Noem confuses a constitutional right with its abuse. Imagine my surprise.

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I really don't think the dmeocrats have a leg to stand on after promoting a clearly demented man to run for POTUS again.

But I sure wouldn't cry if Kristi Noem was forced to resign. I don't like her, even a little. She's too often an empty headed person in over her head. I think she worries more about her image than what she's supposed to do.

An empty-headed person in charge of the Department of Homeland Security.
Let that sink in.

We are talking about someone entrusted with safeguarding our borders, defending against cyberattacks, protecting critical infrastructure, and responding to national emergencies — and yet they're more preoccupied with their public image than the responsibilities of the office.

This isn't just about partisanship or personal dislike. It's about what should be the unacceptable reality that someone lacking depth, sound judgment, or even the basic intellectual capacity to manage a gas station is sitting atop one of the most sensitive, consequential agencies in the U.S. government.

Whether it’s a governor playing photo-op politics or a national official fumbling through staged talking points, the stakes are too high. You don't put someone in charge of Homeland Security — or any vital public role — because they look good on camera or poll well.

Leadership should be earned through competence, vision, and accountability. Not vanity.

Not branding.

And certainly not ignorance.

 

[SeaMajor7]

I unfortunately had to do a crash course in the U.S. constitution in order to make an assessment of just how bad thing had gotten in our country (found out that they had always been this bad with the exception of the time period that began on 1/20/2025). I was very surprised to learn that our laws were actually fashioned to protect the rights of not the individuals who are innocent, but those who are actually guilty.

I know this seems counter-intuitive and I didn't believe it either when I first read it but I have since researched it further and essentially, it's not so much that people are [more] concerned about the rights of "illegal aliens" as they are that the rights of EVERYONE be protected.

Because if you put your support behind violating the rights of others because you don't believe they are entitled to them for whatever reason, then you can't rightfully expect any support when YOUR rights are violated especially if you're innocent, how could you?

Why the U.S. legal system seems built for the guilty — not the innocent​

At its core, the U.S. Constitution and legal system were designed to protect people from the government, not just to sort out guilt vs. innocence.

The Founders weren’t imagining innocent people getting arrested all the time — they were imagining a government that might try to jail people just because it could. That’s the key difference.

---

So here’s the big, counterintuitive truth:​

---

In plain terms:​

Imagine if you were actually guilty of something — let's say, stealing a car. Even if you did it, the cops and courts still have to play fair:

• They can’t break into your house without a warrant
• They can’t force you to confess
• They can’t hide evidence from your lawyer
• They can’t convict you without giving you a fair trial

That’s because the system assumes:

• If the government can railroad the guilty, it can do even worse to the innocent
• So the rules are designed to slow things down, even if it means some guilty people walk free

---

But here’s why that hurts the innocent:​

If you’re innocent:

• You’re often treated just like someone guilty
• You still get arrested, booked, dragged into court, forced to pay a lawyer
• The system doesn't automatically favor you just because you're telling the truth

Because the rules are neutral — they protect everyone the same, guilty or not

---

Why It Feels Backward​

If you're innocent, you want the system to say:



But instead, it says:



This isn't because the system assumes you're guilty — it’s because it tries to avoid abusing power, and in doing so, it offers the same protections to everyone… even if they don’t deserve it. [theoretically]

---

Bottom Line:​

So the system:

• Moves slowly
• Demands proof
• Gives everyone the benefit of the doubt — even when they don’t deserve it

That’s what protects the innocent in theory, but in practice? It also means you don’t get a fast-track just because you're innocent.

The United States of America is a sovereign nation, and your CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS do NOT have the right to be here, or most detrimental to your cause, the right to VOTE.
You can twist and spin into an epic vortex of illogical madness all you want, but our Founding Documents are not a suicide pact.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Noem doesn’t know what habeas corpus means. That’s not a blunder. That’s stupidity.

And obama...the commander in chief, didnt know it was pronounced "coreman" not "corpsemen".


Blunders..both of them.

Also obama and his "57 states" comment

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

That's ok, she isn't a judge now is she.

Listen to some of the losers Joey bribem nominated to the Courts.

They didn't know even the basics.

THAT matters.

Not hers.

Are you a judge?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The United States of America is a sovereign nation, and your CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS do NOT have the right to be here, or most detrimental to your cause, the right to VOTE.
You can twist and spin into an epic vortex of illogical madness all you want, but our Founding Documents are not a suicide pact.

Well that's was a particularly stupid response.

