Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Just Tony wrote:
...

There is a rather growing list of people killed by illegal immigrants from several countries. Is that specific enough for you? This is well documented, and not anything new. I'm not even TOUCHING the massive list of other violent crimes committed by people who shouldn't have even been IN the country when it happened, just focusing on the murders ALONE should be enough to give anyone who lives here pause.

I understand why it doesn't give YOU pause, you aren't even on this continent.

There's also a growing list of people killed by US citizens.

TL;DR: if we reduce the size of the population and keep the same crime rate we have fewer crimes. Not sure why we need to state the obvious, but it is there I guess. One can only imagine how few crimes we'd have if we just killed 90% of the population.

 Peregrine wrote:
TL;DR: if we reduce the size of the population and keep the same crime rate we have fewer crimes. Not sure why we need to state the obvious, but it is there I guess. One can only imagine how few crimes we'd have if we just killed 90% of the population.

Your not wrong, You could narrow it down to ten people and somehow someone will still commit crime. Its built-in human behavior.

Its extremely pessemistic and defeatist but... we can never truly eliminate crime. Anyone who says that we can is crazy. We can reduce its likelihood.

But anyway I can't understand trumps trade war... like Tariffs only hurts people of this country....

Well, illegal immigrants do account for over 30% of the prison population.

 Just Tony wrote:
I could have sworn that we WERE doing something about the violent crimes committed by citizens. We call it the Criminal Justice System. If you can find a way to make those crimes preventable, then I'm all ears. Violent crimes by illegal aliens are preventable insofar as preventing breaches of our border would eliminate them from the equation.

The criminal justice system is also there to do something about crimes committed by illegal immigrants. Why is it that crimes committed by illegal immigrants need more to be done against than crimes committed by US citizens and legal immigrants? Sure, you could prevent illegal immigrant crime by preventing them from coming into the US. You could also prevent US citizen crime by preventing them from being born. A more realistic way of preventing illegal immigrant crime is simply to provide better living conditions, registration and legal avenues for immigration, meaning that less immigrants will have to resort to crime.

 Just Tony wrote:
I know you're trying to spin this as racism or xenophobia. Let me give you a little more insight. I'm Lithuanian by genetics, American by birth. My family immigrated here legally in the beginning of the 20th century when Lenin came to power. If there are illegal Lithuanians here, they need gone, and better checks put in place to keep them from coming in without using the proper channels. A violent crime by an illegal immigrant is equally as egregious and preventable regardless of the immigrant's genetic make up or country of origin.

Is this a new variation on the old "some of my best friends are X" defense agains racism accusations?
Anyways, back in the days of Lenin, immigration to the US used to be a lot easier than it is now. Your ancestors likely just booked a trip on a boat and turned up at Ellis island to get a stamp of approval, the whole process being complete within a few hours. My family got into the US the same way. Ran away from the Reds, got on a boat, got a stamp, et voilà! And it wasn't much more difficult for my mother's side family who emigrated from the Netherlands to the US after WW2. Nowadays, immigrating to the US is quite a bit more difficult, especially for people from Latin-American countries who are running away from the gangs and cartels. Once they get away, they have to make an incredibly hazardous trek across Mexico, and once they reach the border there is no real place for them to apply for immigration. Well, there is the border checkpoint of course, but applying there is hazardous for various reasons. For that reason, many have to actually make it across the wall and the desert into the US first, to apply for asylum on US soil, and then they likely will still get deported because they can't "proof" that they face persecution at home (which is nearly impossible). And that is only the start of the process. Your family or my family likely never had to proof that they were actually persecuted by the Reds or go through a lengthy process, so that is a massive difference.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
[ Nowadays, immigrating to the US is quite a bit more difficult, especially for people from Latin-American countries who are running away from the gangs and cartels. once they reach the border there is no real place for them to apply for immigration. Well, there is the border checkpoint of course, but applying there is hazardous for various reasons.

What is hazardous about US border checkpoints?

They're not a great place to go with kids, I understand.

Wolfblade wrote: "At the end of the day people are dead" True, but you're acting like illegals are responsible for a rather large number of violent deaths, instead of being relatively insignificant number of them in any sort of comparison. I'm not saying to totally ignore, not prosecute them, or anything of the sort, but you're blowing this issue way out of proportion as illegals commit fewer violent crimes than the average person and it's appearing as build the wall, illegals bad!

What I'm saying is that you have a control point to lessen any crimes from that direction. You can spin it as "illegals=bad" as much as you want, but it's still a control point. If there were more control points to stem crimes coming from ANY directing, it would be folly to not focus on USING that control point.

