Below is my column in The Hill on the new policy of Secretary Marco Rubio to deny entry of foreign figures responsible for the censorship of American citizens. It would constitute the first meaningful response to the growing threat of Europe to free speech in the United States. In the very least, it signals that the United States is prepared to fight to preserve this “Indispensable Right.”
Here is the column:
Winston Churchill once warned that “appeasement is feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last.” When it comes to the crocodile of censorship, history is strewn with defenders who later became digestives. Censorship produces an insatiable appetite for greater and greater speech limits, and today’s censorship supporters often become tomorrow’s censored subjects.
This week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stopped feeding the crocodile.
On May 28, 2025, Rubio shocked many of our allies by issuing a new visa restriction policy that bars foreign nationals deemed “responsible for censorship of protected expression” in the U.S.
The new policy follows a major address by Vice President J.D. Vance in Munich challenging our European allies to end their systematic attacks on free speech. Vance declared, “If you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people that elected me and elected President Trump.”
At the time, I called the speech “Churchillian” in drawing a bright line for the free world. Rubio’s action is no less impressive and even more impactful.
Europe has faced no consequences for its aggressive efforts at transnational censorship. Indeed, this should not be a fight for the administration alone. Congress should explore reciprocal penalties for foreign governments targeting American companies or citizens for engaging in protected speech.
After Vance spoke in Munich, I spoke in Berlin at the World Forum, where European leaders gathered in one of the most strikingly anti-free speech conferences I have attended. This year’s forum embraced the slogan “A New World Order with European Values.”
That “new world order” is based on an aggressive anti-free speech platform that has been enforced for years by the European Union. At the heart of this effort is the Digital Services Act, a draconian law that allows for sweeping censorship and speech prosecutions. Most importantly, it has been used by the EU to threaten American corporations for their failure to censor Americans and others on social media sites.
After the World Forum, I returned home to warn that this is now an existential war over a right that defines us as a people —the very “Indispensable Right” identified by Justice Louis Brandeis, which is essential for every other right in the Constitution.
The irony was crushing. I wrote about how this nation has fought to protect our rights in world wars, yet many in Congress simply shrug or even support the effort as other countries move to make Americans censor other Americans.
What was most unnerving about Berlin was how Americans have encouraged Europeans to target their fellow citizens. At the forum was Hillary Clinton who, after Elon Musk purchased Twitter on a pledge to dismantle its massive censorship system, called upon the EU to use the Digital Services Act to force him to resume censorship.
Other Americans have appeared before the EU to call upon it to oppose the U.S. Nina Jankowicz, the former head of President Joe Biden’s infamous Disinformation Governance Board, has recently returned to the EU to rally other nations to oppose what she described as “the autocracy, the United States of America.”
She warned that the Digital Services Act was under attack, and that the EU had to fight and beat the U.S.: “Do not capitulate. Hold the line.”
Former European Commissioner for Internal Markets and Services Thierry Breton even threatened Musk for interviewing Trump before our last presidential election. He told Musk that he was being “monitored” in conducting any interview with now-President Trump.
The EU is doubling down on these efforts, including threatening Musk with prosecution and massive confiscatory fines if he does not resume censoring users of X. The penalties are expected to exceed $1 billion.
Other countries are following suit. Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes shut down X in his entire country over Musk’s refusal to remove political posts. These countries could remotely control speech within the U.S., forcing companies like X to meet the lowest common denominator set by the EU and anti-free speech groups.
There are free speech concerns even in such measures designed to protect free speech. This policy should be confined to government officials, particularly EU officials, who are actively seeking to export European censorship systems worldwide. It should not extend to academics or individuals who are part of the growing anti-free speech movement. Free speech itself can counter those voices. These are the same voices that we have heard throughout history, often using the very same terms and claims to silence others.
However, Rubio showed Europe that the U.S. would not simply stand by as European censors determined what Americans could say, read, or watch. As the EU threatens companies like X with billion-dollar fines, it is time for the U.S. to treat this as an attack on our citizens from abroad.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt put it simply during World War II: “No man can tame a tiger into a kitten by stroking it.”
