Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (301211)	9/7/2024 8:08:59 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 362368

If crossings are allowed, they aren’t illegal? If crossings are allowed by statute, then they are legal. There are plenty of legal ways for people to travel from one country to another. I've done it bunches of time, some pretty out of the way countries, too. Countries write laws to specify the particulars and there's also international law. Which is why I asked what provision of the proposed legislation Thomas was talking about. It makes no sense for a law to be written to allow an unlawful act. It's an inherent contradiction so the claim must be somehow mistaken. When J6 protestors were allowed to enter the Capitol, it wasn’t illegal? I haven't looked into the particulars of how they were allowed in. Some guards may have opened the doors for people, as has been claimed, because they didn't know better given the abrupt and unusual nature of the event. Or because they were scared and submitted when threatened, which itself is a crime. If some protestors had a genuine impression that it was OK to enter based on the behavior of the guards, I would think that that would be taken into consideration re charging them even though the building was not open to the public. For the ones who forced their way in, charge and conviction are called for. The scenarios are comparable only in that both have their own laws regarding entry.