 

[Crepitus]

Noem says Trump can deport who he wants, botches what ‘habeas corpus’ means​

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Tuesday that President Donald Trump has an absolute right to deport people without due process, after she incorrectly defined the meaning of the term habeas corpus.

Noem was grilled on habeas corpus — the constitutional right of individuals to challenge their detention by the government in a court of law — during the Senate hearing.

“Secretary Noem, what is habeas corpus?” asked Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H.

“Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country,” Noem replied.

“That’s incorrect,” Hassan interjected. “Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/20/kristi-noem-habeas-corpus-immigration.html

Don't feel too badly Kristi. Hardly anyone in the regime understands the concept.

She's so damn stupid.

 

[MagicMike]

No, because when the Senate was questioning her she was clueless.

I could care less about her opinions, I DO CARE that she is clueless about the Constitution.

Was she THIS clueless?

 

[westwall]

Was she THIS clueless?

Worse.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Noem doesn’t know what habeas corpus means. That’s not a blunder. That’s stupidity.

Especially for someone heading up the Department of Homeland Security.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Because she screwed up this question?

Not because she screwed up the question but because she doesn't know the answer. And when I say she doesn't now the answer I'm referring to actually knowing and not merely being able to parrot back what she's heard or read.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

SO anyone that screws up an answer to a question during a congressional hearing needs to be fired?

Katanji Brown needs to impeached?

She didn't "screw up" the question. She doesn't know the answer, and probably still doesn't understand it, in context.

Even though I was unaware that habeas corpus is contained in Article 1 of the Constitution, I knew she didn't know what she was talking about as soon as she said "habeas corpus is the right of the president...." "The president" is "the government" and the government is who the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution protects us from ("the people of the United States").

 

[Paradoxical#1]

If this was the Biden administration MAGA would be condemning Noem loudly as a DEI hire.

Noem had a slip up. The Biden cabinet were all screw up DEIers.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

An empty-headed person in charge of the Department of Homeland Security.
Let that sink in.

We are talking about someone entrusted with safeguarding our borders, defending against cyberattacks, protecting critical infrastructure, and responding to national emergencies — and yet they're more preoccupied with their public image than the responsibilities of the office.

This isn't just about partisanship or personal dislike. It's about what should be the unacceptable reality that someone lacking depth, sound judgment, or even the basic intellectual capacity to manage a gas station is sitting atop one of the most sensitive, consequential agencies in the U.S. government.

Whether it’s a governor playing photo-op politics or a national official fumbling through staged talking points, the stakes are too high. You don't put someone in charge of Homeland Security — or any vital public role — because they look good on camera or poll well.

Leadership should be earned through competence, vision, and accountability. Not vanity.

Not branding.

And certainly not ignorance.

She misspoke on one item. Your guys effed up every time.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

She's not a lawyer. That's not what she was hired for.

Embarrassing is a Supreme Court Justice that doesn't know what a woman is.

The Department of Homeland Security is one of the newest major U.S. federal departments — created in 2002, after 9/11. Its job is simple on paper:

Protect the U.S. from threats — especially those coming from outside or targeting our infrastructure and people.

But in reality, it’s huge, complicated, and touches a lot of different areas.

---

How Important Is DHS in the Government Hierarchy?​

DHS is part of the President’s Cabinet, which means it’s a top-level executive agency — right alongside:

• Department of Defense (DoD)
• Department of State
• Department of Justice (DOJ)
• Department of the Treasury

So yeah — it’s a big deal.
It's not quite as powerful as the Pentagon or DOJ when it comes to military or legal force, but in terms of day-to-day protection, critical infrastructure, cyber threats, and immigration, it's extremely influential.

---

What Makes DHS So Big?​

It’s more like a giant umbrella made up of smaller powerful agencies. When it was created, it pulled together 22 different federal agencies. Some big ones you’ll recognize:

Sub-Agency	What They Do
FEMA	Handles natural disaster response (hurricanes, earthquakes)
TSA	Airport security (scans, pat-downs, no-fly lists)
CBP	Customs and Border Protection (watching who and what enters the country)
ICE	Immigration enforcement and deportation
USCIS	Green cards, citizenship, immigration paperwork
Secret Service	Protects the President, investigates financial crimes
CISA	Cybersecurity and protecting critical infrastructure from hacking

All of these fall under DHS.

