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][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]

LOL, you make these claims yet...where is any legislation from Dems to ever "ban guns" - 70% of Americans are for sensible gun legislation that would keep guns out of the hands of youth and the mentally ill; The GOP are the ones blackmailing companies and universities over the speech issue, and the GOP are the ones illegally detaining people over speech, not the democrats. The GOP are the ones who let a merry band of hackers into the countries most secure servers and scrape data on every American from multiple agencies. that data has now been lined up by Theil and Musk as well as the Russians for god know what purposes. Wake the heck up, this isn't the democrats, it is the GOP and this administration aiding our enemies and the billionaires.[/quote]
Yes, the Republicans are also terrible.  [b]But Dems pretending that their hatred of Trump and love of illegal immigrants are driven by love of the founding documents is silly.[/b]  Even if some hyperpartisan Dems have convinced themselves that they fight deportations and liberal bureaucrat layoffs due to….a Tea-Party-ish fife and drum love of the Constitution, NO-ONE ELSE believes it.  Democrats have stopped talking to independents and Republicans and mostly talk to themselves now, so they nod and agree with each other that they have always been big fans of strict Constitutional constructionism, but no-one else buys this laughable claim.[/quote]

Not. It’s not. I’m a lawyer and know how critical these founding documents are to keep us from becoming an authoritarian nation.  And it only works if we follow the whole Constitution.  Even parts we strongly disagree with. I strongly disagree with the EC and out of control access to semi-automatic weapons. But I would never advocate ignoring the EC in favor of the popular vote or seizing guns without due process and following the law/ Constitution.  Because ai know if you ignore one part, the next Administration ignores other parts.  And the Constitution stops working.

Just because you’re okay with ignoring laws you don’t like does not mean the rest of us are. [/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