Image 01 Image 03

Trump: “We are not backing down” in Effort to Pursue Citizenship Information

Trump: “We are not backing down” in Effort to Pursue Citizenship Information

Will issue Executive Order requiring federal agencies to turn over citizenship information

Thursday evening, Trump announced his administration was not “backing down in the effort to determine citizenship.” While the census will proceed without the hotly contested citizenship question, the administration will pursue that data via other federal agencies.


For context:

For our previous coverage of the citizenship census saga, see:

Trump still wants to add citizenship question, but faces renewed opposition

Trump administration reverses course on census, again, will pursue path forward with citizenship question

Census going to print without Citizenship Question

Chief Justice Roberts shot down Census citizenship question, but it’s not dead yet

Supreme Court: No census citizenship question for now, need clarified agency explanation

Census citizenship question opponents make desperate last-minute accusations



Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Precedent now in place, Trump’s conservative judges can now psychoanalyze leftist Democratic administrations into the late 21st century.

Connivin Caniff | July 11, 2019 at 6:29 pm

Roberts and Ryan – two traitors to the Constitutional framework of this country, and major agents of irreparable harm to the American system of freedom and justice for all our citizens.

I disagree … he is backing down. I want to see the question ON THE CENSUS FORM … this is some convoluted gobbledygook, for the life of me, what good does this do? This is merely some effort to save face and appease his base … but I’m not buying it.

    healthguyfsu in reply to walls. | July 11, 2019 at 6:59 pm

    That’s not possible any more. This is the grown up way of getting it without throwing a tantrum about it. A Dem wouldn’t know that approach because they all reverted back to childhood over the past 2 and a half years.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to healthguyfsu. | July 11, 2019 at 8:12 pm

      The problem is getting the information this way will not affect the most important reason for getting the question on the census which is the distribution of house districts.

      So yes it is a loss no matter which way you slice it. The sad part is that it is a fight that was worth having that was in easy win.

        Milhouse in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 12, 2019 at 1:24 am

        How would having the question on the ballot affect the distribution of house districts? Unless you agree with the Democrats that having it there would have discouraged aliens from answering the census, which would cause the total population to be undercounted.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 10:34 am

          Because I was incorrect about the Census only counting Citizens and Legal residents, though it is moronic that it isn’t done that way.

    artichoke in reply to walls. | July 11, 2019 at 7:01 pm

    You don’t win every battle. It would have been good to have the citizenship question, but there’s an upside with the precedent of another sort. I suspect that may have been a goal or at least a consolation prize, and in the long run it could matter much more.

    Trump 2020!

      MarkS in reply to artichoke. | July 12, 2019 at 6:19 am

      No Trump 2020 for me! He has become the Caver in Chief and what’s with this announcing a week in advance that he’s going to deport a million illegals. Does he really think that they will all be hanging around their houses on Sunday waiting for ICE, or more than likely they’ll be in hiding. That’s like telling Jeffery Epstein in advance that when he lands at Teterboro airport the FBI will arrest him

    tom_swift in reply to walls. | July 11, 2019 at 7:23 pm

    I’m not sure it qualifies as backing down, but it is admitting defeat. And it’s not really clear why. That “deadline” excuse for printing the census hardly holds water. Martin Luther could get his 95 Theses printed up overnight, and that was over five hundred years ago. Sure, the 21st Century has been a bit of a disappointment—where’s my damn flying car, already?—but we should be able to do at least as well as Martin’s local printer.

    Let me take issue with you. Why does it NEED to be ON THE CENSUS FORM, unless the motivation is the vile underhanded stuff the Democrats accuse it of being, an attempt to deter illegal immigrants from answering the census, and maybe the first step into not letting illegals be counted for redistricting purposes? What’s more important, the deterrence of illegals filing the census or gathering the actual information?

    I certainly think it’s the latter, else it is living down to the administration’s critics’ vile aspersions. And if you do want to make a case for not counting illegals, which would be with little precedent, you need the information more.

      walls in reply to JBourque. | July 11, 2019 at 7:49 pm

      1. It has been on census form for decades; was it illegal back then?
      2. Commerce Dept. is in charge of census … NOT SCOTUS.
      3. Motivation is IRRELEVANT … it’s either legal … or it ain’t. Talk about judicial overreach!
      4. This question is more relevant than the number of bathrooms or SF in my house! I want to know how many invaders are in my country.

