Trump Promises Mass Deportation Using 1798 Law Amid Controversy

During a recent rally in Aurora, Colorado, former President Donald Trump announced plans to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to initiate mass deportations of immigrants. Trump described immigrants as “the worst criminals in the world” and vowed to expedite the removal of individuals he referred to as “savage gangs”. This law, historically associated with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, would empower the president to enact broad deportation measures.

Trump’s rhetoric included specific threats to Haitian-American immigrants, whom he stated would need to return to Haiti regardless of their legal status in the U.S. He asserted that local police would receive immunity from prosecution for actions taken under this mass deportation scheme, which he claimed would affect up to 20 million people.

The former president’s comments have elicited pushback from local officials, including Aurora’s Republican mayor Mike Coffman, who stated that the city is not overrun by gangs, contrary to Trump’s claims. The mayor emphasized that Aurora is a safe city, countering Trump’s characterization of the area as a “war zone”.

Critics have highlighted the potential human rights implications and economic consequences of Trump’s proposed deportations, warning that it could lead to widespread suffering among immigrant communities. Trump’s approach reflects a continuation of his administration’s hardline stance on immigration, aiming to galvanize support among his base by invoking fear related to crime and safety.

As Trump seeks to re-establish his influence in the political landscape, his latest remarks signal a return to familiar themes of fear and division surrounding immigration policy. The potential implementation of the Alien Enemies Act raises significant concerns about civil liberties and the treatment of immigrant populations in the United States.

(h/t: https://www.salon.com/2024/10/11/theyre-animals-vows-mass-deportation-under-law-used-to-justify-japanese-internment-camps/)

Trump’s Controversial Claims About Migrants at Nevada Rally

During a recent rally in Reno, Nevada, former President Donald Trump made alarming claims about migrants crossing into the United States. He asserted that some migrants are equipped with weapons more advanced than those used by U.S. soldiers and suggested that they pose a significant threat to American sovereignty. Trump’s rhetoric implied that these migrants are attempting to ‘conquer’ the country, a characterization that echoes extremist narratives historically used to dehumanize marginalized groups.

Trump’s comments included unfounded claims that migrants are overwhelming hospitals and public schools to the detriment of American citizens. He alleged that there are no available hospital beds for Americans and implied that migrant children are prioritized over local children in schools. These statements are misleading and lack credible evidence, contributing to a narrative that fosters fear and division.

The former president’s remarks also included a call to action for his supporters, promising that under a potential future Trump administration, American citizens would be prioritized over migrants. He framed the situation as a battle for the country’s future, using language that evokes historical parallels with extremist ideologies that aimed to incite fear and justify discrimination.

Trump’s rhetoric has been criticized for its potential to incite violence and normalize hate against immigrant communities. His comparison of migrants to armed adversaries reflects a dangerous trend in political discourse that seeks to vilify and marginalize vulnerable populations. This approach not only distorts the reality of immigration but also undermines the values of inclusivity and compassion.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-vows-to-end-migrants-who-are-trying-to-conquer-u-s/)

Trump Posts “The Great Replacement” Conspiracy Popular With Neo-Nazis

Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post concerning immigration has drawn critical attention for echoing a dangerous and unfounded conspiracy theory – the “Great Replacement.” This theory, alleging a coordinated effort to replace white Americans with immigrants, has long been a cornerstone of white nationalist and far-right ideologies. Its presence in a mainstream political figure’s post demands careful analysis.

It’s becoming more and more obvious to me why the “Crazed” Democrats are allowing millions and millions of totally unvetted migrants into our once great Country. IT’S SO THEY CAN VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. They are signing them up at a rapid pace, without even knowing who the hell they are. It all makes sense now. Republicans better wake up and do something, before it is too late. Are you listening Mitch McConnell?

