Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 12
Trump says Mamdani should be arrested and deported…
But for some reason, Trump gets away with saying such things, as well as arresting and deporting American citizens.
Meanwhile MAGA faithful are screaming about how Mamdani will bring sharia law and terrorists to NYC while simultaneously claiming not to be racists.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Wbaloney,
Before you post "road apples" attributing statements to politicians you don't like, you need to quote said politician.
Source it.
Don't just pull "road apples" out of your orifice, Mkay?
No. of Recommendations: 3
But for some reason, Trump gets away with saying such things....
I mean, it's not exactly "getting away" with anything. It's perfectly legal to say such things, and Trump is a lame duck who will never need to run for re-election again. He will suffer whatever political consequences come with that statement, as always (Trump is fairly unpopular with a low approval rating, in part due to his predilection for saying things like this) - but since he's not really interested in general political approval as much as wielding the executive power that comes with his office, he doesn't much care.
No. of Recommendations: 4
What Trump actually said was to the effect that if Mamdani impeded ICE in the performance of its official duties, he should be arrested.
You know, just like a number of other criminal democrat politicians who are facing charges for impeding ICE?
Rule of Law, and all that?
In terms of deportation, Trump said "it should be looked at."
Mamdani was naturalized in 2018. If it turns out he committed material fraud in the naturalization process, yes indeed, he would be subject to the possibility of being stripped of his citizenship and deported.
Just like any one else who hypothetically committed fraud in seeking naturalization.
Rule of Law, and all that?
No. of Recommendations: 8
I mean, it's not exactly "getting away" with anything. It's perfectly legal to say such things...
Well, yeah, it is certainly legal to say such things, but we're talking about the president and, more importantly, precedent and power. It is one thing for you or me to say "such things", but when a president says them, his voice has consequences and people take his words and pervert them and often take things in their own hands, doing damaging things that they think the president wants.
So, yes, I agree that what he is doing is legal, but he does get away with things that no other president ever has, polluting the national conscience and normalizing bad, even evil, behaviors.
Pete
No. of Recommendations: 4
So, yes, I agree that what he is doing is legal, but he does get away with things that no other president ever has, polluting the national conscience and normalizing bad, even evil, behaviors.
Again, he's a lame duck whose indifference to normal political impacts cannot possibly be overstated. He's not "getting away" with anything when he makes statements about potentially arresting a sitting mayor if that mayor tries to (lawfully!) affect how federal officials operate within his jurisdiction. Trump suffers whatever the 'normal' political consequences of that type of rhetoric are - he just doesn't care, because he's not going to try to accomplish any of the things that require 'normal' politics to accomplish. He's decided to go all-in on just using the enormous powers of the Executive, and not worry at all about having any legislative agenda or helping his party accomplish any legislative agenda.
No. of Recommendations: 6
Rule of Law, and all that?
Horseshit. Trump wouldn’t recognize the rule of law if it bit him on the……well…… Trump.
No. of Recommendations: 0
At least Trump wasn't gutless and could speak his preference on the race.
*someone* as usual - too cowardly.
*someone* as usual - called it long ago :)
Muslim Mayoral candidate....couldn't get the. Gutless PAC endorsement for furry animals in self segregation.
LOL
As the LEader said before - I hope he wins.
I think good can come out of it.
I think bad can come out of it.
I'm all for both
I'm curious to see if Trump's last minute stuff swayed Republicans to go Cuomo.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Some people feel upset that Trump might be "getting away with" doing unspecified "things" that are admittedly perfectly "legal."
If so, that's a "them" problem, isn't it?
They may have an imaginary set of rules in their heads about what those unspecified "things" might be. The imaginary set of rules can't be defined because they make it up as they go along.
Don't be one of those people, and you will feel better.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Trump specifically said that Mamdani should be arrested if Mamdani "interferes" with ICE enforcement operations.
That's not "legal!" albaby.
Try it yourself and let us know how that works out for you.
No. of Recommendations: 6
There's way too much phoneybaloney in your road apples, zamboney.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Trump specifically said that Mamdani should be arrested if Mamdani "interferes" with ICE enforcement operations.He did
not specifically say that. He was asked to respond to Mamdani's comments in his acceptance speech as follows:
Mamdani vowed in his recent acceptance speech to use his power to "stop masked ICE agents from deporting our neighbors."
Asked during a press briefing Tuesday what his response is to Mamdani's promise, Trump said, "Well then, we'll have to arrest him."https://www.axios.com/2025/07/01/trump-mamdani-arr...He didn't say, "we'll have to arrest him
if he interferes" with ICE. Or that we'll have to arrest him if he breaks the law. He made a general comment that if Mamdani does what he says, that they'd have to arrest him.
It strains credulity to believe that Mamdani is talking about taking
personal action to "interfere" with ICE agents. A more plausible reading of his speech is that he will use the powers of the office of Mayor to try to "stop masked ICE agents from deporting our neighbors." Since there presumably exist
some lawful powers that inhere to state government to do that, and since it's not especially likely that Mamdani is deliberately stating - in public - that he intends to commit
crimes, the plausible reading of his campaign speech is that he intends to use whatever
lawful means exist for pushing back on ICE tactics.
You know, the same way that Trump has combed over all of the powers of the Executive to find all the ways he can use already-delegated federal powers to try to accomplish his goals, even in pushing back against what private actors and/or state actors are doing.
Which is why there's such negative reaction to the statement. Had a Democratic President made a similar comment about a conservative state official promising to use their office to try to resist something conservatives disagreed with, it would have elicited a similar negative reaction among conservative observers.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Mamdani maybe is just threatening being lawless and a federal government hater.