Wolfblade wrote: Also nice dodge on the gun violence there.

Okay, you must be blind. Either that, or there is massive cognitive dissonance preventing you from comprehending my post. I mentioned that until guns start getting up and shooting people on their own, then it's irrelevant. A gun is a tool the person BEHIND the gun is the issue. I ask one question: who did the shooting and why. THEN I react. I mentioned snidely about banning cutlery because of the number of stabbings. It's the same principle, and not one I subscribe to. Eliminate guns and dedicated violent people will either turn to the black market or find creative low tech ways of killing people.

Is that enough, or is there some deflection that you imagine in that post?

Kilkrazy wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
...

There is a rather growing list of people killed by illegal immigrants from several countries. Is that specific enough for you? This is well documented, and not anything new. I'm not even TOUCHING the massive list of other violent crimes committed by people who shouldn't have even been IN the country when it happened, just focusing on the murders ALONE should be enough to give anyone who lives here pause.

I understand why it doesn't give YOU pause, you aren't even on this continent.

There's also a growing list of people killed by US citizens.

Condescending tone. I expect better from a MOD. Get back to me when you're willing to address preventable killings. Better yet, how about listing the number of people killed by drug dealers. No? How about the number of people killed by car thieves. Too much? Yeah, illegally entering the US is a misdemeanor, so we should stick with that. How about the number of people killed by drunk drivers?

cuda1179 wrote:Well, illegal immigrants do account for over 30% of the prison population.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh, doesn't fit with the rhetoric. You'll either be accused of strawman, whataboutism, some other -ism, or arguing in bad faith.

Iron_Captain wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
I could have sworn that we WERE doing something about the violent crimes committed by citizens. We call it the Criminal Justice System. If you can find a way to make those crimes preventable, then I'm all ears. Violent crimes by illegal aliens are preventable insofar as preventing breaches of our border would eliminate them from the equation.

The criminal justice system is also there to do something about crimes committed by illegal immigrants. Why is it that crimes committed by illegal immigrants need more to be done against than crimes committed by US citizens and legal immigrants? Sure, you could prevent illegal immigrant crime by preventing them from coming into the US. You could also prevent US citizen crime by preventing them from being born. A more realistic way of preventing illegal immigrant crime is simply to provide better living conditions, registration and legal avenues for immigration, meaning that less immigrants will have to resort to crime.

Our criminal justice system is already overtaxed with crimes committed by citizens, and even crimes committed by law enforcement officials at times. Adding more caseload isn't exactly a high point.

I do indeed love the hyperbole driven suggesting of stopping criminals by keeping them from being born. Good form, and definitely not arguing in bad faith.

Here's a thought, and it'll blow your fething mind. Rather than working to provide them with better living conditions here, why not work towards improving their living conditions THERE? Wild idea, I know. You're a big fan of seizing the means of production. How is it that large groups of people can marshal the strength to come from South America all the way through Central America to jump the US border, but they can't marshal the strength to overthrow an oppressive government, or to rise against and defeat a cartel? We spend tons of money to ship food to impoverished countries, why not invest that money in improving quality of life permanently? Give a man fire, teach a man to make fire, yadda yadda...

Iron_Captain wrote:Is this a new variation on the old "some of my best friends are X" defense agains racism accusations?

I definitely expected better of you than this.

Iron_Captain wrote:Anyways, back in the days of Lenin, immigration to the US used to be a lot easier than it is now. Your ancestors likely just booked a trip on a boat and turned up at Ellis island to get a stamp of approval, the whole process being complete within a few hours. My family got into the US the same way. Ran away from the Reds, got on a boat, got a stamp, et voilà! And it wasn't much more difficult for my mother's side family who emigrated from the Netherlands to the US after WW2. Nowadays, immigrating to the US is quite a bit more difficult, especially for people from Latin-American countries who are running away from the gangs and cartels. Once they get away, they have to make an incredibly hazardous trek across Mexico, and once they reach the border there is no real place for them to apply for immigration. Well, there is the border checkpoint of course, but applying there is hazardous for various reasons. For that reason, many have to actually make it across the wall and the desert into the US first, to apply for asylum on US soil, and then they likely will still get deported because they can't "proof" that they face persecution at home (which is nearly impossible). And that is only the start of the process. Your family or my family likely never had to proof that they were actually persecuted by the Reds or go through a lengthy process, so that is a massive difference.