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111667694816747840

While concerns about immigration trends and their potential impact on society are legitimate topics for discussion,Trump’s post utilizes inflammatory language and unsubstantiated claims. The assertion that millions of immigrants are being deliberately “unvetted” and signed up to vote solely for partisan gain fuels xenophobia and undermines trust in democratic processes. This narrative conveniently omits the complex web of economic, social, and political factors driving immigration patterns, instead choosing to paint a picture of nefarious outsiders infiltrating American society.

Trump’s post echoes disturbing historical rhetoric with its coded language and divisive framing. Phrases like “millions and millions” and “totally unvetted” bear striking resemblance to slogans chanted by white supremacist groups like those who marched in Charlottesville. Their hateful chants targeting Jewish communities openly invoked the “Great Replacement” theory, highlighting its dangerous potential to incite real-world violence and discrimination.

Dismissing such language as mere political rhetoric carries significant risks. Normalizing these narratives, even unintentionally, emboldens extremist groups and provides validation for their hateful ideologies. It has the potential to further erode social cohesion, fuel animosity towards immigrants and minorities, and ultimately weaken the fabric of American society.

Instead of indulging in fear-mongering and unsubstantiated claims, responsible political discourse should prioritize facts and evidence-based solutions. By addressing legitimate concerns about immigration while rejecting harmful stereotypes and conspiratorial narratives, we can foster a more informed and inclusive national conversation. Let’s focus on building a stronger nation where all members feel welcome and contribute to its shared future, rather than succumbing to the shadows of hate and division.

Trump Echoes Hitler’s Immigrants Poisoning Blood of the Country

Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post, declaring illegal immigration to be “poisoning the blood of our nation,” reverberates with disturbing historical echoes. The language, while veiled, taps into a wellspring of dehumanizing and exclusionary rhetoric used throughout history to ostracize and discriminate against marginalized groups. Examining the post through this lens reveals the potential dangers of such inflammatory language and underscores the importance of responsible political discourse.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS POISONING THE BLOOD OF OUR NATION. THEY’RE COMING FROM PRISONS, FROM MENTAL INSTITUTIONS — FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD. WITHOUT BORDERS & FAIR ELECTIONS, YOU DON’T HAVE A COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111593149429973351

Firstly, the stark metaphor of “poisoning the blood” is deeply concerning. It dehumanizes immigrants, reducing them to a toxic threat infiltrating the nation’s very core. This echoes similar language used throughout history to demonize groups based on ethnicity, religion, or origin. Nazi propaganda, for instance, frequently depicted Jews as a “poisonous bacillus” infecting the Aryan body politic. Such language not only creates a stark “us vs. them” dichotomy but also lays the groundwork for justifying discrimination, hostility, and even violence against the targeted group.

Furthermore, the post’s claim that immigrants come from “prisons, mental institutions, and all over the world” further fuels harmful stereotypes. This paints a generalized picture of immigrants as criminals, deviants, and outsiders, fostering fear and distrust. It disregards the vast diversity of experiences and circumstances among immigrants, reducing them to a monolithic threat instead of recognizing them as individuals seeking a better life. Such generalizations often stem from xenophobic sentiments and lack factual basis, contributing to an atmosphere of prejudice and discrimination.

Ultimately, Trump’s post exemplifies the perils of employing divisive and dehumanizing language in political discourse. It stokes fear, fosters prejudice, and risks normalizing dangerous rhetoric with historical roots in exclusion and hate. As responsible citizens and journalists, we must critically analyze such language, expose its harmful origins, and advocate for a more inclusive and fact-based political discourse. Only then can we truly build a nation where all members, regardless of their background or origin, feel welcome and valued.

Trump tweets a letter calling protesters ‘terrorists’

President Donald Trump tweeted out a letter Thursday that referred to a group of protesters as “terrorists,” following their violent ouster from a park near the White House earlier this week.