        Milhouse in reply to walls. | July 12, 2019 at 1:29 am

        1. It has been on census form for decades; was it illegal back then?

        Nobody claims it was illegal then or would be illegal now.

        2. Commerce Dept. is in charge of census … NOT SCOTUS.

        But the courts are in charge of determining whether any agency action is legal.

        3. Motivation is IRRELEVANT … it’s either legal … or it ain’t.

        That is just not true. Motivation is always relevant — every agency action must be for a good reason. It is illegal for a government agency to do anything at all on a whim. And the law specifically says the courts should determine this.

        The courts’ precedent is that the reasons agencies give for their actions should be given extreme deference, but that is not the same as blindly accepting them in all cases even if it’s obvious to the court that they’re lying.

          heyjoojoo in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 3:07 am

          “Motivation is IRRELEVANT … it’s either legal … or it ain’t.”

          Uh, are you a new law student?

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 8:59 am

          Was that comment directed at walls? Because those are his/her words, not mine. And they’re flat-out wrong. All agency actions are subject to the “arbitrary and capricious” standard.

          artichoke in reply to Milhouse. | July 13, 2019 at 7:14 pm

          Upvoted because while it’s unpleasant, what Milhouse cites is indeed the law as I understand it.

      D Grant in reply to JBourque. | July 11, 2019 at 7:56 pm

      The census is confidential. The identifying info cannot be given to anyone. $250,000 fine and/or 5 yrs prison. Therefore, it will not deter illegals from answering the question. It would be nice to know how many people here are not citizens. And it has been asked since 1850, in one form or another.

        Milhouse in reply to D Grant. | July 12, 2019 at 1:34 am

        The census is confidential.


        Therefore, it will not deter illegals from answering the question.

        That is very unlikely to be true. Many people, especially aliens and especially illegal ones and their relatives, do not trust the confidentiality, and wouldn’t want to risk it. And they may not be wrong — there is precedent for government using census information, despite the promise confidentiality. It was used to round up the Japanese in 1941.

          D Grant in reply to Milhouse. | July 13, 2019 at 7:39 pm

          The Second War Powers Act was passed to get the information of people of Japanese ancestry living in Washington after a “threat” on the president’s life. That occurred in August 1943, about 17 months after the internment roundup. It gave the names of about 79 people. So, yes, the census was used to find a few, but not the masses. The confidentiality has been reinforced dramatically.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to JBourque. | July 11, 2019 at 8:14 pm

      Illegal Aliens should not be counted for representation purposes, there is nothing vile or underhanded about it. They are not supposed to be counted.

        Milhouse in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 12, 2019 at 1:31 am

        STOP LYING. You know very well that what you wrote is not true. You know very well, because you’ve been told at least a dozen times, that the constitution explicitly rejects your preference, and requires representation to be based on the entire population, including aliens, whether legally here or not. It makes no difference whether you like it, that is the law, and you are not entitled to lie about it and deny it.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 10:39 am

          Why don’t you check out the Time stamps on those comments and not that they were made within minutes of each other instead of being an asshat by default?

          I was not lying you self absorbed pompous know it all, I was incorrect there is a difference.

          I won’t hold my breath for your apology. You need to work on yourself, your becoming as bad a Rags.

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 11:45 am

          No, the Constitution does not. The Constitution only talks about legal people, not people who are here without the permission of our government. The Constitution considers those people to be invaders and provides for remedies to those invaders.

          The Constitution certainly does not require invaders to be counted and represented in our government.

          When the Constitution was written, there were open borders. There were no such thing as illegal aliens. So, the Constitution did not provide for the counting of illegal aliens.

          How people don’t understand this is beyond me.

          Milhouse, I’m talking to you. The Constitution did not establish a government which represented illegal aliens — otherwise known as invaders.

          Illegal aliens — invaders — get no representation in government. They aren’t allowed to be in the Country. Period. Full stop!

          If all persons are to be counted, why the exclusion of “Indians not taxed?” After all, they are persons too.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 6:56 pm

          Indians Not Taxed were indeed persons, which is precisely why they had to be specifically excluded, or they would indeed have had to be counted.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 6:57 pm

          Gremlin, you weren’t just told today, you’ve been here a long time, and this has come up at least a dozen times in the last few months.

          The real question is “why” were “Indians not taxed” specifically excluded from being counted? Perhaps because they were not US citizens until 1923?

