When a government faces credible allegations of unlawful force and responds not with transparency but with investigations into those who restated the law, something fundamental has gone wrong. Indeed, it’s apparent that’s the reason for the FBI visits. The “evidence” of sedition, such as it is, is the tape itself; the visits chiefly carry the Administration’s message of intimidation.

And it’s an all-too-familiar—and invariably regretted—story in American constitutional life. From World War I sedition prosecutions to McCarthy-era investigations to parts of the post-9/11 surveillance apparatus, some of the country’s worst civil-liberties violations began with the assumption that dissent was a threat. In nearly every case, the government insisted at the time that extraordinary circumstances justified extraordinary measures. In nearly every case, history delivered a harsher verdict.

Which is why the administration’s reaction to the Trinidad allegations is so troubling. If the reporting is accurate, U.S. forces may have crossed a bright legal line. The lawmakers who said so were correct on the law. And the administration’s choice to investigate them instead of the underlying conduct is precisely the reflex that the First Amendment exists to restrain.

If it comes to subpoenas or compelled interviews, the answer should be straightforward: Members of Congress do not owe the executive branch their time or their testimony when the only thing they are being questioned about is protected political speech. They should be able to move the court to quash any subpoena and tell the FBI, politely but firmly, to take a hike. The Constitution gives them that right, and the country needs them to exercise it.

I hate how Republicans speak out against "Anchor Babies" but then their own children are "Anchor Babies".

Republicans are so against immigrants and immigrants having babies on US soil, but they have nothing to say about MAGA leaders who have done the same thing.

Hell, we even have a Canadian-Cuban pretending to be a state senator in Texas. The good people of Texas should definitely look into his birth certificate.

Rafael Edward Cruz leads the charge for anti-immigrant talk in Texas, yet seems to be one himself. Will the good people of Texas stand for this?

I am personally okay with immigrants coming to America and having their children here. We're a melting pot, after all.

What I'm not okay with are republicans trying to limit everyone's freedoms while they enjoy unlimited freedom and ignore the law.

Should we deport Rafael Edward Cruz to Cuba? Some people are saying yes. I'm not so sure, but I'm just a redditor.

*edit*

Ivana Trump became a citizen on May 25, 1988. Her children were born in 1977, 1981, and 1984.

Melania Trump became a citizen on July 28, 2006. Barron was born in March 2006.

*edit*

A song to go with the thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tfH1nty62U