The letter is signed by Trump’s former lawyer John Dowd and addressed to “Jim” in a probable reference to former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. It lambasted the former Pentagon chief after he called out Trump on Wednesday for threatening a military response to protests that have engulfed cities across the country. In his letter, Dowd referred to a group of protesters who were violently forced out of Washington’s Lafayette Square on Monday as “terrorists using idle hate … to burn and destroy.”

“They were abusing and disrespecting the police when the police were preparing the area for the 1900 curfew,” the letter said.

The White House did not immediately respond when asked whether Trump views the protesters as “terrorists”.

Protesters had gathered in the park to express their outrage at the death of a black Minnesota man, George Floyd, at the hands of a white police officer, with video showing a largely peaceful — if tense — demonstration. Police charged into the protesters about 30 minutes before the city’s 7 p.m. curfew, throwing chemical irritants and hitting protesters and journalists with shields and rubber bullets.

Trump later walked out of the White House through the cleared area for a photo-op in front of St. John’s Epsicopal Church across from the square.

Mattis joined a symphony of condemnations, which came from both parties, characterizing the episode as a grotesque abuse of power.

“Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath [to defend the Constitution] would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens — much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside,” Mattis wrote in a statement to journalists on Wednesday.

On Thursday, several protesters and the Washington, D.C., chapter of Black Lives Matter sued Trump, along with other law enforcement leadership they identified as leading the Monday clash, accusing them of violating the protesters’ rights to free assembly and freedom from unreasonable seizure.

Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is among the organizations representing the plaintiffs, decried Dowd’s letter as “abhorrent and a completely false characterization of the peacefully assembled demonstrators who were dispersed through state-sanctioned violence at the hands of government officials.”

“It is remarkable,” Clarke said in a statement to POLITICO on Thursday night, “that President Trump objects so vehemently to those speaking out against racial and police violence while embracing gun-toting activists who take siege of government buildings and violent white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville.”

[Politico]

Trump promotes shooting black Americans in the street

Twitter says President Donald Trump and the White House’s official Twitter (TWTR) account have violated its rule against glorifying violence and has affixed a warning label to tweets on both, marking the first time such action has been taken against the accounts.The social media platform is using what it calls a “public interest notice” to flag the incendiary post about the protests and violence in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

This means the tweets will not be removed, but will be hidden behind a notice that says “this Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.” Users can view it if they click past the notice.The company’s move risked escalating tensions with the White House during an already tense week. Trump signed an executive order that purported to address “censorship” by Twitter and other social media companies, following Twitter’s earlier decision to affix fact-check type labels to two of his misleading posts about mail-in voting ballots.

Hours after Twitter flagged the tweet from Trump, the official White House account posted the same message. Twitter then took the same action with that message.

“As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited,” Twitter said in a tweet explaining its earlier decision to place a warning label on Trump’s tweet. “People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”

A spokesperson for Twitter said the decision was made by teams within the company and CEO Jack Dorsey was informed of the plan before Trump’s tweet was labeled.Trump continued his criticisms of Twitter on Friday after it labeled his post, tweeting that “it well be regulated.”

The president posted an identical message to Facebook and Facebook-owned Instagram. CNN has reached out to Facebook for comment.

The post in question was about a third night of protests following the death of George Floyd, a black man who was filmed on video saying that he could not breathe as a white police officer used his knee to pin Floyd down.

As cable news networks carried images of fires and destructive protests in Minneapolis, the president tweeted at 12:53 a.m. ET: “these THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!”

His phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts,” mirrors language used by a Miami police chief in the late 1960s in the wake of riots. Its use was immediately condemned by a wide array of individuals, from historians to members of rival political campaigns.

Some users reported the tweet to Twitter as a rule violation.

Less than two-and-a-half hours later, Twitter took action. “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today,” the company said.

“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance.”

Twitter (TWTR) has said in the past that it makes exceptions to its rules when heads of state are involved, due to the inherently newsworthy nature of their posts.

Facebook came under scrutiny last year for saying it would not fact-check politicians’ posts.

