We've already had the dumbest post of the day thanks to The Lincoln Project, but this is from yesterday, so we'll at least consider it a Friday contender. The first problem is assuming any scenario in which Kamala Harris is president. The second is assuming that Harris would close the border, let alone deport anyone.
Conor Friedersdorf had a thought experiment for us: Would conservatives be OK with President Harris deporting someone because they opposed DEI or men playing on women's sports teams? That's a strawman argument as if there ever was one. Obviously, he's referring to the feds arresting a Columbia graduate student who is a Hamas sympathizer and led anti-Semitic intimidation campaigns against Jewish students. Democrats, always anxious to be on the wrong side of an issue, are defending Mahmoud Kahlil and claiming his threats against Jews were free speech.
I would ask if conservatives nodding along to this post believe it would've been lawful under the First Amendment for a President Harris to deport any green-card holder who objected to DEI or trans athletes participating in women's sports? https://t.co/ZmXkSneKcA
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 14, 2025
Apples and oranges, dude.
If they engaged in violence or terrorism. Yes.
— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) March 14, 2025
Objected? Of course not. Calling for the murder of trans individuals or minorities & an armed intifada to accomplish it? Absolutely. Get your facts straight sir.
— Stacey (@ScotsFyre) March 15, 2025
If a green-card holder who objected to DEI or trans athletes participating in women's sports organized illegal takeovers of community spaces and advocated for & coordinated violence against trans people & DEI officials in alignment with terrorist organizations, then yes. https://t.co/SKnrSD6681
— Fusilli Spock (@awstar11) March 14, 2025
Recommended
Conor, this isn’t hard. Of course we wouldn’t object to deportation if that activist engaged in violence or organized students to harass and terrorize trans students.
— Julie Gunlock (@JGunlock) March 15, 2025
Lmaooooo buddy Khalil did more than simply object, these contortions to protect a non-citizen from the consequences of organizing criminal protests and intimidation of minorities are simply amazing
— Jon 🔬 (@JonnyMicro) March 15, 2025
Hamas and Hezbollah are State Dept designated terrorist organizations. They have killed American soldiers and citizens over the past 25+ years. You are a ridiculous moron.
— FilmLadd (@FilmLadd) March 14, 2025
I'm pretty sure Khalil did more than just "object".
— AdamInHTownTX (@AdamInHTownTX) March 15, 2025
In this scenario, do those "objections" include taking over university buildings, harassing trans or minority students enough to cause them fear for their safety, and organizing criminal trespass and vandalism? Important to know before I answer.
— Good Dog, Blue. 🐶 (@sasimmons) March 15, 2025
If someone is a guest in your home and they insult you and you ask them to leave, that doesn’t take away their rights. It just means they can’t exercise their rights in your home anymore.
— Pudge (@pudgenet) March 14, 2025
We can make our own rules for that.
They can be bad rules, but not unconstitutional.
He's a green card holder. That means he's a guest in this country at the Secretary of State's discretion. We don't want Hamas members as guests.
Sure.
— Lopezesq 🤺 🇺🇸 🍷 (@Michael_E_Lopez) March 14, 2025
A country gets to pick and choose who gets invited to the party.
And the host gets to decide when its time for someone to leave the party.
It's not always fair or good, but it's the rules of hospitality, which are there for a reason.
Holding a green card is a privilege not an entitlement.
— 🇺🇸OldGuy_54 (@Oldguy_54) March 14, 2025
Khalil's wife is eight months pregnant, so we can't arrest him. That's the same sort of logic Friedersdorf is trying to apply here.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member