It is time to get serious about the European threat to free speech. And Rubio is doing just that — finally imposing real consequences for censorship. We are not going to defeat censors by yelling at them. Speech alone clearly does not impress them.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Mr. Turley could not have selected a worse example of a proponent of rights of free expression that Americans enjoy under the First Amendment. Rubio at forefront of the stooges implementing policies to conduct social media screening and vetting to prevent issuance of visas to students and exchange visitors based on their political beliefs, particularly those opposed to geocide.
Hey Anonymous, if Rubio was in his position in 2022 the guy in Boulder Co wouldn’t have gotten his Visa and would have been tossed out while fools like you would have screamed that the Egyptian Palestinian that hates Jews has 1st A rights.
Well said professor! Great column today! Thank you!
Since we, legally, have no power over what others do outside our borders, I believe that Trump and his administration know that we do have power over to whom we give our “pleasure” . If you want to “play” with us, here are the rules. Since we still (maybe) have the best economy in the world – we hold the fortunes of many others in our hands, just as the OPEC nations realized in the 70s. Use access to our largesse as our legal tool to steer the world away from despotism, fanaticism, and socialism where we can and lock out the recalcitrant parts from our abundance, not with force but with guile.
It is a shame (but inevitable) that the progs here do not comprehend just what Trump’s use of tariffs and access can accomplish; especially when the alternative for many is to deal with the chinese/russian brutal enterprises..
Especially in light of the Colorado act of terrorism by a mentally controlled evil person who advocates for ideologies that have been the bain of the globe since 571 AD. We should be aware that in this modern world of global travel, volatile and pernicious ideologies can reach in to our nation and (as we are seeing and will continue to see) causing death, destruction and chaos that tax our resources and our cultural stability.
We can thank Biden for letting this scum in during his 4 years
What a load of horseshit. How about Marco allow ALL criticism, including that of the tiny hat tribe of the Chosenites who’ve been responsible for most of the death and destruction in the 21st and 20th centuries?
*. Wow, anon, that bad?
I sometimes find Prof Turley’s analogies to be a bit forced, but love this one. The crocodile of censorship. Nicely done.
The analogy comes from Churchill.
Turley is nowhere near smart enough to come up with with his own analogies or ideas.
He is just another Fox stooge following instructions.
“ The EU is doubling down on these efforts, including threatening Musk with prosecution and massive confiscatory fines if he does not resume censoring users of X. The penalties are expected to exceed $1 billion.”
Wow. A billion dollars. Assuming that it could be collected, think a mere billion will impress Elon? He paid $44 billion for X. That’s about the ratio of cost of high-end car to its tires. The way I drive, that means about every 18 months. It’s called maintenance. If that’s what getting the word out costs, so be it.
For Elon, $1B is a rounding error.
Jonathan: You and Marco Rubio have a very skewed view of “censorship”. In the name of fighting it Marco is banning foreign nationals, presumably EU leaders, from entering the US to express their views. Is that really supposed to enhance “free speech”? You would think Rubio would welcome foreign nationals into the US to engage in constructive dialogue about his complaints. Rubio could have EU leaders appear at a public forum here where he could air all his grievances and allow them to respond. Nope. Rubio wants to ban them from the US. And that is supposed be how you address “free speech” issues?
Of course, Rubio is not in the “free speech” business. His attempts to expel foreign students from Harvard shows he actually wants to take away the 1st Amendment rights of of Harvard students. Rubio and DJT are in the “censorship” business. DJT cancels the federal grants for Harvard in an attempt to force Harvard to teach only DJT approved curricula. That’s censorship. DJT issues EOs penalizing law firms because they represent clients DJT doesn’t like. That’s also censorship. DJT sues the broadcast media to force them to air only what he approves. That’s also censorship. And the courts agree finding DJT’s actions are a violation of the 1st Amendment.
No, every autocratic regime wants to censor its critics. DJT is no exception. But you bizarrely think Rubio is trying to protect “free speech”. Now that is a real head scratcher!
