Reply to Trump Says Trials for Migrants "Not Possible"

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Trump Says Trials for Migrants "Not Possible" "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am sorry I don't quite understand how can an illegal immigrant can be turned about away at the border with zero due process but somehow if they make it into the country there has to be due process in order to deport them? Outside of validating their status what else should we need to do?[/quote]

+100
And it's really such a shame the Biden administration saw fit to open the floodgates to millions of illegal immigrants in the first place.  Let's not forget who bussed them all over the country, often in the dead of night.  And now the Trump administration is left to clean up this disaster.[/quote]

Why do you keep repeating these lies? Biden complied with American and International law where asylum is concerned. He asked for and created bi-partisam legislation to deal with the issue more expediently and Trump got the GOP to reject their own legislation. Now he is using that same lack of judges to flaunt US and International law.

And people like you fall for it.[/quote]

CBP One App was not required under international law. Millions and millions.  It was treason.  I want to know who decided we should create a phone app to facilitate an invasion of unskilled, unvetted migrants?   That person should be tried for treason. Seriously. [/quote]

You know what, go ahead and accuse "that person" of treason. It is utterly nonsense and you will be laughed at and scolded for wasting people's time, but I applaud you for FINALLY using our existing legal channels. THAT IS ALL WE ARE ASKING. [/quote]

What was the purpose other than to destabilize America and facilitate her destruction?  As it was summarily stopped and deactivates as an App it was clearly not required by any law, so what was the point?  And who developed the App and implemented it?[/quote]

Let me repeat: I am for the Constitution and the rule of law. Are you??? Pick a lane.

[/quote]

Article 4 it is the Presidents job to control the borders from invasion.  An influx that overwhelms our civilian infrastructure to deal with such can only be construed as an invasion.[/quote]

Democrats were against the Constitution before they were for it.  They hate the Bill of Rights and are eager to ban speech, ban guns, and ban privacy.  They hate the electoral college and are eager to ignore that part of the Constitution.  [/quote]

Yes. There are parts on the Constitution both parties take issue with.  Maybe it’s time for a new Constitutional convention and a compromise that includes gun regulation, popular vote and the end of birthright citizenship.

In the meantime, the Constitution is what it is. Please point to specific examples of Democrats ignoring electoral college results (that would be Trump who tried that, BTW), and seizing your semi automatic weapons.  I have no idea what you mean by ignoring privacy rights— Republicans say those don’t exist under the Constitution, and got rid of Roe v Wade on that basis. And want to get rid of contraception, gay marriage and other rights that fall under the constitutional concept of privacy. Dems are also not the ones who gave Elon Musk full access to all the information the government has on you to train his AI and sell to the highest bidder. MAGA ranting about Dems not respecting privacy while Trump lets Elon pilfer our data for his private gain is nauseating.  As to free speech, also not interested in hearing about it while Trump is actively trying to destroy colleges because student spoke out against a genocide by Israel. And very interested to hear who has been punished for free speech under Biden.

It’s okay to disagree with the Constitution. Dems and Rs both do. It’s okay to criticize parts of it and advocate for change. Both parties do. And 1A allows this. It’s not okay to just ignore the parts you don’t like. And if Dems did this, and ignored the electoral college, like you claim, then HRC would have been our 45th President. Or put the country through months of lawsuits and an insurrection, like Trump did— rather than conceding on the day after the election, which she did.

You’re full of sh-t.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics