Joe Lieberman Wants Power To Strip Government Opponents of Their Citizenship.

[Octafish]

Then, they can name, lock up and punish anyone they want as an enemy combatant without due process or trial.

S. 1698: Enemy Expatriation Act

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-1698

I'm sure the bill won't make it out of committee. Even if it does, President Obama will not sign it. Right?

[Zalatix]

1. What party is this guy again?

That's a rhetorical question, BTW...

[Octafish]

7. One Percenters make up the Party of Joe.

The guy represented ENRON and Arthur Andersen and anyone flush on Wall Street.

[tsuki]

25. Likud. nt

[DeathToTheOil]

29. Beat me to it!

[elehhhhna]

46. ding ding we have a winner

[fujiyama]

27. The asshole party

The good thing is he's retiring after this term.

[think]

2. And 1 co sponsor: Scott Brown [R-MA] n/t

[Zalatix]

3. Elizabeth Warren should capitalize on that, big time.

[Octafish]

10. He could be a showroom dummie.

And to think that repug occupies the same office as Edward Kennedy. It's a nightmare.

[Rex]

4. He still suffers from epic failure imo.

Such a failure to Al Gore and the DP in general. He had such good legistation and then went all paranoid crazy after 2000/2001. What party is he in now?

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. No, not quite that. Something

snapped inside of him on 9.11

I read his positions before and after 9.11 on things like this. He is a frightened little man. In fact, he'd make a fascinating study on that process...

But at this point I'd say he is afraid of his shadow... as long as it is turned towards Mecca.

[quinnox]

5. Par for the course

for LIEberman. THis is the kind of guy, along with Ben Nelson, that actively harm the Democratic party. Oh I forgot, maybe Lieberman went back to independent, he might as well be a republican though.

[Octafish]

44. What kind of guy is Traitor Joe?

We could have sunk the BFEE. But, noooo....

Is The Enron Scandal Over?--It's Up to Joe Lieberman

http://www.thenation.com/blog/155972/enron-scandal-over-its-joe-lieberman-updated

PS: Sorry, I don't know how to embed links on DU3.

[AtomicKitten]

8. He's retiring. Can we just shove him out on an ice floe now?

[Motown_Johnny]

9. I believe it would take a constitutional amendment to do that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution


Loss of citizenship

Loss of national citizenship is possible only under the following circumstances:

Fraud in the naturalization process. Technically, this is not loss of citizenship but rather a voiding of the purported naturalization and a declaration that the immigrant never was a United States citizen.

Voluntary relinquishment of citizenship. This may be accomplished either through renunciation procedures specially established by the State Department or through other actions that demonstrate desire to give up national citizenship.[20]

For much of the country's history, voluntary acquisition or exercise of a foreign citizenship was considered sufficient cause for revocation of national citizenship.[21] This concept was enshrined in a series of treaties between the United States and other countries (the Bancroft Treaties). However, the Supreme Court repudiated this concept in Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967), as well as Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U.S. 252 (1980), holding that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment barred the Congress from revoking citizenship.

[Octafish]

34. Thank you for the background. Do you think the Roberts court will agree?

So far, they've ruled solidly in favor of corporate power over individual rights.

http://www.democracyjournal.org/23/the-roberts-court-v-america.php?page=all

[Motown_Johnny]

39. I have no idea, but based on previously set precident

I think it would be pretty hard for even those RW nuts to uphold that law. It would diminish the power of the court they are sitting on, and their egos might not allow them to do that.

[Dawson Leery]

57. Joe LIEberman has repeatedly shown his hatred of our Constitution.

[CreekDog]

11. You took an oath Joe

oh well, so much for that.

[Under Dog]

12. Doesn't this bast*** have dual citizenship?

Maybe he should give up his! You know where his loyalty is.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. No, he does not have dual citizenship.

Nice slur though.

[Octafish]

36. So what do you think of Lieberman's bill?

It seems un-American to me, one who believes the Bill of Rights supersedes the powers of the state.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Is your response supposed to be ironic?