The TDS runs strong in this one ⬆️⬆️⬆️ … May God save his soul 🙏🙏🙏
Dennis points out the fallacies of those with TVS (Trump Vindication Syndrome). Nicely done.
TDS is a real mental condition and a threat to national security, DIA employee arrested after allegedly attempting to give classified information to foreign govt: DOJ
An email from Laatsch allegedly said that he did not “agree or align with the values of this administration” and was therefore “willing to share classified information” that he had access to, including “completed intelligence products, some unprocessed intelligence, and other assorted classified documentation,” according to DOJ court documents.
https://justthenews.com/government/security/dia-employee-arrested-after-attempting-give-classified-information-foreign
U sound like an eu communist! If u like their politics move you ass to Europe because u don’t sound like an American
Trump’s war against Harvard is really an attempt to get them to stop teaching antisemitism. Harvard’s own study showed that the school has a serious problem and needs major reforms. Now, is Trump asking for too much? Maybe, but at least he’s got corrective measures started.
They are not teaching anti-Semitism. They are teaching a different point of view. Trump is engaging in point of view discrimination by demanding Harvard run its classes the way Trump wants. Harvard is a private school. Turley has a son in Harvard. Maybe he should have his son study at his own school.
George, your different point of view argument is specious. The KKK had a “different point of view” also. The Harvard study of itself describes labeled the problem.
The pity of your comment? The myopic arrogance of your rationale.
They are not teaching anti-Semitism. They are teaching a different point of view.
I’ve been on this blog for a dozen years and that has to be in the top 10 of the stupidest comments ever made. Every advancement and every set back in the history of human civilization is rooted in a “different point of view”. The questions are; what are these “differences” and do they do harm to the rights our laws are supposed to protect? If they do harm then yes, discriminate against them. And absolutely do not use public funds to support them.
Dear Anonymous: June 2, 2025 at 10:04 AM,
Nope! Trump’s war against Harvard is really about stopping The Crimson Blob at The Harvard Institute for International Development (HIID) from creating and orchestrating disruptive NGO programs of political arbitrage (conflict) both Domestically and Abroad to enrich their Endowments and Harvard’s select Deep State Trubays & Oligarchs (of the; US, EU, Harvard’s Global network, Alumni etc. …).
See:
Mike Benz: The CIA’s Use of NGOs to Coup Foreign Governments, and How They’re Doing It to Trump
Mike Benz on how NGOs run the world on behalf of a small number of very dangerous people.
By: Tucker Carlson – TNC ~ May 28th 2025
https://tuckercarlson.com/tucker-show-mike-benz-3
(NOTE: view Harvard related dialog beginning at: 1:12:40′)
Ano
Do you know which top college worked with Germany during the 1930.
Wrong again dennis
(“censorship”)
If you come to the USA, you need to follow the rules. Same as any other country. If not you are sent packing.
It’s really that simple.
So American social media companies who want to operate in other countries should follow their rules too, right? If they are not they can be punished by fines or…censorship.
BTW, our rules allow freedom of expression and speech no matter where you come from.
And our rules allow the executive to deny visas to foreigners
OMG… george., Are you really this stupid? If you are from another country and came in by visa. You have rules. Get over it…
Keep proving how little you know.
So we tell the world you can’t censor Americans in their countries on social media but we can deny entry because we don’t like their views. How is that any better?
If they are already here they can exersise their free speech like anyone else. Once they are here they are subject to the jurisdiction of the constitution.
FBI’s investigation on COVID coverup zeroing in on three separate plots
“What were and weren’t told: The FBI seeks answers about coverups regarding the true origin of COVID and other aspects of the way the pandemic was handled. Agents in at least three cities — Cleveland, New York, and Baltimore — are fast at work in the investigation.”
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/fbi-probe-covid-coverup-zeroes-three-separate-plots
‘Who Was Signing Those?’: Ex-WH Doctor Asks Who Was ‘In Charge’ During Biden Admin
“This is similar to what happened in 1919 with Edith Wilson as the First Lady, with Woodrow Wilson when he had a massive stroke, and he continued to be president for a year and a half after that, and it’s well documented that it was the physician to the president and the First Lady that kept him sequestered and that kept hidden from the press and were making the decisions about what was going on in this country,” Jackson told “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo.