Now this is an immigration reform talking point I can actually get behind. If the issue is the lack of ease of applying for asylum, then fix those issues. Staff the embassies better to accommodate asylum seekers, place embassies in areas where there is a crisis that is creating the influx of refugees/asylum seekers, facilitate transport to keep the coyotes from making money off of them. Granted not everyone will be brought in, but it at least makes the process easier to the point that trekking almost a hemisphere isn't comparable.

Michael Cohen has implicated Trump in campaign finance crimes.

https://twitter.com/MichaelCohen212/status/678410436774141956

@HillaryClinton when you go to prison for defrauding America and perjury, your room and board will be free!

7:03 PM - 19 Dec 2015

been quite a day for the GOP

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/21/politics/duncan-hunter-campaign-charges/index.html

Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter and his wife, Margaret, routinely -- and illegally -- used campaign funds to pay personal bills big and small, from luxury vacations to kids' school lunches and delinquent family dentistry bills, according to a stinging 47-page indictment unsealed Tuesday.

The charges of wire fraud, falsifying records, campaign finance violations and conspiracy were the culmination of a Department of Justice investigation that has stretched for more than a year, during which the Republican congressman from California has maintained his innocence.
The detailed indictment portrays the Hunters as living well beyond their means and said they "knowingly conspired with each other" to convert campaign funds to personal use.

Federal prosecutors contend that the Hunters repeatedly misrepresented what their expenses were for -- in one instance buying personal clothing at a golf course so that the purchase "could be falsely reported to the treasurer as 'balls for the wounded warriors,'" the indictment says.
The indictment also charges that Duncan Hunter facilitated the "theft of campaign funds" by directing his treasurer to obtain a campaign credit card for his wife at a time when she had no formal role.
The congressman then insisted that his wife be named as his paid campaign manager -- over the objections of his treasurer -- because, according to the document, he said the family needed "the extra money that would come from her salary."
Prosecutors said Hunter also allowed the alleged theft to take place by "ignoring his campaign staff's multiple warnings about Margaret Hunter's improper use of campaign funds." He lashed out at aides, the indictment says, by accusing them of disloyalty and "trying to create some kind of paper trail on me."
The indictment makes it clear that the Hunters were in dire financial straits and could not have supported their lifestyle without the use of those campaign funds.

more through the link

best bit is him using the campaign funds to, er, pay for his steam account







oh yes :

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/21/author-of-trump-russia-dossier-wins-libel-case-in-us-court-christopher-steele

Author of Trump-Russia dossier wins libel case in US court
Suit against Christopher Steele by three Russian oligarchs thrown out by judge

 Just Tony wrote:
[What I'm saying is that you have a control point to lessen any crimes from that direction. You can spin it as "illegals=bad" as much as you want, but it's still a control point. If there were more control points to stem crimes coming from ANY directing, it would be folly to not focus on USING that control point.

It's only a "control point" in the same way that any policy that reduces the total population will also reduce the number of crimes. There's little or no evidence that removing an illegal immigrant will have a greater chance of reducing crime (other than illegal immigration itself) than removing a random citizen. Therefore a focus on the "control point" of deporting and keeping out immigrants only makes sense if you're also going to use the "control point" of exiling random citizens to reduce the total population.

Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Well, illegal immigrants do account for over 30% of the prison population.

Lets break down that stat...

According to the DOJ 26% of people in FEDERAL prison are known or SUSPECTED aliens. So, not more than 30%, 26%. And that is only federal prison, which is only 10% of all prisons. At state level it is only about 10% of the population. And this is all aliens, i.e. imagrants who are not natralised. Not all of those are illigal.

About 16% of the whole prison population is non-citizens, compaired to about 12% of the overall population. This means that it is true that the number of non-citizens in prison is slighly higher than the number of natralised US citizens.

HOWEVER we need to look at the reasons for being in prison:

29% of aliens in Bureau of Prisons custody are there for immigration offenses
For the U.S. Marshals Service this is 59%

Drug trafficking and related offenses represent 46% of prisoners in BoP custody and 24% for the USMS.

Therefore the vast majority of aliens in federal prison relates directly to their entry to the US, either with or without illigal drugs. Whilst they have commited crimes this paints a very diffrent picture to the origonaly presented stat. And a good chunk of those illigal ailens in prison are in prison because they are illigal ailens.

Sources:
www.fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/criminal-aliens
https://cis.org/Huennekens/DOJ-26-Federal-Prisoners-Are-Aliens

Just for clarity, both of my sources for those facts are anti immigration groups.

There's a similar picture in Japan.

Despite right-wing nationalist racist claims that immigrants are the cause of crime, once you remove visa violations from the equation -- a crime which natives are unable to commit -- it turns out that the native population displays a higher crime rate than the immigrant population.