I think the bill is shit and nothing more than a product of irrational fear. So what do you think of anti-Semitism? Think it is "acceptable" on certain occasions?

[Octafish]

49. I don't approve of anti-Semitism. Do you think I do?

And would me putting the interests of the United States ahead of Israel make me an anti-Semite?

My post was about Joe Lieberman's proposed legislation. Thank you for raising these legitimate concerns.

[Behind the Aegis]

52. This is good to know.

"And would me putting the interests of the United States ahead of Israel make me an anti-Semite?"

No. That is abusrd on it face, but I am sure you were aware of that.

I know what your post was about. Did you bother to read the post to which I was responding? That is why you were asked what you were asked.

[Octafish]

56. So now I'm in your database?

My friends at Technion will be pleased.

[Behind the Aegis]

59. What database is this?

Seems you are ignoring the anti-Semitic remarks, which is why I posed the question. And, now deflecting, once again! You are also ignoring my comments to the bill. If you think you are on the "database," and that makes you feel more important...go for it.

[Octafish]

60. So, I didn't make an anti-Semitic remark?

And now you imply that I ignored anti-Semitic remarks by others. That's a surprising perspective, considering I've posted for more than 9 years all I could to bring NAZIs, warmongers and gangsters to justice.

Deflect this: Put me or don't put me in your database or personal file or whatever else is "good to know." I don't care.

[Behind the Aegis]

61. I didn't say you did.

You have (ignored anti-Semitic comments). Your response to my post which was commenting on an anti-Semitic slur. But that isn't a "rule breaker."

Your comments reak of paranoia. There is no "database."

[Lucky Luciano]

63. Calling someone a bastard is anti-semitic? nt

[Behind the Aegis]

64. No. Didn't say it was.

Accusing a Jew of being more loyal to Israel than his native country (in this case, the US) is.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

41. You've made an accusation. Provide details.

How is this a slur? What is it you mean? What do you find objectionable with the post you replied to?

[Behind the Aegis]

50. A slur is an insulting or disparaging remark or innuendo.

Accusing a Jewish person of being more loyal to Israel is a slur against Jews. Unless you or the one who made the post have any proof, then it is nothing more than an old anti-Semitic myth which has plagued Jews before there was even an Israel. Lieberman isn't a dual citizen, therefore it is easy to conclude the statement was made because Lieberman is a Jew. There are plenty of non-Jews who have his exact stances when it comes to Israel, yet I never see them accused of "dual loyalty" or being more loyal to Israel.

[WilliamPitt]

42. Slur?

[Behind the Aegis]

51. A slur is an insulting or disparaging remark or innuendo.

In this instance, it refers to a Jew being more loyal to Israel. Note, no-one has provided any proof of such a notion. "There is a crime. A black man was in the area of the crime. The black man must be the perpetrator because he is black." That statement would easily be identified as racist, unless there was some kind of proof the black man was involved, and even then, why would his race even matter? The same is true here, except it involves Jews. However, this form of anti-Semitism seems acceptable to many. I suggest you read up on "dual loyalty" accusations against the Jews (it precedes Israel's creation, so that makes it even more interesting).

Then again: "...it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel,..." (source: DU TOS: No bigoted hate speech).

[Under Dog]

54. As for Lieberman being a bast**d, I'll stick by my comment

I wasn't sure if he had dual citizenship or not??? But anyone who pushes for this kind of draconian legislation such as Homeland Security, Airport patdowns and full body scanning, National Defense Authorization, H.R. 1955, etc., all in the name of fighting this phony war on terror is a bast**d in my book.

[Behind the Aegis]

55. I have NO problem whatsoever with you calling him a bastard.

Asshole, dipshit, skidmark, fuckwad...well, you should get the point. That isn't what I took exception with, nor was that the slur to which I refered. My apologies for not being clearer. This is the slur: "Maybe he should give up his! You know where his loyalty is."