“The big difference is, is that the stakes were much higher over the last four years than they were in 1919 and you know as well as I do all the damage that the Biden Administration did to this country across the board whether it was overseas in Afghanistan, our reputation overseas, our southern border, the economy or all the disgusting social issues that they tried to push down the throats of the American people,” Jackson added.
https://dailycaller.com/2025/06/01/ronny-jackson-biden-health-who-was-signing-those/?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
The remains of our families and friends rest all over Europe freeing these dipshuts from the very thing they now wish to force on their citizens. Let’s hope some of the courage our men and women had freeing them rubs off.
Excellent piece, thank you Professor Turley.
When hateful, deceitful infowarfare is allowed free reign, you end up with Oct 7th, and Feb. 24th. You end up with some Egyptian illegal immigrant raging in the Boulder Pearl St. Mall with a homemade flamethrower. You end up with a radical Zionist in Israel assassinating his own President. You end up with young, socially-isolated males going on shooting sprees.
In drawing the “free speech” line permissively way beyond the requirement for authenticity and goodwill in the public square, Prof. Turley is taking up a reckless, irresponsible legal position whereby the fanatics and zealots with hearts brimming over with hate are handed over control of the public conversation and mindshare.
Maintaining a healthy, civilized, free society is not nearly as straightforward as Turley makes out in his book, which only takes up free speech rights of the well-meaning and underpowered. He simply refuses to confront the abuses of free speech rights by the powerful and manipulative. He ignores the special case of impressionable children, and parents rights to exercise control over what they are exposed to, tacitly supporting the purveyors of porn, body shaming, and foreign terrorist ideation. He turns his back on the consequences of organized hate campaigns.
Speech freedom in the public domain is a complex, nuanced challenge. It cannot be solved by cherry-picking use cases. We have to look at the totality of public expressions, and the full range of intentions, both good and ill (to quote JFK). The most inauthentic, manipulative, infowarfare-skilled actors must be a use case paid attention to — otherwise we’ll carry their water, and defeat ourselves.
So, Anon, what you are saying is that we should all celebrate freedom of speech in public but behind the scenes we need censorship. Clearly that censorship should be hidden from view and conducted, for our own good, by those who know better than us. That concept is Pure Fing Evil. Which TLA do you work for?
Old
Notice how it’s the (left) who wants to control free speech.
You got it backwards, OldFish. I was suggesting that we need a higher standard of conduct for public speech, based on trustworthiness (authenticity) and goodwill (positive thinking). People should be free to say whatever they want in private.
One thing the US has that most of the world lacks is our 2nd ammendment. The 1st may be essential to guaranteeing all other rights but the 2nd provides the the ultimate backup for the 1st.
I disagree with not extending bans to academics that advocate and rationalize censorship. We the People are not telling them that they can’t speak, we’re just telling them to speak from their own home. Given the effectiveness of modern communications they can be heard.
Coming here is not a right. That includes foreign workers, students, and tourists. They are guests and should behave like guests. They ought to refrain from trying to wield political influence in a country not their own or we’ll turf them out.
As for the Trump administration’s crackdown on “antisemitism,” like it or not, such speech is an absolute right. The only time it should carry consequences for an American citizen is when it crosses the line into harassment, violence, vandalism and so on.
Is Turley stupid or is he being deliberately naive again. The Trump administration has been attacking free speech quite a bit. Turley’s avoidance of the Trump administration’s severe punishment of law firms, students, and organizations who express their views on Israel, the 2020 election, the Russian collusion, etc. Turley is one gigantic hypocrite. It takes a lot of nerve to accuse Europe of censorship while Trump punishes and shuts down speech thru threats and intimidation.