Looks like the net is closing in on Trump. His henchmen are dropping like flies.

And if the Democrats seize Congress and the Senate in November, we could be into high crimes and misdemeanours territory.

Battle lines will be drawn...

Apologises to American dakka members, but from a British perspective, it's good to see we're not the only country going down the pan right now with political scandal/intrigue.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There's a similar picture in Japan.

Despite right-wing nationalist racist claims that immigrants are the cause of crime, once you remove visa violations from the equation -- a crime which natives are unable to commit -- it turns out that the native population displays a higher crime rate than the immigrant population.

Reminds me of Finland when worst of immigration flood was in. According to statistics relative to population refugees would need to 5x times to equal natives they were involved in police missions(either as perpetrator OR victim). Even more for high priority cases.

Simultaneously news were full of right wing "rapists flocking in!" news

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/fake-news-media-having-a-particularly-busy-day-20180822176570

 Just Tony wrote:

Wolfblade wrote: "At the end of the day people are dead" True, but you're acting like illegals are responsible for a rather large number of violent deaths, instead of being relatively insignificant number of them in any sort of comparison. I'm not saying to totally ignore, not prosecute them, or anything of the sort, but you're blowing this issue way out of proportion as illegals commit fewer violent crimes than the average person and it's appearing as build the wall, illegals bad!

What I'm saying is that you have a control point to lessen any crimes from that direction. You can spin it as "illegals=bad" as much as you want, but it's still a control point. If there were more control points to stem crimes coming from ANY directing, it would be folly to not focus on USING that control point.

I think Peregrine answered this pretty well:

 Peregrine wrote:

It's only a "control point" in the same way that any policy that reduces the total population will also reduce the number of crimes. There's little or no evidence that removing an illegal immigrant will have a greater chance of reducing crime (other than illegal immigration itself) than removing a random citizen. Therefore a focus on the "control point" of deporting and keeping out immigrants only makes sense if you're also going to use the "control point" of exiling random citizens to reduce the total population.

And again, you're focusing on a group that commits fewer violent crimes than other groups on average. What is your solution beyond "illegals bad." Build the wall!? Spend billions to potentially reduce the number of violent crimes by a very small amount?

Okay, you must be blind. Either that, or there is massive cognitive dissonance preventing you from comprehending my post. I mentioned that until guns start getting up and shooting people on their own, then it's irrelevant. A gun is a tool the person BEHIND the gun is the issue. I ask one question: who did the shooting and why. THEN I react. I mentioned snidely about banning cutlery because of the number of stabbings. It's the same principle, and not one I subscribe to. Eliminate guns and dedicated violent people will either turn to the black market or find creative low tech ways of killing people.

Is that enough, or is there some deflection that you imagine in that post?

Didn't you just go on and on about control points? There's one right there! Gun violence is a serious issue in the US (in case you missed it), more so than any other first world country. Ban or reduce the number of guns, and you reduce the number of violent deaths, but suddenly that's a bad thing huh? (and yes, knives are harder to kill with than guns)

The difference between guns and knives is that guns are designed purely for killing by the way.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

tneva82 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There's a similar picture in Japan.

Despite right-wing nationalist racist claims that immigrants are the cause of crime, once you remove visa violations from the equation -- a crime which natives are unable to commit -- it turns out that the native population displays a higher crime rate than the immigrant population.

Reminds me of Finland when worst of immigration flood was in. According to statistics relative to population refugees would need to 5x times to equal natives they were involved in police missions(either as perpetrator OR victim). Even more for high priority cases.

Simultaneously news were full of right wing "rapists flocking in!" news

Many studies do conflate immigrants with illegal immigrants. That tends to throw the stats off a bit. There are SOME areas that are backed by evidence. There is a positive correlation between illegal immigrant population and car theft. Also, illegal immigrants cause a disproportionate amount of drunk driving fatalities, according to the Cato Institute.

Also, the difference in crime stats is at least partially explained by immigration enforcement. They deport the trouble makers before they become repeat offenders. It's like weeding a metaphorical garden of those immigrants.

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

With the amount of jingoism attached to it, people 'proudly' displaying the flag have always made me nervous. The US flag has become a weapon for the right wing, especially the extremists to the point where the two get conflated.

 skyth wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

With the amount of jingoism attached to it, people 'proudly' displaying the flag have always made me nervous. The US flag has become a weapon for the right wing, especially the extremists to the point where the two get conflated.

Quite literally in the case of some of the clashes with neo-Nazis, where they've used 'flagpoles' as weapons.