[Maccagirl]

43. His #1 loyalty is to the Jewish State

but he does not have Israeli ciizenship-yet.

[Behind the Aegis]

53. YOu have any proof?

I would love to see it. I see poeple like you make the accusation all the time, yet never seem to pony up with anything resembling actual facts.

[got root]

58. His loyalty is to the 1 percent

like most of the others, unfortunately.

[Politicalboi]

13. Doesn't Loserman have duel citizenship?

He can't decide if he has allegiance to the US or Israel. Duel citizenship should be stripped when it comes to holding office.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. He doesn't have dual citizenship.

Remarks like yours are based on false information, ignorance and/or bigotry. It is oft repeated, but in the years since his running for VP, when right-wingers accused him of being more loyal to Israel, to present day with the left doing it, as well as continued lies and assaults from the far right.

[hlthe2b]

21. Israel has their Lieberman. We have ours. In the end, neither will have a positive effect on Israel

and its future. And, no, I am not among those who would ever make such claims about dual citizenship. In fact this is the first time I've ever heard that posited. But, it is hard to deny Joe's extremist views--that often revolve around Israel.

[Behind the Aegis]

22. If you know anything about Israel's Lieberman, you know theirs is much worse.

The "dual loyalty" card gets played often when it's Lieberman. Of course, now that DU is no longer deleting such messages, it will be easier to show this accusations to those who haven't seen it. Lieberman's extermist views often revolve around "terrorism" and "homeland security," not Israel.

[hlthe2b]

23. I agree that Israel's Lieberman is worse...

I strongly disagree that Israel has not factored into some of (Joe) Lieberman's extremist views... His overwhelming advocacy or call for war, war, war--including, but not limited to Iraq and Iran. I agree with those who believe he has become an irrationally scared little man since 911. But, Israel factors into a lot of his lunacy.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. I didn't say it wasn't a factor.

I simply stated others things, which in my opinion are more influential on his thinking. The thing is it (Israel) is not the overwhelming factor; at least I have never seen one person demonstrate it, but have seen many claim it. The accusation he is more loyal to Israel, made twice in this thread, is an old anti-Semitic canard made against Jews, even before the advent of Israel.

The Jews were more loyal to Communism (The Soviet Union), so said the Nazis. The Jews were more loyal to Facism (Germany), so said the Soviets. Both claims were made against Jews in both countries at the onset of WWII. It goes back even further.

ETA: Now you have two more examples! (4:12am CST)

[bhikkhu]

14. Government opponents...thats the republicans, right?

I don't know why he or anyone else would even bother with this - its the sort of stupidity you usually only find suggested in the cheesier comments on paranoid op-eds.

[msongs]

15. the indefinite detention president will veto it? nt

[The Second Stone]

18. Lieberman is suffering from dementia

and doesn't realize that Congress cannot revoke citizenship per the constitution. What a useless, hateful, frightened remainder of a man he is.

[joshcryer]

19. I want to know what happens if you are stripped of citizenship. Are you shipped...

...off the planet? Where do you go?

[krispos42]

20. Of course he does. He's a coward.

51 more weeks, then he's out, the Republican-supporting ass.

[eShirl]

28. +1

[AnotherMcIntosh]

24. Where did Lieberman get this nutty idea?

Earlier this year, "The Knesset plenum ... gave its final seal of approval to a law that would enable Israel's Supreme Court to revoke the citizenship of anyone convicted of espionage, treason or aiding the enemy during war."
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/knesset-passes-law-to-strip-terrorists-of-israeli-citizenship-1.352412

Did he get this idea from the action of the Knesset? Or did he come up with it some other way?

[malaise]

30. He should be at the top of the list

Stupid fuck!

[Octafish]

40. Those who voice such thoughts are already enemies of the state.

Traitor Joe's just tying up some loose ends around America's noose.

[justiceischeap]

31. Isn't this a milder version of what Hitler did to the Jews?

Joe should know better than this...