Turley has not said a word about Ozturk or Khalil both were targeted because they expressed public opinion against Israel. These incidents are well known and Turley said nothing. We know why. Because he’s afraid of the backlash and the possibility of earning Trump’s ire. He supports free speech as long as its precisely done the way he wants or Republicans want. Anything less than civil is not free speech. Ozrurk only co-wrote an op-ed critical of Israel. No violence or anything uncivil. Yet she was targeted because she exercised what Turley supposedly holds dear, free speech. Khalil organized a protest and negotiated with school officials to peacefully resolve an solution and expressed political views opposing Israel which is protected speech. Both were punished by being targeted for deportation because of their speech. Turley said nothing.
Rubio is now focusing on what foreigners, visa applicants say on social media to determine if they are allowed in or not. How is that not an attack on free speech? Its saying we don’t want you in our country because of your views. How is that different from what Europe does? Turley is one massive hypocrite and now so is Rubio.
WOW george
Look who is throwing “insults” now.
Is Turley stupid
Yes, Turley is being very stupid.
But no one is more stupid than you.
Own it.
Awww you’re so cute when you try to look smart
I am not trying anything. I am simply making a observation that describes you accurately. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Maybe you should go look in a mirror
To easy
Maybe YOU should.
I took you advice and all I saw was a good looking, hard working, common sense kinda guy with more intelligence than you and the slow and dumb one combined.
You try too hard upstate.
Are you?
Talk about fail.
Nope, that would be you george.
But everyone here knows that.
BD!
GEORGE is the one that is STUPID AND NAIVE!!! AGAIN!! and always!
Kirk got triggered. Nobody disses daddy Turley.
First, please note the distinction between speech, conduct and policy. Once you do that you can better understand Turley’s position. Rubio is punishing conduct (their censoring of Americans) not their right to condemn American policies in speech
Rubio is punishing speech. Not conduct. Censoring of Americans in their own country because they deem speech to also be conduct.
Elon allowing incitement of violence on his platform which is not protected speech here is not allowed in Europe either. Turley conveniently leaves that particular fact out. Rubio seeks to deny foreigners entry because they said something critical of the US. How are the two different?
Free speech is only good if it isn’t criticism of the US or Israel?
Rubio wants to punish other nations for exercising their laws as they see fit. Europe could ban Americans just for their conduct on social media too. That’s no different than Rubio. He’s engaging in censorship too. Turley is doing a very bad job of justifying it and it shows. He’s an idiot for even trying.
“Rubio is punishing speech. Not conduct.”
Pretty sure that censorship requires conduct. By men with guns.
George here even folks who don’t know the difference between free speech and incitement have a right to express their views.
Trump is constantly attacking free speech. He punishes and threatens everyone with jail or funding cuts because of criticism he doesn’t like.
Turley works for Fox News, and he knows they would drop him in a heartbeat if he started criticizing Trump as harshly as he did Biden.
Trump has been shutting down the free speech of international students through threats of deportation or visa revocations. Turley is a sycophant and a coward for ignoring the apparent Trump transgressions.
*. Kahlil and ozturk aren’t being shut down. They’re simply being deported. They aren’t interchangeable. Kahlil lied on his visa app in addition. If you want to say only citizens of the United States have free speech internally within the jurisdiction you can do that. Kahlil has abundant free speech in the world at large.
Citizens can civilly debate the middle east war freely but not in the world at large. Jewish people are not targets here. It’s against the law.
You’re foolish to imagine any foreign person within the jurisdiction understands American values and culture.
They are being deported because they exercised their right to free speech. While they are here, they can express their opinion or criticism of government policies.
Khalil did not lie on his visa application. He’s accused of not mentioning what others close to him have supported, which had nothing to do with his own views.
You don’t have to be a citizen to have free speech rights. The Constitution does not make that distinction.
International students understand the law, and they know that their right to free speech and expression is protected under the U.S. Constitution. Trump doesn’t, and that’s why it’s very stupid of Turley to even argue that Europe is anti-free speech. They deem speech as conduct and have a right to regulate social media platforms that wish to operate within their borders. We want to ban TikTok for “security” reasons. They can censor Americans for the same reason in their respective countries.
Trump is anti-free speech, especially when it’s criticism of him or Israel.
^^^^ The slow and stupid one. 😏
It is not clear to me from reading this article whether the administration will only pursue free speech censors from allies like the EU or also from countries like Russia or China. This is, once again, sad evidence that Prof. Turley tends to focus only on one side of the picture. His arguments are always excellent but, again, they focus only on one side. Prof. Turley has lost much credibility in my mind. During the Biden Administration, he reported on every transgression, however small, of the liberal/woke elite and I was grateful to him for that. It greatly influenced my understanding of and sympathy for Trump and it made me very happy when Trump won the election. Since the inauguration, Prof. Turley has literally ignored the transgressions of the Trump Administration, some of which are huge. The arm twisting of law firms, the damaging tariff policy, the government by Executive Orders, the utterly repulsive conduct and manners of Trump and several of his team. The whole ‚retaliation and retribution policy‘. I interpret Prof. Turley’s silence on these matters as tacit approval. It does not seem to matter to Prof. Turley that Trump’s conduct has damaged the reputation of the USA possibly beyond repair; certainly beyond repair in the foreseeable future. Trump has become a pariah on the world stage and he has succeeded in making Xi Jingpin appear as the adult in the room. Trump may be feared by some but he is respected by no one. He has vindicated the gangster, dictator and even murderer Putin. He has turned the invaded Ukraine into an aggressor. What used to be the beacon of liberty, justice and freedom (USA) has become a bullying nation. I have spent half of my adult/business life in America and with Americans. I was an unwavering admirer of America. I was an American at heart until 3 months ago. And now I have to admit defeat to all those against whose anti-Americanism I have argued for decades. America has become a bully nation, a nation whose leadership – apparently with broad popular approval – gangs up against the weak and schmoozes up to the gangsters, dictators and even murderers. I am terribly sad! And I am terribly disappointed in Prof. Turley!
PS: I should add that I have for years if not for decades recommended policies which Trump now claims as his own – bringing the budget deficit and – above all – the current account deficit under control; controlling migration; reforming the ‘deep state’; supporting freedom of speech; constraining the woke virus; etc. But in a way in which Ronald Reagan might have done it and certainly not in the primitive, brutal and bullying way in which Trump & Co. do it. Trump and Co. are an insult to America’s Founding Fathers!
generouslybf8cfd29cb,
Well said. The whole MAGA idea is not new. It has been around for decades. Trump just summed it up in a tight, neat, clever campaign slogan. The leftists hate it, as it accurately defines what at least half of the country wants or sees as just plain common sense.
I (Austrian) have absolutely no problem with “America First” or “MAGA”. On the contrary, a nation which is so important to the rest of the world; which – despite mishaps like Vietnam or Iraq – has done so much for the rest of the world – such a nation has all the right in the world to think of its own interests before anything else. Except – you simply do it with serious actions and serious policies and you don’t brag about it publicly all the time. I think the issue with the Trump administration is not so much the “what”. Quite a few of Trump’s “what’s” are very plausible ideas/goals. The problem with the Trump administration, in my opinion, is the “how”, and that starts at the very top. Trump’s public personality (I understand that he is privately quite a different person) is simply shameful. There are severe personality and character issues. He has no style and no manners. He is simply a bully. And the United States of America, the traditional beacon of the Free World, certainly does not deserve to have a bully as President. In my opinion, at least.
I can see where some find his public personality off-putting but I would take that along with his policies over anything the Democrats had or have to offer. The man secured the southern border in less than 100 days. Something the Biden admin and Democrats declared was not possible without their outrageous bill that would of done nothing of the sort.
It appears the main hub for censorship is in London. The UK is arresting and prosecuting everyone making posts that they do not like. Its the right step to Ban those involved in censorship from entering the US. That includes ” Mary Popkins Nina Jankowicz who served on the Disinfo Board then moved to London when she lost her job here.
