Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

You would think an attorney would understand the difference between speech and action, and there has been plenty of evidence that Muhammad Khalil is deported not for his speech but for his actions. So I don’t know what the heck they are teaching in law school these days but...

61,156 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

11 Comments

MAG🔫1775🇺🇸's profile picture
MAG🔫1775🇺🇸1 year ago

Exactly, Muhammad Khalil isn’t being deported for holding a sign. He’s being booted for supporting terror-linked groups, inciting violence, and crossing the line from protest to national security threat. You don’t get to hide behind the 1st Amendment while waving a Hamas flag and calling for jihad on U.S. soil. That’s not free speech that’s enemy action. Due process? He’s lucky he got that. Non-citizens don’t have the right to undermine the country that gave them a visa. You want to chant for America’s enemies? Do it from overseas. And for the record defending this guy doesn’t make you a civil rights hero. It makes you a useful idiot. Rule of law means we protect AMERICANS FIRST.

Estadio Deportes's profile picture
Estadio Deportes1 year ago

MANTIENE LA POSTURA 🫡 Pese a su actitud 'neutral', Roger Goodell se pronunció sobre las políticas de diversidad que Trump está implementando en Estados Unidos. Descubre qué dijo aquí. 👇 #NFL #RogerGoodell #Trump

Kate's profile picture
Kate1 year ago

Law schools are funded by leftist money. This is the biggest issue.

Kevina Gafa 🇺🇸's profile picture
Kevina Gafa 🇺🇸1 year ago

Try being an American student in Algeria and then talk about the Algerian government the same way Mahmoud talked about our government and watch what happens

Tammy- Unchecked's profile picture
Tammy- Unchecked1 year ago

What they are really saying is that they have gotten used to, and now feel entitled to, precipitating violent actions without consequences. Which ( I believe) was elevated to a great degree during the BLM riots.

⭐️The FJC⭐️'s profile picture
⭐️The FJC⭐️1 year ago

They're apparently teaching them that the law no longer matters.

Kevin Sims's profile picture
Kevin Sims1 year ago

They Had No Problem With The GD Democrats Rebelling Against Article I Section #4 And The oath of Office When They Used The Lower Branches Of Government To Amend Our Voting Laws So They Could Rig The 2020 Election!

RabbitTurd's profile picture
RabbitTurd1 year ago

The globalist agenda has infiltrated nearly all types of education in order to create indoctrinated mindless lemmings.

LISA 🌟💖🇺🇸✊'s profile picture
LISA 🌟💖🇺🇸✊1 year ago

So-called self-appointed legal geniuses like this moron who casually throw around words like authoritarian regime have no clue what a real one is. My grandfather died on the way to Siberia in a cattle car. Fvck this guy.

GenXGirl's profile picture
GenXGirl1 year ago

Except Braindead Barbie, he isn’t charged for any ACTIONS. 🤡 In Fact, he isn’t charged for anything AT ALL.

Brock's profile picture
Brock1 year ago

What are they talking about

Related Videos

Tucker UNLEASHES on AG Pam Bondi with a blistering 3-minute rebuttal to her remarks on “hate speech.” The monologue version of Tucker is back. This is EXACTLY what we need from him right now. “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech. This is the Attorney General of the United States, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, telling you that there is this other category called hate speech. And of course, the implication is that’s a crime. There’s almost no sentence that Charlie Kirk. “And I, I’m not running the risk of appropriating his memory for my own ends by saying this. It’s provable. There’s no sentence that Charlie Kirk would have objected to more than that. And you’ve got to think the Attorney General didn’t think it through and was not attempting to desecrate the memory of the person she was purporting to celebrate that she just threw that out there, that she hadn’t thought about it. “You hope that. You hope that Charlie Kirk’s death won’t be used by a group we now call bad actors to create a society that was the opposite of the one he worked to build. You hope that. “You hope that a year from now, the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country. And trust me, if it is, if that does happen. There is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that, ever. “And there never will be. Because if they can tell you what to say, they’re telling you what to think. There is nothing they can’t do to you because they don’t consider you human. They don’t believe you have a soul. A human being with a soul. A free man has a right to say what he believes, not to hurt other people, but to express human his views. “And by the way, that thinking, and not to pile on the Attorney General, who’s a very nice person, but that thinking that she just articulated on camera there is exactly what got us to a place where some huge and horrifying percentage of young people think it’s okay to shoot people you disagree with to kill Nazis for saying things they don’t like. “Why do they believe that? How did we get here? Is it the video games? Is it the SSRIs? Yeah, probably. But what it really is is 12 and then 16 years of indoctrination in our schools at the hands of people who tell them that, who say exactly what the Attorney General just said. “Well, there’s free speech, which of course, we all acknowledge is important, so, so important. But then there’s this thing called hate speech. Hate speech, of course, is any speech that the people in power hate. But they don’t define it that way. They define it as speech that hurts people, speech that is tantamount to violence. And we punish violence, don’t we? “Of course we do. They’ve been taught that every year of their lives. And so naturally, most of them believe it. When Charlie Kirk is shot in the throat with a .36 on camera. I doubt very many young Americans want to see something like that or actually applaud the death of a man, a father, a husband. “But they’ve been told for their entire lives in schools exactly what Pam Bondi just told them. Well, there’s free speech, but then there’s also hate speech. And woe to those who engage in it because it’s a crime.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

262,785 views • 9 months ago

Rep. Thomas Massie: "I've heard [Trump] recently say [the Epstein 'sex trafficking ring'] is a hoax. But if it's a hoax, his attorney general fell for it, his FBI director fell for it, his vice president fell for it, and even his own sons fell for it." This clip of Massie (Thomas Massie), a former engineer and the United States representative for Kentucky's 4th congressional district, is taken from an episode of the Children’s Health Defense series Financial Rebellion posted to Rumble on August 14, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So the Epstein files and that whole sex trafficking ring, that's, exposing that is emblematic of what Trump promised, or the promise that he projected when he was elected. That there's always been this group of rich and powerful and politically connected people that have been outside of the reach of the judicial system. If they get in trouble, they just buy off a judge or buy off a witness and move on. And we were told, or led to believe that that would be exposed, that Trump was going to be the bull in the china shop and expose these rich elites who've been beyond the law. "And, you know, I've heard him recently say it's a hoax. But if it's a hoax, his attorney general fell for it, his FBI director fell for it, his vice president fell for it, and even his own sons fell for it. If it's a hoax, because they all promised that this would be revealed. Even after the election, we were still being promised that this sex ring would be revealed and the things that the government knows about it would be shown to the American people. But that's not happening. And when it became apparent that this is a massive cover up, I decided that I could. I, realized I could introduce legislation and force it to the floor for a vote. "Politics is the art of the doable. And this wasn't doable. A year ago, there weren't enough Democrats who would get on board. But now, I don't care how they get to the foot of the altar, as long as they get there. Foot of the cross. But some of these Democrats are seeing the light now that it's not their president who's in the White House. And some of them are very sincere, like my co-sponsor, Ro Khanna, who's having this press conference with me on September 3rd. There's this parliamentary procedure in the House rules that's been there forever that says if you can get 218 signatures, people physically have to sign the document. "You can bring any bill to the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote. You bypass the committee where it's died, you bypass the speaker, who may not want it, because he's trying to protect people from taking a vote that would expose their preferences. And maybe if they vote the wrong way, which they might be inclined to do because they have donors who want them to vote the wrong way, then they would draw the ire of their constituents. "But suffice it to say, I think I'm going to get 218 signatures, because I think every Democrat will sign this and I've already got 12 co-sponsors on the actual legislation to release all of the Epstein material. And I can get into why we won't run into the same problem that the president ran into when he said, pretty please, mother, may I, will the judge release the grand jury transcripts? That's not what we're doing. We are saying the DOJ has evidence that they submitted to the grand jury, and we are by law compelling them to release that evidence, all of the evidence. We're not going to the judicial branch of government. We're going to the executive branch and saying, you have to release this with my legislation."

Sense Receptor

24,701 views • 10 months ago