---

So Where Does DHS Rank in Terms of Power?​

Let’s use a tier metaphor to rank by influence:

Tier 1: Super Core Executive Power​

• Department of Defense
• Department of Justice
• State Department
• Treasury

Tier 2: Strategic, Security-Critical​

• Homeland Security
• Energy (nuclear security)
• Intelligence Community (overseen more loosely, like CIA/NSA)
• Health and Human Services (especially post-COVID)

Tier 3: Regulatory/Administrative​

• Transportation
• Agriculture
• Labor
• Education

So DHS sits squarely in Tier 2, but because it owns border control, cyber, counterterrorism, and infrastructure, it can punch like Tier 1 when needed.

---

Why Does This Matter?​

Because when people brush off DHS like it's just about airport security or immigration, they’re underestimating how much national infrastructure and digital safety runs through it.

And when someone who’s unqualified is placed in charge of it — as was hinted at earlier with the “empty-headed DHS” comment — it’s not just embarrassing, it’s dangerous.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Holy shit

I mean

Holy shit

Yeah whatever happened to that allegedly "meritocracy"?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

They probably shouldn't ask her any questions unless she's wearing one of her action costumes.

I used to giggle whenever I would hear people referring to Hegseth & Noem, et al as engaging in cosplay, now all I can say is wow and shake my head.

 

[Rawley]

She didn't "screw up" the question. She doesn't know the answer, and probably still doesn't understand it, in context.

Even though I was unaware that habeas corpus is contained in Article 1 of the Constitution, I knew she didn't know what she was talking about as soon as she said "habeas corpus is the right of the president...." "The president" is "the government" and the government is who the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution protects us from ("the people of the United States").

She's not lawyer
,

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Not according to Supreme Court precedent.

If you break the law to come in illegally circumventing all due process. You don’t fucking deserve any due process in being removed.

 

[Rawley]

The Department of Homeland Security is one of the newest major U.S. federal departments — created in 2002, after 9/11. Its job is simple on paper:


But in reality, it’s huge, complicated, and touches a lot of different areas.

---

How Important Is DHS in the Government Hierarchy?​

DHS is part of the President’s Cabinet, which means it’s a top-level executive agency — right alongside:

• Department of Defense (DoD)
• Department of State
• Department of Justice (DOJ)
• Department of the Treasury

So yeah — it’s a big deal.
It's not quite as powerful as the Pentagon or DOJ when it comes to military or legal force, but in terms of day-to-day protection, critical infrastructure, cyber threats, and immigration, it's extremely influential.

---

What Makes DHS So Big?​

It’s more like a giant umbrella made up of smaller powerful agencies. When it was created, it pulled together 22 different federal agencies. Some big ones you’ll recognize:

Sub-Agency	What They Do
FEMA	Handles natural disaster response (hurricanes, earthquakes)
TSA	Airport security (scans, pat-downs, no-fly lists)
CBP	Customs and Border Protection (watching who and what enters the country)
ICE	Immigration enforcement and deportation
USCIS	Green cards, citizenship, immigration paperwork
Secret Service	Protects the President, investigates financial crimes
CISA	Cybersecurity and protecting critical infrastructure from hacking

All of these fall under DHS.

---

So Where Does DHS Rank in Terms of Power?​

Let’s use a tier metaphor to rank by influence:

Tier 1: Super Core Executive Power​

• Department of Defense
• Department of Justice
• State Department
• Treasury

Tier 2: Strategic, Security-Critical​

• Homeland Security
• Energy (nuclear security)
• Intelligence Community (overseen more loosely, like CIA/NSA)
• Health and Human Services (especially post-COVID)

Tier 3: Regulatory/Administrative​

• Transportation
• Agriculture
• Labor
• Education

So DHS sits squarely in Tier 2, but because it owns border control, cyber, counterterrorism, and infrastructure, it can punch like Tier 1 when needed.

---

Why Does This Matter?​

Because when people brush off DHS like it's just about airport security or immigration, they’re underestimating how much national infrastructure and digital safety runs through it.

And when someone who’s unqualified is placed in charge of it — as was hinted at earlier with the “empty-headed DHS” comment — it’s not just embarrassing, it’s dangerous.

SO where is the "defend lawsuits by loon lawyers" come into her job description?

 

[buckeye]

It's ALL embarrassing. Incompetence everywhere.

But your just forget to comment on democrat dishonesty which allowed 20 million illegals to flow into our country unvetted? And instead think its just fine to spend hours attacking a Trump cabinet member for a comment she made?

(There was no incompetence involved. Opening the borders was a calculated move on their part.)

it was noted because it was something the Democrats couldnt even explain. There was no rhyme or reason.

How can they explain dishonesty and a desire to flood the country with cheap labor and to get more people dependent on the democrats for govt welfare? Why would they want to explain that?

You're the Democrat. Sucker.

Now that makes no sense but not surprising that you're punting.