[northoftheborder]

32. Joe Lieberman did not make this type of idiotic statement back in his earlier political life.

I don't know how old he is, but his frequent seemingly extreme statements lead me to believe he may be suffering from some sort of decline in mental acuity.

[G_j]

33. that last question mark

resonates for me in a frightening way.

[GeorgeGist]

35. Sounds like fascism to me.

"Fascism sought a principle of community that could serve as an alternative to the international working class community envisioned by socialism, and as my quotation from Mussolini suggests, fascism found such an alternative principle in the nation, as it defines itself in its struggle against national enemies."

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/m_r/pound/fascism.htm

[Enrique]

37. the concept has many supporters on DU

they asserted loudly and repeatedly that Anwar al-Awlaki lost his citizenship based on his ant-American actions. They even applied it to his teenage son when that son was killed in a drone strike, which goes beyond even Joe Lieberman's legislation.

They are completely absent from this thread, but that is only because Joe Lieberman is much less popular than Barack Obama.

[bemildred]

38. Yet Another Totalitarian Loser (YATL). nt

[treestar]

45. Do you oppose this?

"A bill to add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality."

To add to this statute:

§ 1481. LOSS OF NATIONALITY BY NATIVE-BORN OR NATURALIZED CITIZEN; VOLUNTARY ACTION; BURDEN OF PROOF; PRESUMPTIONS
How Current is This?
(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or
(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)
(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or
(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.



S 1698 IS
112th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 1698
To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER 12, 2011
Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Comments
Permalink
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Enemy Expatriation Act’.
SEC. 2. LOSS OF NATIONALITY.
(a) In General- Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in each of paragraphs (1) through (6), by striking ‘or’ at the end;
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘; or’; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘(8) engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘(c) For purposes of this section, the term ‘hostilities’ means any conflict subject to the laws of war.’.
(b) Technical Amendment- Section 351(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1483(a)) is amended by striking ‘(6) and (7)’ and inserting ‘(6), (7), and (8)’.

[Octafish]

65. Yes, ''...by a preponderance of the evidence.''

The reason, because this bill helps advance the slide to a police state where people who criticize the government, its policies and its officials, can be classified as enemies of the state.

Suppose I tell someone at OWS that they should burn their draft card. That would make me one..."engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities (meaning any conflict subject to the laws of war) against the United States."

That also means I could get the ziggy and tossed in the slammer or disappeared into Gitmo in Riyadh and no lawyer I can afford could do anything about it.

I am to understand that you do not oppose the bill?

[treestar]

67. It is so typical

That attempting to find more information before making up one's mind that "we are sliding into a police state" is "supporting the bill."

This kind of extreme panic at every bill introduced into Congress these days - now, every time I see this, I want to go and read the bill and get the background for it first. Usually that results in something far less black and white than the drama monarch that started the panic intends for everyone to think.

It does not look as if your horrible examples are provided for under this bill necessarily. We should get informed first.

[Octafish]

69. This ''drama monarch'' sides with democracy, not the executive.

Here's another example: President Obama issued a "signing statement" when he gave the Pentagon authority to arrest and detain civilian citizens indefinitely and without trial in the United States. While he said he'd never use the law against U.S. citizens, the law gives future presidents extraordinary authority. I wouldn't trust a Jeb Bush or similar such executive with that power.

[zappaman]

47. Joe Lieberman is a douchebag.

No surprise here.

[annabanana]

62. Mr "Get off my lawn" is at it again. . . He's retiring, right?

good riddance

[thelordofhell]

66. The only good thing from the stolen election of 2000

Is that this asshat didn't become our Veep

[unkachuck]

68. "...lock up and punish anyone they want as an enemy combatant without due process or trial. "

....why is a nice Jewish fellow like Joe Lieberman acting like a Nazi?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

70. Oh, that's OK. Obama will veto it like he vetoed the NDAA...oh, wait.