He's trying to get the anti-government Liberal militia types into his coalition
No. of Recommendations: 3
Mamdani doesn't have the legal authority to "stop ICE agents from arresting our neighbors," or to stop them from arresting anyone else.
It's called the Supremacy Clause, part of the U.S. Constitution. Federal law preempts state and local law.
Mamdani vowed to break the law. Mamdani can't "stop ICE agents" from doing their jobs.
As I said in a prior post, why don't you try to "stop ICE agents" from carrying out their lawful responsibilities and tell us how that works out.
Mamdani, as Mayor of NYC, or as a candidate, has no greater power than you do to "stop ICE."
No. of Recommendations: 5
Mamdani, as Mayor of NYC, or as a candidate, has no greater power than you do to "stop ICE."
When ICE engages in criminal behavior, as documented incidences seem to indicate, of course the mayor of NYC has the right to stand up for the rule of law and arrest criminal lawbreakers.
No. of Recommendations: 5
If Mamdani were willing to arrest "criminal law breakers," he would be helping ICE apprehend illegal immigrants, not threatening to obstruct the enforcement of federal law by federal law enforcement authorities.
Again: Go ahead and try it. Interfere with "masked ICE agents deporting [your] neighbors." Make a citizen's arrest.
You'll be a hero, you'll be a KING. Because you know better than federal law! You get to decide to completely disregard it! You're a king!!!
I got a whole big basket of road apples and baloney sandwiches for ya.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Mamdani doesn't have the legal authority to "stop ICE agents from arresting our neighbors," or to stop them from arresting anyone else.
Yeah. This isn't arguable. If he tries some PR stunt by laying down in the middle of the road or handcuffing himself to some doorway the Feds can arrest him on the spot for obstruction and prosecute him in federal court if the local US attorney agrees.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Mamdani was recently campaigning with one of the alleged terrorists who were involved in the 1993 WTC bombings.
Albaby's alibing on Madami's behalf aside, Mamdani has absolutely no intention of using any alleged "legal authority" (which the Mayor NYC doesn't have in any case) to "stop masked ICE agents from deporting our neighbors." He's an agent provocateur. He's signaling his radical cadre that he won't do anything to stop THEM from interfering with ICE agents performing their legal functions.
But ya really think this highly privileged, wealthy, radical Islamic nepo baby has any intention of putting himself in the line of fire?
Nope, just his useful idiots. There are many of them.
No. of Recommendations: 16
Mamdani was recently campaigning with one of the alleged terrorists who were involved in the 1993 WTC bombings.
I’m guessing you got this bit of horseshit from Epoch Times or some similar fount of ridiculous propaganda.
Regardless, Trump just pardoned over a thousand terrorists who attempted to help him overthrow the government on January 6th.
No. of Recommendations: 12
It's called the Supremacy Clause, part of the U.S. Constitution. Federal law preempts state and local law.
Yes, I'm very familiar with it. I'm a zoning and land use lawyer, and from time to time I've had to deal with Supremacy clause issues as they've come up pertaining to local regulation of federal facilities.
The Supremacy Clause is not a blank check exemption. Federal officials are required to comply with all state and local laws unless there is a conflict with a federal law or the exercise of federal function. Moreover, federal regulation is constrained by the anti-commandeering doctrine under the Tenth Amendment - basically, the 10th ensures that the federal government can't require the States (or their instrumentalities) to use their resources or personnel to implement or enforce federal programs or regulations.
Which is why your statement:
Mamdani, as Mayor of NYC, or as a candidate, has no greater power than you do to "stop ICE."
....is incorrect. If Mamdani is elected Mayor, he will have the legal authority to exercise a number of governmental powers, which powers ultimately derive from the State of New York, which are protected by the 10th Amendment and which will bind even federal officials unless there is an actual conflict with a federal law. That's far more power than I have.
So if, for example, NYC were to adopt the sorts of laws that California has adopted to try to cabin how ICE operates at the intersection of state and local law power, those would probably be fine under the Supremacy Clause. The anti-mask ones will probably be the subject of more serious litigation, and the Federal government might prevail. But most other "sanctuary city" type laws have managed to find legality under anti-commandeering or by avoiding direct conflict with federal law.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Mamdani was recently campaigning with one of the alleged terrorists who were involved in the 1993 WTC bombings.
Sorry, the fellow was listed as a potential co conspirator on a list that has been criticized as overly broad. Won't stick... but how about the rape gang in those Epstein files?
No. of Recommendations: 0
Why do you say things?
No. of Recommendations: 1
No. of Recommendations: 5
Why do you say things?
Because this is a message board where people have conversations about politics? I'm not sure I entirely understand the question....
No. of Recommendations: 4
Lapsody,
I'm glad you mentioned your concern about "rape gangs." Apparently that's a huge problem in certain areas of Western Europe where Islamic rape gangs have been rampantly abusing women and young girls for years if not decades.
For, you see, it's O.K. for true believes to rape infidels at their whim.
No. of Recommendations: 2
For, you see, it's O.K. for true believes to rape infidels at their whim.
I have no idea what the above means, which is par for the course.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Mamdani was naturalized in 2018. If it turns out he committed material fraud in the naturalization process, yes indeed, he would be subject to the possibility of being stripped of his citizenship and deported.
Just like any one else who hypothetically committed fraud in seeking naturalization.
Rule of Law, and all that?
Such as Melania? Hypothetically speaking, of course.
No. of Recommendations: 6
or Elon.