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s CEO and cofounder, defended the company’s position in a speech last year in Washington, but noted there may be some exceptions. “Even for politicians we don’t allow content that incites violence or risks imminent harm — and of course we don’t allow voter suppression,” he said.

[CNN]

Trump claims he will temporarily suspend immigration into US due to coronavirus fears

President Donald Trump said late Monday night he will sign an executive order temporarily suspending immigration to the United States as the nation battles the health and economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic.

“In light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens, I will be signing an Executive Order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States!” he tweeted.

It’s unclear what mechanism he will use to suspend immigration, how long such a suspension could last or what effect this will have on the operation of US border crossings and on those who already hold green cards.

The White House declined to provide further information on the executive order Monday evening.

The tweet comes as the administration seeks to reopen parts of the country from the coronavirus shutdown through a phased approach, but it’s also a continuation of the President’s 2016 campaign promise to slow immigration.

Trump has repeatedly touted his decision to halt travel from China and Europe as a means of blunting the spread of coronavirus in the United States.

The tweet also comes hours after Trump directed Admiral Brett Giroir, the assistant Health and Human Services secretary for health, to provide an update on border wall construction after he briefed reporters on coronavirus testing.

[CNN]

Trump Retweets Image of Speaker Pelosi and Senator Schumer in Traditional Islamic Clothing Before Iranian Flag

President Donald Trump took his attacks on Speaker Nancy Pelosi Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to a whole new level Monday morning, by retweeting a photoshopped image of the two in traditional Muslim garb before an Iranian flag.

The tweet came in a flurry of frenzied presidential tweets (and retweets) critical of Speaker Pelosi’s criticism of the Trump administrations handling of Iranian foreign relations, in particular, that following the deadly drone strike that took the life of Quds force leader and Iranian Republican Guard Major General Qasam Soleimani.

In the days that followed Soleimani’s death, a million Iranians reportedly flooded the streets of Teheran to protest the U.S. killing of the number two leader of Iran. But as Iran eventually admitted to shooting down a Ukranian airliner and killing 167 civilians, protests have started against the Iranian regime.

[Mediaite]


Phrase ‘White Nationalists’ Cut From Measure To Screen Military Enlistees

A measure in the National Defense Authorization Act meant to keep white nationalists out of the U.S. military no longer mentions “white nationalists” after Congress quietly altered the text after it initially passed the House.

The change, which has not been previously reported, could water down a House-passed amendment meant to address the threat of white nationalists in the military. The House language was specifically drafted to encourage screening for white nationalist beliefs in military enlistees. But after the Republican-controlled Senate passed its own version of the massive military spending bill and the two chambers’ bills were reconciled, the final NDAA instead requires the Department of Defense to study ways to screen military enlistees for “extremist and gang-related activity.”

While it may seem like a minor tweak, the removal of the term “white nationalists” from the amendment text was concerning to Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), who introduced the amendment in July after alarming reports about white nationalists in the U.S. military. 

Earlier this year, federal authorities arrested a Coast Guard lieutenant for allegedly stockpiling weapons in preparation for a terror attack. A series of HuffPost investigations also exposed 11 U.S. service members who had ties to Identity Evropa, a white nationalist group best known for helping organize the deadly 2017 “Unite The Rally” in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Stripping the specific mention of “white nationalists” from the legislation could leave the door open for more white nationalists to join the military and could leave the U.S. military off the hook for what many critics say are lackluster efforts to screen enlistees for white nationalist beliefs.

It’s not clear who approved the language change or why. Senators on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, including Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment on the language.

After the House and Senate each passed their own versions of the NDAA, lawmakers from both chambers met to reconcile differences between the two. The final NDAA was then approved by both chambers.

Aguilar said the fact that the final NDAA does not mention “white nationalism” indicates the Senate may not be taking white nationalism seriously.

In a statement to HuffPost, he noted that white nationalists have “successfully enlisted in our military in order to gain access to combat training and weaponry.”

