squistion

Note this source is not named and only described in the NY Post article as a "female graduate student." Also note that the Title VI complaints she claimed to have filed were also done "anonymously" I am skeptical this is a legitimate account and I suspect that it was probably concocted by the NY Post to make Mahmood Khalil look bad.

It would not suprise me that at some point Trump will try to have the DOJ shut down the networks for being "Illegal"and they will try to find some law or statute to justify it.

As I have been saying all along: https://abcnews.go.com/US/experts-palestinian-activist-mahmoud-khalil-deported-due-process/story?id=119756360 Experts say Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder, can't be deported without due process [...] Under the Immigration Nationality Act, which experts say is rarely invoked, the government can charge a green card holder as being deportable without being convicted of a crime if there are reasonable grounds to believe they engaged in certain criminal or terrorist activities. But experts and immigration attorneys ABC News spoke with said the statute does not give the secretary of state the power to deport green card holders like Khalil without going through a procedure. "The way the statute is constructed, it doesn't mean that Secretary Rubio can just say, 'Oh, I determined this, and therefore we're just going to deport you out of the country,'" said Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You would still need to go through a process." After the federal government invokes the statute, individuals like Khalil are entitled to argue their case before an immigration judge. Khalil is set to appear before an immigration judge later this month in Louisiana. "There are some due process and protective procedures that the person is entitled to," Chen said, "including being given a notice of the charges, and an opportunity to confront that evidence and to bring his or her own evidence in response."

If the government doesn't have to explain or give any sort of rationale as to why someone is "a danger to this country" then, theoretically, they can deport any immigrant they want for any reason, whether that person is here legally or not. Be careful what you wish for.

He and most of the others here are clueless on how this Democratic Republic is supposed to work, per the Constitution.

Nope, I only have one account. And I don't think "Trans Rock" is a music category (I've never heard of it) or if there is, Chappell Roan doesn't qualify as being in it.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/14/politics/fact-check-trump-immigration-biden-ukraine-doj Fact check: Trump’s false claims on immigration, Biden, Ukraine in DOJ remarks WashingtonCNN — President Donald Trump made multiple false claims in a Friday speech at the Department of Justice in which he discussed the legal system and crime but also a wide range of other topics, including immigration, the war in Ukraine and former President Joe Biden. Trump also made numerous allegations for which he provided no evidence, alleging unspecified “egregious crimes” in the government during the Biden administration, corruption among unspecified judges, illegality by media outlets that he claimed cover him too negatively and “crooked” behavior by law firms connected to cases involving Trump. Here is a fact check of some of his assertions. Trump’s prosecutions and Biden: Trump repeated his regular unsubstantiated claim that former President Joe Biden used his office to wield the legal system against Trump. “Etched onto the walls of this building are the words English philosopher John Locke said: ‘Where law ends, tyranny begins.’ And I see that, and I saw it over the last four years when somebody was allowed to attack, viciously, with this department and the FBI, his political opponent. How did that work out? It didn’t work out too well, but it wasn’t pleasant. I was attacked by a political opponent,” Trump said. There has never been any evidence that Biden personally used the Department of Justice or FBI to attack Trump. Trump’s two federal prosecutions, one over Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat and one over his retention of classified documents after his first presidency, were brought by a special counsel, Jack Smith. Smith was appointed in November 2022 by then-Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, but that is not proof that Biden was involved in the prosecution effort, much less that Biden personally attacked Trump using the department; Garland said in 2023 that he would resign if Biden ever asked him to act against Trump, and added that he was sure that would never happen. Biden documents investigation: Trump falsely claimed in his remarks that former President Joe Biden was “essentially found guilty, but they said he was incompetent and therefore let’s not find him guilty, I guess.” He added, “Nobody knows what the ruling was.” He continued, “I think I would have rather been found guilty than what they found with him. They said he didn’t know what the hell he was doing and therefore … let him go.” Biden was not found guilty, “essentially” or not, and there was no judicial “ruling” at all; Biden was not even charged with a crime. The special counsel who was appointed to look into Biden’s handling of classified documents, Robert Hur, wrote in his public report that “the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” adding that “several defenses are likely to create reasonable doubt as to such charges.” Trump appeared to be referring Friday to the fact that Hur wrote in the report, “We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” But Hur did not say he would have brought charges against Biden if not for this. Hur wrote at length about various facts of the case and possible Biden defenses that meant that he thought would make it too difficult for the government to win a unanimous guilty verdict. Immigration under Trump: Trump repeated two false claims about immigration statistics during his presidencies. First, he said, “In our first full month in office, we achieved the lowest level of illegal border crossings ever recorded.” He could have accurately said the number of migrant apprehensions by the Border Patrol in February 2025 – 8,347 – was the lowest in many decades, but it’s not the lowest number on record. Official federal statistics show there were fewer Border Patrol encounters with migrants at the southwest border in some of the months of the early 1960s and in years prior. Second, he said that “by the time I got out” of office the first time, “we had the lowest numbers ever. My favorite chart of all time was brought down that day and, on that chart, it said we had the lowest numbers ever.” But the chart doesn’t actually show that illegal immigration was at its lowest level at the time Trump left office, though text beside a red arrow on the chart claims that’s what it shows. In fact, the arrow actually points to April 2020, when Trump still had more than eight months left in his first term and when global migration had slowed to a trickle because of the Covid-19 pandemic. After hitting a roughly three-year low (not an all-time low) in April 2020, migration numbers at the southern border increased each month through the end of Trump’s first term. US and European aid to Ukraine: Trump repeated his debunked claim that the US has spent “maybe $350 billion” aiding Ukraine compared to $100 billion from Europe. Neither figure is correct. The $350 billion figure Trump has repeatedly cited is particularly inaccurate. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank that closely tracks wartime aid to Ukraine, Europe – the European Union plus individual European countries – had collectively committed far more total wartime military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine through December 2024 (about $269 billion at current exchange rates) than the US committed (about $129 billion). Europe had also allocated more military, financial and humanitarian aid (about $144 billion) than the US allocated (about $124 billion). It’s possible to arrive at different totals using different counting methodologies, but there is no apparent basis for Trump’s “$350 billion” figure. The US government inspector general overseeing the Ukraine response says on its website that the US had appropriated about $183 billion for the Ukraine response through December 2024, including about $83 billion actually disbursed – and that includes funding spent in the US or sent to countries other than Ukraine. US elections: Trump, vowing to restore “fairness” in the country, baselessly impugned the integrity of US elections, saying, “The elections, which were totally rigged, are a big factor.” He didn’t invoke the 2020 election in particular, as he usually does, but there is nonetheless no basis for a broader claim that recent “elections” in this country, plural, have been “totally rigged.” Iran and terror groups: Trump repeated his false claim that when he was president, Iran was “totally broke” and therefore “they weren’t giving any money to Hamas or Hezbollah.” Iran’s funding for terror groups did decline in the second half of his presidency, in large part because his sanctions on Iran had a major negative impact on the Iranian economy, but the funding never stopped entirely, as four experts told CNN in 2024. In fact, Trump’s own administration said in 2020 that Iran was continuing to fund terror groups including Hezbollah. You can read a longer fact check here.

Exactly. Paraphrasing the OP: You can imagine their reaction if Joe Biden had gone to the DOJ and declared that Fox News and Newsmax were illegal.

For future reference, how are we supposed to know when he is being sarcastic?

They would have to, given the daily trans news threads we see on this forum.

What else do they have to deflect/distract from the Trump debacle as POTUS?

https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/1900684663104172080 Trump just called for his perceived enemies to be jailed — while he was speaking at the Justice Department. He called his courtroom opponents "scum." He said judges were "corrupt." He labeled the prosecutors who investigated him "deranged."

I might if he didn't run the country.

The complete quote: https://x.com/atrupar/status/1900640888067440812 (video clip at link) Trump at the DOJ: "I believe that CNN and MSNDC, who literally write 97.6% bad about me, are political arms of the Democrat Party. And in my opinion, they are really corrupt and they are illegal. What they do is illegal."

Did Putin write this for him? https://x.com/atrupar/status/1900642326453670341 (video clip at link) Trump on Ukraine: "You don't want to pick on somebody that's a lot larger than you."

Provocatively dressed? The two shown dancing in the video were dressed as a ballerina and a cowboy. That's being provocatively dressed?

Dancing Transgender Hecklers would be a great name for a band.

How can this happen in the US in 2025? This is like the worst of the McCarthy era where people were imprisoned and deported just for suspicion of being a Communist.

https://x.com/bestofchappell/status/1900188855904473114 (video clip of Chappell Roan at link) “I can’t call myself the midwest princess and not acknowledge country music straight up. I’m not trying to convince a country crowd that they should listen to my music. I just think a lesbian country song is really funny.” — Chappell Roan on ‘The Giver’ for Amazon Music

Let the witch hunts begin!

That is absurd. And yes. you have a right to that opinion, no matter how ridiculous it seems. According to that logic, any students who participated in that rally at Columbia are also terrorists and presumably should be jailed and/or deported. Thankfully, few in this country share your views and we haven't yet returned to a McCarthy era persecution/prosecution of people simply because they have a political point of view we disagree with.

You're labeling him a terrorist. What terrorist acts has he committed?

It is a McCarthy era Act from1952 designed to deport someone suspected of being a Communist that has rarelly been used, probably not in decades and might not withstand a present day court challenge. https://theconversation.com/can-the-trump-administration-legally-deport-palestinian-rights-advocate-mahmoud-khalil-3-things-to-know-about-green-card-holders-rights-252019 The Trump administration argues that they can deport lawful permanent residents like Khalil under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that a lawful permanent resident can be deported if the secretary of state has reasonable ground to believe that this person “would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.” The Trump administration had initiated deportation proceedings against Khalil on this ground. U.S. law also provides that any non-citizen can be deported if the secretary of state and the attorney general jointly determine that the person is associated with terrorism, or poses a threat to the U.S. In addition, the law says an immigrant can be deported if they “endorse or espouse terrorist activity or persuades others” to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization. Still, lawful permanent residents are entitled to certain basic rights, such as retaining a lawyer to represent them in administrative hearings and court before they are deported.