José Padilla. A US citizen arrested on US soil. Held without charges, trial, or (for awhile) counsel. While the courts are very divided on the issue, this is a clear violation of a plain English reading of the constitution.
-- Doug
José Padilla. A US citizen arrested on US soil. Held without charges, trial, or (for awhile) counsel. While the courts are very divided on the issue, this is a clear violation of a plain English reading of the constitution.
-- Doug
Padilla WAS arrested by law enforcement agents. But all criminal charges were dropped and he was classified as an unlawful enemy combatant. He was turned over to the military where he spent years chained upside-down to a wall in a Charleston brig. Just like the folks at Guantanamo, he was not a criminal, not charged with a criminal offense, and, therefore, not subject to the constitutional safeguards afforded criminals.
He was held and tried under the president's Article II powers, not under those that begin "In all criminal prosecutions...(eg, 6th Amendment).
His citizenship was not a test. In the case of the eight German spies arrested in Long Island (see US vs Quirin), two were U.S. citizens. Six of the eight were executed.
During the Second World War, hundreds of thousands of German & Italian POWs were incarcerated in the United States (Texas alone had 13 POW camps). Of these, more than a handful carried U.S. (or dual) citizenship. Not one ever entered a U.S. courtroom.
How can someone be locked up and NOT be a criminal, you might ask? There are many classifications of folks who can be denied their liberty and not be criminals or accused of a criminal offense.
You're mixing criminal communication intercepts with those of the military. I maintain the military doesn't need a warrant (courts have only recently said otherwise) to intercept enemy communications, even if the communication is from one side of Duluth to the other.
Once upon a time, maybe (like 1870). But at least since the days of Lyndon Johnson and Ralph Yarborough, most have been as liberal as possible.
Desertion in the face of enemy fire, or going absent without leave is a classic Democratic ploy. When the Democratic members of the House decamped to New Mexico, their compatriots from Colorado made a provisioning run to bring them sustenance and succor. Several carloads of beer and peaches (I'm not making this up) sustained the crew until they could bear New Mexico not a minute longer (I think it was about two days, or until they ran out of beer).
Including those who claim a constitutional right to "free speach."
Sorry but they will f*ck things up must faster than that. The only hope they have is that the Republicans will continue to screw themselves.
*******************************************************8We can probably count on the second point.
Yep.
I don't know of another time it's happened. Do you? At the time, I thought it was pretty clever tactic. The redistricting was partisan politics at its worst. The leadership was even blocking parking places for staffers of decamped representatives.
Yeah. And then they went to Oklahoma. Good gawd. How desperate can you get? They survived there a week or two. Now that's real fortitude.
-- Doug
ted text -
And you need to deal with reality not drug induced delusions.
Yes, I was here then and know that the democrats were getting exactly what they deserved. The Democrats had been doing the exact same thing for the previous 100 years and it was a case of what goes around comes around. It was a bitter pill that the democrats didn't want to swallow but didn't have a choice.
But for election purposes they love to pretend they are conservative.
Might just be when he's responding to you.
I agree, it was partisan politics at its worst but you also have to consider that it was pretty much tit for tat since the existing districts in place at that time were so convoluted in the opposite direction that the democrats deserved what they got. They had been in control for the prior 100 years and they had been redrawing the districts to ensure democratic wins in the majority of districts. When that failed, they abandon ship.
I really laughed my ass off during that time. They looked so foolish, like a bunch of children that if they couldn't be in control...they would just quit.
Actually, I have often wondered whether a huge country like the U.S. could manage with a parliamentary system or at the least, with proportional representation. The Electoral College winner-takes-all is so, so...UN-representative...
[...
Is that what you are? Someone must have slipped me something.
Imagining more stuff again are we? Why not read a little upstream in the thread to discover how silly you are.
Sigh. I don't let my grandchildren use the "he hit me first" excuse. Why should I let politicians?
Both sides were being very childish. Three, count them, three special sessions to redistrict. Meanwhile, they were busy ignoring school financing. We really need politicians that put country (or state) ahead of party. They seem to be equally scarce on both sides of the aisle.
-- Doug
Next time your in the neighborhood stop by :-)
cm
The leadership did other things, too, like cancel the Democratic member's cell phones. The theory was that if the members were in New Mexico or Oklahoma and not attending to state business, they didn't need parking places or state cell phones.
Redistricting IS partisan. Before redistricting, the breakdown was 17-15 in favor of the Democrats. After redistricting, the result was 21-11 in favor of the Republicans.
I think they split up. House members went to a motel in New Mexico, Senate members went to a member's dacha in Oklahoma. Or vice-versa.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.