[AATW]

Being granted a license isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the license regardless of how you conduct yourself. Being granted a certificate of land ownership isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the land forever, regardless of how you conduct your finances or eminent domain considerations. There are a hundred examples where designations are not permanent.

I don't think there's any controversy there. Yes, of course there are situations where citizenship can and should be revoked.
But someone being an outspoken criticism of the leader of a country isn't one of them. You're supposed to be a democracy in which people have free speech.
Removing people who criticise the administration is a bit...dictatory.
Come on, dude, you surely see there are dangers here. Although all that said it doesn't sound like Trump actually has unilateral power to do this, so there are some checks and balances.

[honk]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said, but look, whatever. Nothing I'm saying is getting through to you, so if you really want to believe that Clinton is a left-wing totalitarian because of his affair with Monica Lewinsky, then fine, go ahead. The rest of the world knows you're wrong.

On the other hand, there is a compelling argument to be made that the far left should be stripped of citizenship and deported.

No, there really isn't. It's blatantly unconstitutional on the face of it and horrific on an ethical level. That being said, if he wants to do it, then he'll do it. The courts won't stop him, Congress won't stop him, and his fans won't stop supporting him. They will never stop supporting him. That's why I'm not excited about the backlash Trump is getting over Epstein. His fans will fall in line within a week or so.

[Lord Dave]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said, but look, whatever. Nothing I'm saying is getting through to you, so if you really want to believe that Clinton is a left-wing totalitarian because of his affair with Monica Lewinsky, then fine, go ahead. The rest of the world knows you're wrong.

On the other hand, there is a compelling argument to be made that the far left should be stripped of citizenship and deported.

No, there really isn't. It's blatantly unconstitutional on the face of it and horrific on an ethical level. That being said, if he wants to do it, then he'll do it. The courts won't stop him, Congress won't stop him, and his fans won't stop supporting him. They will never stop supporting him. That's why I'm not excited about the backlash Trump is getting over Epstein. His fans will fall in line within a week or so.

Yeah but if Dems get back in power, revenge time.

Like, the next dem president could execute Trump at the inauguration for reasons of him being a domestic threat, arrest and deport every maga member, deny allowing any voting to be secret ballot, then, to top it all off, have ICE protect itself by killing any protesters.

Which is all the apparent power Trump now has.  Or he assumes he does.

[markjo]

The keyword is that someone is granted citenship.

Citizenship is a right granted by the constitution, therefore only the constitution can revoke citizenship.  Please show me where the constitution outlines the process for revoking citizenship.

Further, a US Citizen can choose to give up their US Citizenship, proving that citizenship isn't absolute. If it were absolute you would not be able to give it up.

Being able to give up a right is not the same as having that right taken away.

[Lord Dave]

That's unfortunate for pretty much everyone. But yes, a largely stupid population voted for a stupid thing for stupid reasons. The fact you think that's a good thing is...odd.
I mean, Trump is pretty funny. But if you think that someone being voted in to power because they're funny is a good thing then you're part of the problem.

Humor is used for multiple puropses beyond the sake of humor. I gave an example of the Kim Jong Un summit and how humor was used to gain the upper hand. Trump's use of humor has won him multiple debates, in final striking blows against his opponents, showing that he is the smartest and most dymanic candiate for the job.

I've read the Constitution. It's not that long. It says who gets citizenship. It doesn't say that anyone specifically has a right to keep their citizenship, or that it can't be stripped away from them. There is nothing about "must be kept" or "must be maintained". This would go to the Supreme Court.

Actually, it has gone before the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship case. You know, Trump’s challenge to the 14th amendment.

While you’re reading the Constitution, please point out where revoking citizenship is a power granted to the president in particular or the executive branch in general.