Nice article today. I agree with the penalties proposed however I don’t agree that academics and private individuals should be exempt form those same penalties. They can, in essence, preach their intolerance of free speech at home and then come here and expect a soapbox to try to give legitimacy to it. Why should we provide that? These individuals are likely the ones who advise their governments and the European Union to enact these laws. Other countries have had no problem with denying Americans entry because they dislike their politics.
As far as Hilary is concerned, I would like to re-institute the sentence of exile. She should move over to Dublin and share a flat with Rosie O’Donnell, forever.
One of the most pleasant aspects of this new administration is Marco Rubio. Who ever thought that a Tiger was wrapped away in that mild mannered demeanor.
GEB,
Great comment.
Which should not mean that we stop yelling.
Secretary Rubio is filling his dance card at State rather quickly. A sudden trip out on the floor may bring disaster – at least so the MSM hopes. Marco should keep an eye out for sabotage by ambush predators from within his walls. At least he doesn’t live in fear like Blinken, a marionette who never knew who pulled his strings.
At the same time Rubio, Trump, and the rest of our government attack free speech in America. Police actions against free speech is censorship.
WHAT.. If you come into the USA on a visa. You follow the rules…
Go to another country and pull the stuns the fools have. You’ll be gone or in jail.
Please note the distinction between speech and conduct.
*. ^^^ Were you also the runt of the litter, anon?
The crazy left strikes again.
Multiple people were injured at a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado. Eyewitnesses say the attacker hurled incendiary devices into the crowd. At least six people were injured in the attack.
HE WAS AN ILLEGAL!!!
Dustoff, and CNN tried to mock the FBI for “claiming” it was a terror attack too quickly.
This ILLEGAL, he over stayed his Biden approved Visa, was yelling at Jewish people that he was fighting for Palestine, but it was a but to oblique for CNN to grasp his true intent.
Hull
Truth and CNN can never got together
HullBobby,
CNN, the leftists, most of MSM are all in on the pro-Hamas death cult.They will try to defend or justify the attacks on Jews whenever they can.
‘Targeted terror attack:’ Man yells ‘Free Palestine’ as he attacks pro-Israel vigil in Colorado
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/fbi-investigating-targeted-terror-attack-colorado
Rubio/Vance 2028
Old
Start Monday with a bang. (-:
Neither Rubio or Vance have ever been true executives.
How about DeSantis/Tulsi. Let Vance go run a state or company. Rubio is ok at following directions….from Trump. Remember 6 months ago when he was a total Ukraine war monger or when he did NOTHING about Illegals for the LAST DECADE?
Was brain dead biden ever true executives.
Was Obama ever an executive? Was Hillary, Biden, Gore? Kerry, JFK, LBJ, HST, FDR, Lincoln?
Wow!
Rubio ran for a seat for the Florida House of Representatives in 1999, became the majority leader in 2003 and then speaker of the Florida House in 2006. But all of those are trivial compared to his greatest leadership accomplishment: married Jeannette at age 27, and together they have raised 4 children, functioning as a healthy, stable, role model family, a mostly extinct institution in Western Civilization
The whiny bιτchy troll spends his alone time at a gay bath house doing crystal meth in West Hollywood, California where the gays, non-binary and trans men ignore him, when he is not spreading his misery on this forum.
😉
Rather than illustrate the incompetence of the dem leaders, we should be zeroing in on the brain dead nature of dem voters and the products of our useless universities. There is where you will find the soldiers for the army of chaos that is infiltrating our nation at this moment. There will be a growing number of terror attacks here if we do not make it impossible for more of those ilk to get here and we do not come down like Thor’s hammer on those who are here illegally or with pernicious ideologies (take the newly imported chaos-makers in the squad”.
THEY have to be executives to know what’s going on?? What are you talking about ANON??
*. Ron DeSantis has run a State. He’s an executive.
*. Americans need to pick their battles at this point and focus.
SCOTUS will find for Trump based in national security, emergencies and they understand Trump is preparing for war. A few intelligent justices still remain.
The public should focus and while distractions are important they are distractions and cake baking, sports, bathrooms, deflect attention. Secure the nation with an eye toward war.