People on both sides use whatever they get their hands on as weapons. Rocks, protest signs, bike locks, etc.

 skyth wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

With the amount of jingoism attached to it, people 'proudly' displaying the flag have always made me nervous. The US flag has become a weapon for the right wing, especially the extremists to the point where the two get conflated.

Can you expand on that last bit about the US flag becoming a weapon?

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
[ Nowadays, immigrating to the US is quite a bit more difficult, especially for people from Latin-American countries who are running away from the gangs and cartels. once they reach the border there is no real place for them to apply for immigration. Well, there is the border checkpoint of course, but applying there is hazardous for various reasons.

What is hazardous about US border checkpoints?

Apart from the whole being detained and separated from your kids who are then stuffed into a cage thing, you run the risk of having your asylum application denied right away by the officer in charge of the checkpoint, so when you apply at the border your are completely submitting yourself to the whims of a single person and your entire future could very well depend on what kind of mood that guy is in today. Unsurprisingly, this is a major reason why so many come into the US illegally to get a proper asylum procedure (of course not all illegal immigrants apply for asylum, but a significant amount of them do).

 cuda1179 wrote:
People on both sides use whatever they get their hands on as weapons. Rocks, protest signs, bike locks, etc.

And yet you've been constantly decrying "antifa" or trying this "both sides" nonsense when one side continually comes up with gear, clearly planning on starting crap, by claiming that they're "just looking to defend themselves".

 Kanluwen wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
People on both sides use whatever they get their hands on as weapons. Rocks, protest signs, bike locks, etc.

And yet you've been constantly decrying "antifa" or trying this "both sides" nonsense when one side continually comes up with gear, clearly planning on starting crap, by claiming that they're "just looking to defend themselves".

Did you watch the Tim Pool video above? People with antifa brought shields and clubs to the protest, if that isn't a clear intent on "starting crap" then I don't know what is.

 DrGiggles wrote:

 skyth wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

With the amount of jingoism attached to it, people 'proudly' displaying the flag have always made me nervous. The US flag has become a weapon for the right wing, especially the extremists to the point where the two get conflated.

Can you expand on that last bit about the US flag becoming a weapon?

He's referring to the fact that the right has been consistently wrapping themselves up in national identity, to the point where people act as though the flag is a sacred icon.

This isn't hard. Anyone who's paid attention to the US post-9/11 would be aware of this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
People on both sides use whatever they get their hands on as weapons. Rocks, protest signs, bike locks, etc.

And yet you've been constantly decrying "antifa" or trying this "both sides" nonsense when one side continually comes up with gear, clearly planning on starting crap, by claiming that they're "just looking to defend themselves".

Did you watch the Tim Pool video above? People with antifa brought shields and clubs to the protest, if that isn't a clear intent on "starting crap" then I don't know what is.

Because they're aware of the fact that the Neo-Nazis always bring that stuff with them.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 skyth wrote:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Remember that whole "Punch a Nazi" thing? Well, apparently Bernie voters are now Nazis.

Bravo Antifa. Bravo.

Spoiler:

I can't say I'm shocked that a militant group known for using violence on others was violent to someone. I just don't get how someone could associate the american flag with fascism.

With the amount of jingoism attached to it, people 'proudly' displaying the flag have always made me nervous. The US flag has become a weapon for the right wing, especially the extremists to the point where the two get conflated.

Can you expand on that last bit about the US flag becoming a weapon?

He's referring to the fact that the right has been consistently wrapping themselves up in national identity, to the point where people act as though the flag is a sacred icon.

This isn't hard. Anyone who's paid attention to the US post-9/11 would be aware of this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DrGiggles wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
People on both sides use whatever they get their hands on as weapons. Rocks, protest signs, bike locks, etc.

And yet you've been constantly decrying "antifa" or trying this "both sides" nonsense when one side continually comes up with gear, clearly planning on starting crap, by claiming that they're "just looking to defend themselves".

Did you watch the Tim Pool video above? People with antifa brought shields and clubs to the protest, if that isn't a clear intent on "starting crap" then I don't know what is.

Because they're aware of the fact that the Neo-Nazis always bring that stuff with them.

If they were just defending themselves that would be one thing, but when you are attacking innocent people for doing nothing but carrying a flag then I don't get how you can claim they are the ones being threatened.

 Kanluwen wrote:

He's referring to the fact that the right has been consistently wrapping themselves up in national identity, to the point where people act as though the flag is a sacred icon.

This isn't hard. Anyone who's paid attention to the US post-9/11 would be aware of this.

It's been happening even before 9/11.