Here is Google AI's interpretation of the 1898 case:

"The landmark Supreme Court case regarding birthright citizenship is United States v. Wong Kim Ark, decided in 1898. This case affirmed that the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause grants automatic citizenship to anyone born within the United States, regardless of their parents' citizenship status. "

The keyword is that someone is granted citenship. Being granted a license isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the license regardless of how you conduct yourself. Being granted a certificate of land ownership isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the land forever, regardless of how you conduct your finances or eminent domain considerations. There are a hundred examples where designations are not permanent.

Further, a US Citizen can choose to give up their US Citizenship, proving that citizenship isn't absolute. If it were absolute you would not be able to give it up.

Please don't use AI.  It's stupid.

Also, you can give up your right to remain silent.  But it can't be taken.
Same with citizenship.  No where does it say it can be taken away.  Given away, yes, but not taken.

Otherwise, the next dem could take away Trump's citizenship and deport him to El Salvador.

[Action80]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said...

No, that is exactly what you said.

One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.

Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.

Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.

[Lord Dave]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said...

No, that is exactly what you said.

One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.

Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.

Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.

So Trump is a totalitarian, by your logic?

[Action80]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said...

No, that is exactly what you said.

One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.

Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.

Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.

So Trump is a totalitarian, by your logic?

Yes, although I am not sure where you garner Trump has engaged in sexual acts while at the workplace.

The last one to hold office that was not was shot.

After he recouped, he ceased further attempts for fundamental change.

[Lord Dave]

Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said...

No, that is exactly what you said.

One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.

Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.

Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.

So Trump is a totalitarian, by your logic?

Yes, although I am not sure where you garner Trump has engaged in sexual acts while at the workplace.

The last one to hold office that was not was shot.

After he recouped, he ceased further attempts for fundamental change.

Ronald Reagan?

[Dr Van Nostrand]

After the 'pussy grabbing', crypto scams, insults to our war veterans, subverting our democracy, and aligning with autocrats, it's good to see that at least some Republicans will draw the line at child sex trafficking.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/14/trump-maga-epstein-bondi-bongino-00451114?cid=apn

Live by the conspiracy, die by the conspiracy.

[honk]

Yeah but if Dems get back in power, revenge time.

Like, the next dem president could execute Trump at the inauguration for reasons of him being a domestic threat, arrest and deport every maga member, deny allowing any voting to be secret ballot, then, to top it all off, have ICE protect itself by killing any protesters.

Which is all the apparent power Trump now has.  Or he assumes he does.

No, a Democratic president would be held to account if they tried to exceed their power so blatantly. The Supreme Court would rule against them, Congress would impeach them, public support would drop to nothing, etc. I suspect that a Republican president would also face the appropriate consequences, as there's no other high-profile conservative I'm aware of with the charisma to keep Trump's cult of personality going, although it's hard to say for sure given the GOP's embrace of cynicism and abandonment of democratic ideals.

And there's no point in arguing with Action80. He keeps moving the goalposts every time someone points out to him that his argument is nonsense. His last argument was that politicians passing laws on the subject of what Clinton did was what made it a direct reflection of his political ideology. Now his argument seems to be that the affair happening in the workplace was what made it a direct reflection of Clinton's political ideology. If I provided counter-examples of the hundreds of other inappropriate or illegal things people can do at the workplace that presumably don't reflect their political ideology, he'd change his mind yet again and insist that it actually came down to something completely different. There's nothing to be gained by debating someone who's acting in bad faith.

After the 'pussy grabbing', crypto scams, insults to our war veterans, subverting our democracy, and aligning with autocrats, it's good to see that at least some Republicans will draw the line at child sex trafficking.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/14/trump-maga-epstein-bondi-bongino-00451114?cid=apn

Live by the conspiracy, die by the conspiracy.

This will blow over, just like the hundred or so other scandals that would have ended the career of any other politician have blown over. Trump's fans don't care about child sex trafficking, just like they don't care about the fact that he's a corrupt con man, an incompetent idiot, a rapist, and a deeply foul, sleazy man who exhibits just about every negative quality a single person could have. Trump's fans care about Trump, and they will never, ever abandon him. Not even Trump's eventual death will put an end to their overwhelming devotion and loyalty to him.

[Lord Dave]

Yeah but if Dems get back in power, revenge time.

Like, the next dem president could execute Trump at the inauguration for reasons of him being a domestic threat, arrest and deport every maga member, deny allowing any voting to be secret ballot, then, to top it all off, have ICE protect itself by killing any protesters.

Which is all the apparent power Trump now has.  Or he assumes he does.

No, a Democratic president would be held to account if they tried to exceed their power so blatantly. The Supreme Court would rule against them, Congress would impeach them, public support would drop to nothing, etc.

They might even make an amendment to prevent presidents from having such immunity to begin with.

Which would be the point.

[Action80]

honk still claiming Clinton to be a centrist.

Wow.

No one is fooled by the approach of the ilk claiming Trump to be absolutely terrible, all the while he is continuing the US down the path of the exact things you totalitarians desire.

The guy is a lifelong liberal.

[Dr Van Nostrand]

honk still claiming Clinton to be a centrist.

Wow.

No one is fooled by the approach of the ilk claiming Trump to be absolutely terrible, all the while he is continuing the US down the path of the exact things you totalitarians desire.

The guy is a lifelong liberal.

As horrifying as Bill Clinton may be, at least we now know with certainty that he didn't go to any of Epstein's parties. Trump says it's all a hoax, just a bunch of lies. In fact, he's going to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell. It was just Epstein by himself trafficking girls from himself to himself. Clinton, Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson were publicly dog-piled with these salacious Epstein rumors by hateful people jealous of their public success.

But, Trump has been playing 4D chess all along. By pretending to believe in the list and by claiming Clinton was on the list, he could get into a position of power to safely reveal that the list doesn't exist. something like that...

I'm sure we'll have it Magasplained shortly.

[Tom Bishop]

Being granted a license isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the license regardless of how you conduct yourself. Being granted a certificate of land ownership isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the land forever, regardless of how you conduct your finances or eminent domain considerations. There are a hundred examples where designations are not permanent.

I don't think there's any controversy there. Yes, of course there are situations where citizenship can and should be revoked.
But someone being an outspoken criticism of the leader of a country isn't one of them. You're supposed to be a democracy in which people have free speech.
Removing people who criticise the administration is a bit...dictatory.
Come on, dude, you surely see there are dangers here. Although all that said it doesn't sound like Trump actually has unilateral power to do this, so there are some checks and balances.

That's not the reason Trump gave for why Rosie O'Donnell should be stripped of citizenship. Stop making things up.

The keyword is that someone is granted citenship.

Citizenship is a right granted by the constitution, therefore only the constitution can revoke citizenship.  Please show me where the constitution outlines the process for revoking citizenship.

The Constitution doesn't say whether it can be taken away or not. Anything not in the Constitution is for the government to decide. It also doesn't say that Citizenship is a right, like the right to free speech and the right to bare arms. If it were a right it would have been explicitly described that way with the other rights. Instead, it merely outlines who qualifies for citizenship.

[markjo]

The Constitution doesn't say whether it can be taken away or not. Anything not in the Constitution is for the government to decide. It also doesn't say that Citizenship is a right, like the right to free speech and the right to bare arms. If it were a right it would have been explicitly described that way with the other rights. Instead, it merely outlines who qualifies for citizenship.

Perhaps you should take another gander at the 14th amendment:

Fourteenth Amendment

Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It says that if you're born in the US, then you are a citizen.  That sounds like a right to me.  On the other hand, citizenship through immigration is a privilege that can be revoked under certain conditions.  If the constitution doesn't say that birthright citizenship can be revoked, then you shouldn't assume that it can.

This whole Rosie O'Donnell nonsense is just that, nonsense.  It's just another attempt to distract from the Epstein fiasco.

[AATW]

“Credible”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgl4dl334go

So…he means the stuff he’s not in, right?