Send this article to a friend:


Texas Defies 'Lawless' Biden, Invokes Right To Self-Defense From 'Invasion' With More Razor Wire
Tyler Durden

Texas Governor Greg Abbott just drew a hard line in the sand, putting the Biden administration on notice that he's declared the migrant crisis an "invasion" and invoked Texas's constitutional authority to defend and protect itself.

According to Abbott, "That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority, as well as state law, to secure the Texas border."

The situation in Texas has come to a boiling point at Eagle Pass, where the Texas National Guard have taken control of a local park which illegal immigrants use as a landing zone after crossing the Rio Grande. The state has placed razor wire along miles of the river to block entry to the US - which the Supreme Court just allowed the Biden administration to remove while a legal battle plays out in a lower court.

At the White House, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Mr. Biden has the authority to nationalize the Texas National Guard and order them to desist. But he said Mr. Biden has made no such determination.

The high court’s ruling was 5-4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three Democratic appointees in erasing a lower court injunction that had blocked the feds from cutting wire except in emergency cases. -Washington Times

Meanwhile, Abbott has continued to install razor wire around the migrant-engulfed area.

"Texas’ razor wire is an effective deterrent against the illegal border crossings encouraged by Biden’s open border policies," Abbnott wrote on X Wednesday, adding "We continue to deploy this razor wire to repel illegal immigration."

Are we about to witness the federal government vs. Texas over an invasion of illegals?


our mission:

to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public.
to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become.
to liberate oppressed knowledge.
to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint.
to facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
our method: pseudonymous speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. it thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-- and their ideas from suppression-- at the hand of an intolerant society.

...responsibly used.

The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. but political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the united states. used by the likes of mark twain (aka samuel langhorne clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay (aka publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the united states, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. like the economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker- as it should be. we believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.

Send this article to a friend: