actions in Venezuela that Trump has been ordering without Congressional approval.
Then I notice you don't quote me as usual and when I went back up and re-read MY post.....I realize that I hadn't mentioned it.

I was GOING to offer those boat attacks as recent examples but for some reason didn't do so.
Maybe was distracted with something else at home...lol....but I left it out; however YOU obviously were up on what's going on over there.

I've also read rumors of the U.S. military preparing for an imminent GROUND invasion.

[ProfD]

25 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

When I first read your post I thought it was in response to MY giving the recent military actions in Venezuela that Trump has been ordering without Congressional approval.

I've also read rumors of the U.S. military preparing for an imminent GROUND invasion.

Not a mind reader but gotcha bro. 

 

I'm waiting to see how that Venezuela situation plays out.

 

A US military ground invasion would completely jump the shark. It would criminal.

[Pioneer1]

37 minutes ago, ProfD said:

 

A US military ground invasion would completely jump the shark. It would criminal.

....since when has THAT stopped 'em?

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

....since when has THAT stopped 'em?

The US has never invaded a sovereign nation without provocation and Congressional approval.

[Pioneer1]

Here we go with the bullshit...........

Judge Says Trump’s National Guard Deployment In Washington, D.C., Was Illegal

1. If it was "illegal" for him to deploy them, they why were they ALLOWED to deploy in the first place?
It doesn't take 2 months to figure out if something is actually against the law or not.

2. It's my understanding that some of them are STILL there.
So it it's illegal...why are the troops that are still there being allowed to stay at this very moment?

3. What kind of nation do we live in where ONE judge says something is ok and ANOTHER judge on the other side of the country says it's not.
There are THOUSANDS of judges in this nation.
We can play this game with just about any law or action.

How about a judge declaring it illegal for all Black people to be imprisoned because of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation?
How about a judge pull THAT one off?

[ProfD]

4 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Judge Says Trump’s National Guard Deployment In Washington, D.C., Was Illegal

1. If it was "illegal" for him to deploy them, they why were they ALLOWED to deploy in the first place?

POTUS OJ ordered it be done. The Republican led Congress wasn't going to stop it. 

 

Just like everything else, once it reached the judicial level, a judge decided it was wrong. 

 

 

4 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

It doesn't take 2 months to figure out if something is actually against the law or not.

It took that long to go before the court.

4 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

2. It's my understanding that some of them are STILL there.
So it it's illegal...why are the troops that are still there being allowed to stay at this very moment?

The judicial branch doesn't have the power to order troops be sent home. They can only rule in legality.

 

4 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

3. What kind of nation do we live in where ONE judge says something is ok and ANOTHER judge on the other side of the country says it's not.
There are THOUSANDS of judges in this nation.
We can play this game with just about any law or action.

We live in a nation with three (3) branches of government..executive, legislative and judicial. 

 

4 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

How about a judge declaring it illegal for all Black people to be imprisoned because of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation?
How about a judge pull THAT one off?

Someone has to bring that case before the court before a judge can decide it.

 

There is a separation of powers between the branches of government. They each have a role to play and a process to follow.

[Pioneer1]

ProfD

 

 

Just like everything else, once it reached the judicial level, a judge decided it was wrong.

 

A judge can't DECIDE that something is illegal.
Either it IS or it's NOT.

Presidents and Governors have the right to deploy National Guard Troops where they please.
So I'm not buying that.

If what Trump did was actually illegal, he wouldn't have been ABLE to do it from the jump.

Like I said earlier, they are simply just reducing the troops because the SHOW is over.
Not because some judge told them to.
 

 

It took that long to go before the court.

It didn't NEED to go to court because there was no question about whether or not the Administration could do it.
He clearly could...and did.

That's like saying we need to go "before the court" before deciding whether or not to send some illegal aliens back home.
If they do that...it's a GAME they're engaging in to stall and eventually release them back into the public.
Because clearly you don't need a court to decide something the law has made crystal clear.


Presidents deploy National Guards all the time for this reason or that reason, and the legality is never questioned.


 

 

 

The judicial branch doesn't have the power to order troops be sent home. They can only rule in legality.

The judicial branch doesn't determine whether or not something is legal or illegal.
The LEGISLATIVE BRANCH does that.....they MAKE the laws.
The Judicial Branch determines whether or not the law which has already been made was violated/infringed.

Clearly they haven't been OR all the past Presidents who deployed the National Guard for one reason or another would have been violating the law too, and the issue has never been brought up.

Commander and chief means just that.
 

 

 

 

 

We live in a nation with three (3) branches of government..executive, legislative and judicial.

I understand that.

Again, the judges don't make the laws....they only determine whether or not they have been violated or infringed upon.

There is no law saying the Commander and Chief can't deploy troops.





Someone has to bring that case before the court before a judge can decide it.

The decision has been made already.
We have the right.
No need to "renew" something every few years that is constitutionally guaranteed to us.
 

 

 

There is a separation of powers between the branches of government. They each have a role to play and a process to follow

You mean they each have a role to play in the GAME they're playing on the public...lol

They're PRETENDING that they are at odds with eachother when they're really all on the same page and have had this planned out months if not years in advance.

There is no confusion as to whether or not Trump has the legal right to do what he's doing.
He clearly does.