While we are focused on Padilla (and deservedly so)

[CC27]

senseandsensibility (22,446 posts)

While we are focused on Padilla (and deservedly so)

I would just like to point out what Noem actually said she intends to do. Before they dragged a sitting US Senator out of the room (who HAD identified himself), she said this:
We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country."

As Ron Filipkowski just pointed out, "That's not what the military is supposed to do. That's called a military coup."

To put it even more plainly, they have no right to "liberate" California voters from the representatives and policies that the voters VOTED FOR IN CALIFORNIA. Nothing gives them that right.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220390679

Uh huh

[Carl]

Manufactured outrage 

Funny they had no problem keeping voters from picking their own Presidential nominee and wanted state officials to ban President Trump from the national ballot.

[67 Rover]

Manufactured outrage 

Funny they had no problem keeping voters from picking their own Presidential nominee and wanted state officials to ban President Trump from the national ballot.

Muh democracy.  How about DNC chair David Hogg who was voted in and then removed just because he was not the correct sex.

[SVPete]

Another 15-minutes-of-poutrage flash in the pan. It will be obscured by this weekend's planned riots - guaranteed backfires - unless Israel's attacks on Iran overshadow this poutrage and the planned riots.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

who HAD identified himself

Rushing someone while shouting like a deranged lunatic is unbecoming of an elected official. So, you can't complain that they didn't believe you.

We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country."

As Ron Filipkowski just pointed out, "That's not what the military is supposed to do. That's called a military coup."

It's not a coup to put down a violent foreign incursion. You have no legal right to assist that incursion.

[SVPete]

Padilla claims he identified himself. ASSuming he did not lie - in content or in timing - he would have done so with people shouting around him while SecDHS Noem was speaking over a PA system. His claim, even if true, is meaningless.

Grammar correction

[Karin]

I just perused the list of topics on GD.  Yesterday, almost every thread was about Padilla.  Today, after the entire nation got a good look at that video, there is zero threads about Padilla.     What a bunch of wankers I swear. 

[SVPete]

I just perused the list of topics on GD.  Yesterday, almost every thread was about Padilla.  Today, after the entire nation got a good look at that video, there is zero threads about Padilla.     What a bunch of wankers I swear.

They're back to No Kings fantasies and whining about the Feds enforcing immigration laws. There are several threads about the attack on Iran, but they are not getting numerous Replies and are, so far, mainly about what happened. DU's resident anti-Semites have been quiet, so far.

[DUmpDiver]

Muh democracy.  How about DNC chair David Hogg who was voted in and then removed just because he was not the correct sex.

It was democracy in action. 294-99 voted to redo the election.

[DefiantSix]

It was democracy in action. 294-99 voted to redo the election.

An excellent example of why the United States IS NOT a duh-mocracy: the moment some con artist can change what the mob thinks it wants, they'll "un-vote" what they voted for with ridiculous speed. 

[CollectivismMustDie]

Muh democracy.  How about DNC chair David Hogg who was voted in and then removed just because he was not the correct sex.

Was it sex or skin color?

[BamaMoose]

To put it even more plainly, they have no right to "liberate" California voters from the representatives and policies that the voters VOTED FOR IN CALIFORNIA. Nothing gives them that right.

They have such short memories.  In 2000, California voters voted 61% to 39% for a law banning same-sex marriage.  The California Supreme Court ultimately ruled the law was against their state constitution.  In 2008, California voters voted 52% to 48% for a state constitution amendment banning same-sex marriage.  That was ultimately tossed by the US Supreme Court on procedural grounds.  In 2015, same-sex marriage became the law of the land when the US Supreme Court ruled bans unconstitutional.  Perhaps the current Supreme Court should be asked if they had the right to "liberate" California voters from the policies that the voters VOTED FOR IN CALIFORNIA.