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 14, 2019 at 1:10 pm

          Indians Not Taxed were not included in the apportionment because while they were physically within the borders the USA claimed for itself, they were effectively not in the USA at all. They were not subject to US jurisdiction (which is why they were not taxed). They could not be prosecuted or sued in US courts. There wasn’t even any real way to count them if that was desired.

        Milhouse in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 12, 2019 at 6:58 pm

        Lgbmiel, that is the most ridiculous pack of nonsense I have ever heard. You cannot possibly believe it yourself.

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 9:05 pm

          What is nonsense? Be specific.

          The borders were open when the Constitution was written. Illegal aliens did not exist. However, invaders did exist and the Constitution most definitely provides for what we are to do with invaders.

          The census is for representation in our Congress and invaders are not to be represented by our government.

          You cannot make a case for representation of illegal aliens — invaders — in our Congress. Even the amendment to our Constitution makes plain that the counting is for representation and voting.

          Milhouse you are plainly wrong. Illegal aliens are not to be counted by the census.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 14, 2019 at 1:38 pm

          It is nonsense that when the constitution says “all persons” it excludes those here illegally. As you yourself pointed out, no such people existed in 1788, so there is no way the phrase could have been understood to exclude them. Everybody in 1788 understood “all persons” to mean literally every breathing human being, regardless of age, sex, race, nationality, or condition of servitude. (The constitution then went on to specify two categories of persons who were not to be counted despite being “persons”: Indians Not Taxed, and 40% of slaves. Illegal immigrants do not fit into either of these categories.)

          It is also nonsense that the constitution considers illegal immigrants to be invaders. Indeed the constitution doesn’t even give Congress the authority to control immigration. Congress now has that authority only by virtue of a Supreme Court decision more than a century after the constitution was ratified.

          It is also nonsense and overblown rhetoric to regard illegal immigrants as invaders in any sense. They are certainly not legally invaders, and if, e.g., someone were to shoot one of them they’d be tried for murder — even if they were to do so on the president’s orders.

          It is also nonsense that “the Constitution most definitely provides for what we are to do with invaders”. It doesn’t mention invaders at all, though it does four times mention invasion.

          The census is for representation, not for voting. It explicitly requires that people who are ineligible to vote must nevertheless be counted and represented.

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | July 14, 2019 at 2:08 pm

          They didn’t exclude them because they was no cause to exclude them, they didn’t exist. How does legislation exclude people who don’t exist.

          The Constitution is for the People of the United States of America. You seem to forget that. The Framers wrote it for the People of the united states. The instructions laid out in the Constitution are only for people who are legally here in the Country.

          All other persons are, in fact, invaders, whether you choose to recognize the fact. They are invading a sovereign country by breaking its laws. They come in without regard to our laws and make demands on the government, ‘waging war’ when the government doesn’t give them what they want.

          That is an invasion of our Country. Our governments exist only for the benefit of the citizens — the people who created them.

          It is beyond imagination and beyond absurdity that you would ever entertain the idea that people who should not even be here and have the opportunity to fill out a census, should be counted.

          Do you understand that, Milhouse? An illegal alien is not supposed to be in the Country. It is the failure of our government that there are any here to even be counted.

          This issue should not even exist.

          Our government has failed in keeping these people from entering our Country; has failed in keeping track of the illegal aliens; has failed in removing them; has aided and abetted these invaders.

          Your position is pure insanity.

          The Constitution exists only for the People of the United States. Illegal aliens are not the People of the United States.

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | July 14, 2019 at 2:23 pm

          Amendment XIV Section 2

          Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

          Of course it’s related to voting!!! How do we get representation??? We vote for it!

          My goodness, Milhouse, don’t you remember who could and couldn’t vote back then??? There were whole classes of legal residents who were ineligible to vote. Children didn’t vote, either, but they still were ‘represented.’

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | July 14, 2019 at 2:28 pm

          What do you mean the Constitution doesn’t delegate immigration to Congress?

          I think I have figured out your problem…

    Close The Fed in reply to walls. | July 11, 2019 at 7:53 pm


    Roberts & Crew are killing the country. The self-importance of those lawyers disgusts me.

    Trump should have told Barr to POUND SAND, pulled a Jackson/Obama, and put the damn question on the census. Roberts has made his decision and now let him enforce it!

    Roberts & Crew will go down in any honest history as the murderers of America. Roberts & Crew and their predecessors in office.