To prevent more white nationalist violence, Aguilar said, “we cannot turn a blind eye to this growing problem which puts our national security and the safety of the brave men and women serving our country in jeopardy.”

“It’s disappointing that Senate Republicans disagree,” he added.

Academics and law enforcement officials have long warned of the specific threat posed by white nationalists who join the military, where they receive combat training they can use to inflict violence on civilians. White supremacists have long been attracted to the U.S. military, and often for good reason. In the 1970s, for example, a Department of Defense directive allowed service members to join the Ku Klux Klan.

Although military rules prohibit service members from committing acts of discrimination or engaging in extremist activity, an unnerving 2017 Military Times poll found that nearly 25% of American service members reported encountering white nationalists within their ranks.

Just this week, an ESPN article revealed the Army football team’s motto had origins in the neo-Nazi gang the Aryan Brotherhood; two cadets flashed the “OK” hand sign, often a white power symbol, on live television during the Army-Navy football game; and Army units memorialized World War II’s Battle of the Bulge on social media by posting a photo of a Nazi war criminal.

Last month, Vice News confirmed that three members of the U.S. military were registered users of the online neo-Nazi forum Iron March.

And in 2018, a series of investigative reports by ProPublica and “Frontline” found multiple members of violent neo-Nazi groups in the armed services.

Aguilar’s amendment to the NDAA this year sought to address this long-standing problem by requiring the Secretary of Defense to “study the feasibility” of screening for “individuals with ties to white nationalist organizations” during initial background investigations of enlistees.

The amendment also requires the Department of Defense to study whether two FBI resources — the Tattoo and Graffiti Identification Program and The National Gang Intelligence Center — could aid the military in this effort.

[Huffington Post]

Trump approves plan for record low number of refugee admissions

President Trump has approved a plan to reduce the cap for refugee admissions to the country for fiscal 2020 to 18,000, the lowest level on record since the program began more than three decades ago. 

In a statement announcing the move this weekend, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that “the core of the Trump Administration’s foreign policy is a commitment to make decisions based on reality, not wishes, and to drive optimal outcomes based on concrete facts.” 

Pompeo went on to say that “this year’s determination on refugee admissions does just that, even as we sustain our longstanding commitment to help vulnerable populations and our leadership as the world’s most generous nation.” 

The plan, which was announced in late September, has drawn pushback from Democratic lawmakers, including governors who have said they will continue to welcome refugees to their states despite the steep reduction.

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) said last month that her state is a “sanctuary state” and that Oregon will continue to “stand with refugees” in light of the executive order issued by the Trump administration, which allows states to turn away refugees. 

“These are people who cannot return home because they fear for their lives and their families. And to make matters worse, the Trump administration wants to slash the number of refugees our country will welcome this coming year to 18,000, the lowest ever on record,” she said then.

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) said in a letter to Trump last month that his state will continue to accept refugees fleeing violence and added that he was “dismayed” by the administration’s plans to drastically reduce the refugee cap to 18,000 — a significant jump from former President Obama’s proposed cap of 116,000 refugees in 2016.

“To reject refugees outright emboldens the message of those who seek to inspire hatred by saying that we, as Americans, do not have compassion or care for specific groups of people in the world facing persecution or worse,” Wolf wrote in the letter.

According to The New York Times, under the new move by the Trump administration, only 5,000 people who wish to flee their home countries for fear of persecution due to their religion will be allowed admission into the U.S. as part of the refugee program.

Fewer than 2,000 Central Americans will reportedly be allowed admission under the program going forward as well as 4,000 Iraqis who aided the United States military during the Iraq War.

The new cap for Iraqi refugees is reportedly less than half of the 9,829 who were admitted under the Obama administration in fiscal 2014. Under the Trump administration during fiscal 2019, just 153 Iraqi refugees whose applications were given high priority were admitted into the country. 

[The Hill]

1 2 3 35