Should the President suspend habeas corpus and arrest those invading our borders?


And again, just assigning this to me willy nilly gets you no where.

Andrew Napolitano’s take:

The man is a retired judge, and a constitutional textualist. Try answering what he’s saying.

And I mean be specific about it.


Napolitano’s “take” is wrong-headed and simply WRONG. No one has an unfettered “right” to enter the US without the U.S.'s permission any more than they have the “right” to enter my house without MY permission. That’s a STUPID argument and I’d expect better of a former “judge.”

Secondly, the 14th Amendment does NOT grant automatic citizenship to anyone born within the confines of the United States. It wasn’t INTENDED to and it actually DOESN’T. I thought you claimed that he was a “contextualist.” An illegal alien is NOT “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. He/she is “subject to the jurisdiction of his/her country of birth” unless otherwise naturalized somewhere else. Without at least one parent being an American citizen, any child born here is a citizen of his/her PARENTS’ country.


Then your saying rights are created by Government, not nature or God.

Citizenship is created by Governments. Thus, any rights it gates are also a creation of Government.

People have a natural right to free association, or they don’t.

People have a natural right to freedom of Contract, or they don’t.

If it’s a natural right, then it can’t be gated by citizenship or Government. Everyone must have it by virtue of being human.

Decide what it is Dave.

If natural rights only apply to citizens, then they aren’t natural rights. They’re rights Government gives to them.


… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men …

The Declaration of Independence makes it clear here that the Government does not give these rights to citizens but is obligated to defend them. Where is the obligation to defend these rights for every human being on the planet?


You will notice that Alaskaslim never addresses the issue of public safety. That is because, like his cohorts in the Democratic Party, it is of no importance to him. In fact, it is an impediment to his radical plans. All he wants is to flood the country with all persons who wish to come here, regardless of their intentions.

He has also expressed a desire to do away with the U.S. Dollar and replace with an international currency like Bitcoin. It does not matter him that Bitcoin has lost a lot of its value since he made this radical proposal. Once more he has shown a disregard for the rights of honest, hard-working Americans who have worked and saved and followed the rules.

I proposed to him that the dollar and Bitcoin could exist side by side with those who wished to participate in the Bitcoin experiment free to do so. That was not good enough for him. Bitcoin has to become the new, world-wide currency.

Alaskaslim wants to portray himself as a conservative. He uses his interpretation of “Natural Law,” an implied membership in the Tea Party and Barry Goldwater as his credentials. In fact, he is a radical left globalist who is looking to upset the entire social order of this country.


No. Andrew Napolitano ignores the documented legislative intent of our Constitution in order to promote his personal love affair with being a libertarian.

The fact is, our founders were very concerned about “invasions” and they expected immediate action to be taken should one occur!

Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 15: The Congress shall have the Power (to) provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Article IV, Section 4, Paragraph 1: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestics Violence.



Another lie by our Fifth Column media _ visa overstays is the major problem


See: Visa Overstays Outnumber Illegal Border Crossings, Trend Expected to Continue

March 7, 2017

”The majority of immigrants settling in the U.S. without authorization are first coming to the country legally, raising questions about the effectiveness of President Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexican border.”

Now, according to the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, in November of 2017, it cited recent numbers, and among the estimated 11.4 million unlawfully present non-citizens in the U.S., “half of that population is made up of visa overstayers, while the other half is comprised of individuals who have entered the United States without inspection.” __ LINK

The irrefutable fact is, we have a major illegal border crossing problem, and our Fifth Column actives, in our media and on Capitol Hill, want us to believe building a wall/barrier where the geographical terrain is not an obstacle to mass illegal border crossings is unnecessary because the vast majority of those unlawfully present in the United States are visa overstayers.

The truth is, illegal border crossings and visa overstays are the problem, and both need to be addressed.

NBC needs to stop its fake news about a wall/barrier not being necessary.


Illegal immigration is now costing American citizens over $18 billion a year in healthcare costs alone! Far more than the measly $5billion asked for to build a wall! LINK


The last “data” I saw on this issue was that only 40% of illegals here today were visa overstays. That means that SIXTY PERCENT are illegals who snuck across the border undetected or stowed away in a ship landing at one of our ports or otherwise got here without detection. The wall is ABSOLUTELY necessary to cut into that figure.


If they come here. You don’t have to expend resources to force observance elsewhere, but we are supposed to be a haven where they are observed.

English Common law, does nothing to treat a foreigner differently. A human being, is a human being.


I have, you’re just full of red herrings today.

If you want to ask me a question, ask it without the bull crap please.

Still not seeing any reply from you to Andrew Napolitano.

I made it nice and easy for you Send, so where’s my answer?



I was saying crypto was basically going to create null usage of Government currencies. The only thing “forcing” Government currencies out would be markets, and the only thing I wanted, was for Government to quit forcing out their competition.

You got it wrong Send. Can you be honest about this?


Do walls keep guns out?

Cognitive dissonance; Understanding Government can’t fully control guns, but acting as if it can control people.

No one can explain this contradiction to me.


I disagree with Judge Napolitao on the wall issue. I am not a member of a herd of sheep. Just because a conservative says something does not mean that I was follow them.


Cool, if you’re able to discern that he’s a conservative, then you can kindly knock off the nonsense.

And you can stop pretending Goldwater’s position would be any different.

The Founder’s philosophy is what it is, if it sounds alien or strange to you, then you didn’t study them very closely. Or John Locke. Or William Blackstone. Or anyone from the “Republican” movement in England circa the 18th century.

To be a Conservative in America is not to simply be a reactionary. It’s to conserve their ideas.


Like I said, I am not a sheep, nor do I intend to bend to cyber bullies.


I’m not the one making it personal.

If you can’t separate your person from the ideas you’re discussing, then you’re letting yourself be too fragile.


And if YOU, AS, can’t understand the difference between the late 19th Century and the 21st, then maybe YOU are doing the very same thing.


Said every liberal on the 2nd amendment, ever.

Unalienable is unalienable. It’s definition doesn’t change.


What in the HELL does the 2nd Amendment have to do with “suspending Habeas Corpus” or illegal immigration? Our country is VASTLY different vis a vis immigration today compared to the 1800s.


Natural rights don’t change, no matter the era.

People have as much a right to Freedom of Contract, and Freedom of Association, as they do to arming themselves.

The legal immigration system created illegal immigration, by violating Natural Law with cynical laws meant to prohibit immigration.

Just as Liberal states create black market gun problems, by instituting cynical gun laws meant to prohibit gun ownership.