    Who wrote Plyler v. Doe again???

    I have ZERO respect for Roberts & Crew. ZERO. ZERO respect for Congress that has zero manly virtues, totally content to watch the country die. Dishonorable is too good a word for all of them!

NavyMustang | July 11, 2019 at 7:06 pm

Lawsuit to prevent this gambit in 3…2…1…

While it would have been better to have presented a more disciplined argument to SCOTUS and allowing the question on the census this data sharing by federal departments and agencies is actually a worse outcome for the open border crowd.
1. Think about having a side by side searchable Database from SS, IRS, DOJ, Fed. Prisons, USDA (food stamp/TANF), HUD, CPB, HS.
2. The application of the database for combating identity theft, fraud in various government assistance programs will be a huge asset in prosecution.
As one example the database will have demographic data from SS showing age. So if the household of John Smith age 100 is receiving benefits appropriate for a dependent minor child that creates a reason for John Smith to come to a benefit review in person. Of course he will need to bring in his DL or ID and utility bills in his name to validate his address and identity.

This opens the opportunity to send clarification to state governments such as; John Smith AS # xxx is only 35 years old and does not live at the listed address. Now the state government can adjust voter registration role or school district zone crossing or perjury charges related to applications for state benefits.

Bottom line is a lawsuit to block commerce department from using data from other departments to augment directly collected census data in creating the final census data to be used in apportionment might succeed or might not. However, there is no way a suit to prevent sharing for creation of a database itself will succeed. Once that genie is out of the bottle then it is too late.

In fact, surrendering to Roberts on this whole idea—that a court can decide that perfectly legal actions are magically made illegal if the court doesn’t like the imaginary reasons behind them—is a disaster. This is a huge extension of the whole “emanations of penumbras” fraud, and it should be fought by someone who has the clout to do so. Someone like, say, Andrew Jackson. We can’t have government employees arbitrarily deciding the extents of their own powers; that’s the Roman Triumvirate all over again, and it doesn’t end well.

    The decision was a dishonest win by TKO, running out the clock. Roberts in no way stopped the question from being on the 2030 form, he just made it impossible to get it on the 2020 form. I won’t rant against Barr for recognizing that reality. But Trump can counter in ways that are more difficult to stop, and which go after the information rather than the “deterrence effect”. A lot of people have argued for that deterrence, but not Trump.

    Trump may have the last laugh.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to JBourque. | July 11, 2019 at 9:16 pm

      We have repeatedly seen Trump do things which initially draw criticism, and then prevail. He usually has more and better information than we have.

    Milhouse in reply to tom_swift. | July 12, 2019 at 1:38 am

    In fact, surrendering to Roberts on this whole idea—that a court can decide that perfectly legal actions are magically made illegal if the court doesn’t like the imaginary reasons behind them—is a disaster.

    Sigh. Once again:
    The reviewing court shall—
    (2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be—
    (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law;

      Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 9:07 am

      Do the downvoters somehow contend that this is not the law?! Or do they think it doesn’t matter what the law actually is, when it hurts their feeelingz?

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 10:42 am

        I think it is probably more a problem with people being tired of your pompous condescending and arrogant attitude, like I said above you are basically just acting like Rags Jr. now.

We already know how many people are here legally. It’s the number of social security numbers assigned to living people plus the number of valid green cards plus the number of active visas. Everyone else is illegal. They’ll only get counted if they answer the census and turn it in. Trump’s EO gives the Commerce Department access to the databases they’ll need. It’s brilliant.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to elliesmom. | July 11, 2019 at 8:20 pm

    Except for the huge numbers of illegals that have fake identities.

      Mac45 in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 11, 2019 at 8:42 pm

      The social security administration, in conjunction with the IRS can easily determine the approximate number of illegal aliens working in the US. Employers follow the law as far as obtaining SS numbers is concerned. And, they pay withholding taxes on those SSNs. But, no one really wants to get involved with this. All of the withholding taxes, gathered from people illegally using the SSN of another are kept by the US Government. So, unless you have a situation where an employer has multiple people using the same SSN [and we have had several cases where that was the case] the government is not interested in prosecuting, or even pursuing, people using stolen identities. And, while a certain percentage of illegal aliens are engaged in illegal industries, most actually work in legal industries using false identification.

      elliesmom in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 11, 2019 at 8:48 pm

      If someone is using a social security number illegally, he’ll lie about being a citizen on the form, too.

I think this was at best a tactical and at worst a strategic retreat.

Realistically, we will never know how many Illegals are in our country – the estimate of 11 million is a joke and it is probably many times higher than that.

I’m sure many Illegals – those who actually opened the Census Form – would just throw it away. And how many others would you expect to answer the question honestly?

So if the Romans really tried to get an accurate count of how many Visigoths had entered the “gates” by way of a questionnaire would it have changed anything?

Not that I have anything against Visigoths (Diversity being our Strength and all).

And I will always support PDT for trying but what a daunting task!


    elliesmom in reply to franker. | July 11, 2019 at 8:04 pm

    If illegals don’t fill out the census and turn it in, then they don’t get counted. States with large illegal populations due to sanctuary cities don’t get congressional seats for them or any kind of federal aid based on headcount. I’m OK with that. If there are fewer benefits to having them in your state, maybe there will be less incentive to encourage them to come. Without its huge illegal population counted, California would be bleeding congresscritters, which is very likely the reason Pelosi is so afraid illegals will avoid filling out the census. The original prescription for taking a census was written before there was any concept of an illegal immigrant. If you wanted to become an American, you just got off a boat. In today’s environment, only citizens should be counted for congressional representation.

      Milhouse in reply to elliesmom. | July 12, 2019 at 2:18 am

      If illegals don’t fill out the census and turn it in, then they don’t get counted. States with large illegal populations due to sanctuary cities don’t get congressional seats for them or any kind of federal aid based on headcount. I’m OK with that.

      I’m OK with it too, because I don’t like the way people in those states vote. But if they happened to be places that voted the other way I wouldn’t be OK with it, so I don’t expect the other side to be OK with it now.

      In today’s environment, only citizens should be counted for congressional representation.

      So are you proposing to amend the constitution?

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Milhouse. | July 12, 2019 at 10:53 am

        “So are you proposing to amend the constitution?”

        That is what I would propose, though in today’s political climate the chances of actually getting any amendment passed are practically zero, regardless of how it is proposed.

        I would also argue that the wording of the 14th amendment was never meant to include Illegal Aliens since such a thing was basically unheard of at the time. “Whole Number of Persons” was worded in that way to ensure that every former slave was counted, though good luck ever getting a court, especially the current SCOTUS to rule that way.

      D Grant in reply to elliesmom. | July 13, 2019 at 7:53 pm

      “California would be bleeding congresscritters, which is very likely the reason Pelosi is so afraid illegals will avoid filling out the census.”


Close The Fed | July 11, 2019 at 8:02 pm

And let us be clear: if Roberts & Crew win, which they most certainly ARE, then the country becomes more and more inundated with numbers of foreigners it is IMPOSSIBLE to assimilate.

That means the entire character of the country changes – which it’s been doing – right before our eyes.

And let me tell you, Mr. Roberts & Crew, cartels don’t have much use for judges, or mayors, or policemen, or reporters. Just go to Breitbart Cartel Chronicles, and you can see how many are routinely murdered!

So people will still be living here, but the safety, the decency, the prosperity, the success, will all be gone, gone, gone…. Gone With The Wind…. The South isn’t the only place that can lose its power.

Good for you Roberts! Whatever ass gave you this power, whatever string of events caused all of these crews to show up and grab unto themselves the power – not the right- but the POWER, to fundamentally destroy America, was a tragedy beyond comprehension — because all that come after, all those lifetimes, all those countless seconds, minutes, days of millions upon millions of people, will live an UnAmerican life, even though their birthright was American.

Roberts is a self-satisfied piece of human garbage, as are the others who suffer from law-itis, and are happy to see the country fail while they preen self-satisfied.

    There was no immigration in the US from the 20’s to 1965 … the glory years! Then along came the democrats led by Ted the Swimmer with the Immigration Act of 1965. Remember the promises … they will assimilate, learn English, etc. What a crock! I’d like to find Ted’s grave and piss on it … no, crap on it.

Dear United States Government,

How many US citizens are there, where do they live, what are their representative needs? How many illegal aliens are in the US diluting my governmental representation and resources?

Signed, a concerned citizen.

Dear person,

It is none of your business. As a matter of fact, the concept of US citizen is now outlawed by judicial fiat. If you continue to engage in such wrong think, you will be sent for re-education.

Signed, the All Powerful Swamp

If they’ve got sense, any census forms that are going to print have a blank square space where the census question goes, so if they get the green light, flip a switch and the rest come out fixed.

The problem that the administration faces, with the current decision, is that the SCOTUS made it impossible for the administration to return with another reason for including the question.

The SCOTUS essentially said that the administration has to not only have a viable reason for including the question, but, that this has to be the original reason for including the question. The Court made it impossible for the administration to meet both of these requirements. And, there is no higher court to appeal to.

Now, the biggest problem with the decision is two fold. The first is that the decision to include the citizenship question was covered by the APA. As it is not a procedure or regulation, it is not subject to the provisions of the APA. Also, the plaintiffs failed to show, convincingly, that illegal aliens will NOT respond to the census because of the inclusion of the question.

Maybe Roberts has been with Epstein at some point

Maybe that’s what they have on him

    MarkS in reply to gonzotx. | July 12, 2019 at 6:29 am

    IMO, its the adoption of his children

    Close The Fed in reply to gonzotx. | July 12, 2019 at 10:45 am

    I don’t think they have a damn thing on him. He doesn’t like America. He’s twisted into a pretzel to help obamacare. He’s just mainstream left.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Close The Fed. | July 12, 2019 at 10:57 am

      I disagree with both points. The problem with Roberts is that he is more worried about image and legacy than he is making good solid decisions. He doesn’t want his tenure of Chief Justice to be looked at in a negative light, so on any major decision that is highly charged he will try to find a way to land in the middle, or at least make it appear he is being “non-partisan”.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 12, 2019 at 10:59 am

        Addendum to previous comment

        Which is why I hope that Trump has the opportunity to appoint at least one more Conservative Justice to the court, it would greatly reduce Roberts influence over decisions.

        artichoke in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 12, 2019 at 9:29 pm

        I think you’re falling for the usual hagiography of senior public figures.

        He’s corrupted or bad. What you see is what you get. They want you to overthink it and ignore what’s in front of everyone’s eyes.

      artichoke in reply to Close The Fed. | July 12, 2019 at 9:27 pm

      Check out the theory about the adoption of his children. It seems to have substance.

        Milhouse in reply to artichoke. | July 14, 2019 at 1:45 pm

        Really? What substance would that be? On the contrary, it appears to be entirely without foundation. It seems to be exactly the same as alleging that Prof Jacobson is a Russian spy, or that Harry Reid has three bodies buried in his basement. These things are not physically impossible, but there’s no foundation for them so it’s scurrilous to allege them.

The census is about counting American citizens, not phucking illegals. Count the fother muckers if you want but not as a citizen. They don’t get to decide our House representation. And phuck Roberts, POS.

    artichoke in reply to gourdhead. | July 12, 2019 at 9:31 pm

    Since entering the USA illegally became a crime, and we had visas that it was possible to overstay, I don’t think we’ve updated our laws regarding the census to reflect the now more legally-diminished status of illegal aliens. (At the Founding there was no such thing as an illegal alien.)

    Milhouse in reply to gourdhead. | July 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm

    The census is not about counting American citizens. It is about counting the entire population, both citizen and alien.

The ONLY way out of this mess – please correct me if there are other ways – is an armed presence of millions of patriotic citizens at the border. I’m talking MILLIONS of armed citizens who say enough is enough, we’re not going to surrender this country to 3rd-world invaders-lawbreakers. According to the gubmint, the number of illegals has been steady at 11,000,000 for the last 30 years! Horse crap! Americans SHOULD KNOW the real number.

This is a cancer – probably Stage 4. The gubmint will arrest 10 or 100 or 1,000. The gubmint will crap their pants at 10,000,000 Americans saying NO! The military will not fire upon citizens defending their homeland against invasion. You have the ballot box. And then you have the ammo box. We’ve tried the ballot box. Hong Kong citizens protested with a 26% turnout!!! Pathetic Americans can even muster a 0.0026% turnout! There is strength in numbers …. and we need the numbers!

I’m hoping against hope for a powder keg moment to light the charge. Mark my words. You won’t recognize this place in 30 years. Thank you dems and RINO’s ….

    artichoke in reply to walls. | July 12, 2019 at 9:25 pm

    Trump seems to be dealing with this in his signature way, by making a deal. Now it seems Mexico is sealing their northern and southern borders.

    That’s really Mexico paying for the wall — for now a human wall of Mexican troops.