Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

That isn’t what that says. 


I don’t see anywhere in there that people seeking asylum need to be from a bordering country like you asserted.

 

These 48 people were asylum seekers under US law and as such here in the US legally.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


I don’t see anywhere in there that people seeking asylum need to be from a bordering country like you asserted.

 

These 48 people were asylum seekers under US law and as such here in the US legally.


That wouldn’t make sense. That means we could only accept asylum seekers from Mexico or Canada. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


That wouldn’t make sense. That means we could only accept asylum seekers from Mexico or Canada. 


Exactly and the was SoCals assertion:

 

“Has something changed? I thought international law was that asylum seekers had to seek asylum in the country that shares an immediate border with their home country? Is Venezuela now adjoining the US? “
 

Posted
1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:


That wouldn’t make sense. That means we could only accept asylum seekers from Mexico or Canada. 

It does make sense. The purpose of these asylum laws is to keep people from country shopping. It’s not a tourist program. The United States can accept people from other countries, but it’s my understanding that we do not have to. 

Posted
Just now, Backintheday544 said:


Exactly and the was SoCals assertion:

 

“Has something changed? I thought international law was that asylum seekers had to seek asylum in the country that shares an immediate border with their home country? Is Venezuela now adjoining the US? “
 


I know his assertion and that’s what I was referring to when I said it doesn’t make sense.  Sorry for the ambiguity. 

Posted

 

This is gut-busting stuff. It’s so stupid that it’s hard to believe it’s not satire, but here we are, with people who illegally crossed the border now suing a governor for giving them a free ride to a sanctuary city they knew they were going to, including signing a release form.

 

My first big question here is how in the world there’s any standing here. In order to sue for damages, you typically need to have been damaged. How were these illegal immigrants damaged financially by no longer living under an overpass and instead flying to Martha’s Vineyard? And given it was technically the State of Florida who transported the illegal immigrants, what standing exists to sue DeSantis personally?

 

Then there are the supposed merits of the lawsuit. In what way was what Florida did 1) illegal, 2) fraudulent, and 3) financially advantageous? The state did not make any money on the deal. Rather, they spent money that was put in the last budget. As to political benefit, that is completely subjective. Some would say the move hurt DeSantis and the state politically. How do you even quantify that?

 

Everything about this lawsuit is farcical and nonsensical. Any judge worth their salt will throw this thing out immediately. There’s obviously no standing to sue DeSantis, and nothing laid out in the fact pattern is backed by real evidence. What crimes are even been alleged to have occurred to back up the assertion that the flights were “illegal?” It’s just laughable.

 

But this is what always happens when a Republican is effective and starts winning. Lawfare is standard fare for the left, as we’ve seen with how Donald Trump has been targeted. I suspect DeSantis is prepared for this, though, and that he’ll once again come out on top when all is said and done. The left hate the Florida man because they fear the Florida man.

 

 

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/09/20/gut-busting-class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-ron-desantis-by-illegal-aliens-n630607

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
7 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

This is gut-busting stuff. It’s so stupid that it’s hard to believe it’s not satire, but here we are, with people who illegally crossed the border now suing a governor for giving them a free ride to a sanctuary city they knew they were going to, including signing a release form.

 

My first big question here is how in the world there’s any standing here. In order to sue for damages, you typically need to have been damaged. How were these illegal immigrants damaged financially by no longer living under an overpass and instead flying to Martha’s Vineyard? And given it was technically the State of Florida who transported the illegal immigrants, what standing exists to sue DeSantis personally?

 

Then there are the supposed merits of the lawsuit. In what way was what Florida did 1) illegal, 2) fraudulent, and 3) financially advantageous? The state did not make any money on the deal. Rather, they spent money that was put in the last budget. As to political benefit, that is completely subjective. Some would say the move hurt DeSantis and the state politically. How do you even quantify that?

 

Everything about this lawsuit is farcical and nonsensical. Any judge worth their salt will throw this thing out immediately. There’s obviously no standing to sue DeSantis, and nothing laid out in the fact pattern is backed by real evidence. What crimes are even been alleged to have occurred to back up the assertion that the flights were “illegal?” It’s just laughable.

 

But this is what always happens when a Republican is effective and starts winning. Lawfare is standard fare for the left, as we’ve seen with how Donald Trump has been targeted. I suspect DeSantis is prepared for this, though, and that he’ll once again come out on top when all is said and done. The left hate the Florida man because they fear the Florida man.

 

 

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/09/20/gut-busting-class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-ron-desantis-by-illegal-aliens-n630607

 

 

.


Your quotes need to do some research. Like really maybe if the right were educated and not lied to all the time they would see things are wrong.

 

Just the first paragraph alone:

 

This is gut-busting stuff. It’s so stupid that it’s hard to believe it’s not satire, but here we are, with people who illegally crossed the border - they were not in the US illegally

 

now suing a governor for giving them a free ride - the ride cost $615,000 or about 30 cents in taxes per FL resident.

 

to a sanctuary city - MV isn’t a sanctuary city

 

they knew they were going to, - they thought they were going to Boston or DC

 

including signing a release form. - contracts are invalid if signed under false pretenses.

 

For anyone who would like a factual read and the accounts of migrants, here is the complaint filed by them:

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.248428/gov.uscourts.mad.248428.1.0.pdf

Posted
13 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


Your quotes need to do some research. Like really maybe if the right were educated and not lied to all the time they would see things are wrong.

 

Just the first paragraph alone:

 

This is gut-busting stuff. It’s so stupid that it’s hard to believe it’s not satire, but here we are, with people who illegally crossed the border - they were not in the US illegally

 

now suing a governor for giving them a free ride - the ride cost $615,000 or about 30 cents in taxes per FL resident.

 

to a sanctuary city - MV isn’t a sanctuary city

 

they knew they were going to, - they thought they were going to Boston or DC

 

including signing a release form. - contracts are invalid if signed under false pretenses.

 

For anyone who would like a factual read and the accounts of migrants, here is the complaint filed by them:

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.248428/gov.uscourts.mad.248428.1.0.pdf

So what you’re saying is that so long as they follow your well outlined roadmap with the NEXT bus load it’s ‘gentlemen, start your engines’. Thanks…let’s roll! 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So what you’re saying is that so long as they follow your well outlined roadmap with the NEXT bus load it’s ‘gentlemen, start your engines’. Thanks…let’s roll! 


If the outline you speak of is following the law then yes. I’m all for moving people to where resource allocations can support them.

 

Border towns aren’t having issues and sanctuary cities want to help, great. Let’s get a Federal effort to help these people.

 

Things that shouldn’t be done:

- Abbott not telling other governors when and where the people will arrive. That’s 100 percent political and isn’t in the best interest of the people

- lying to get people to go. Anyone who would want to be part of such program need to provide full consent being knowledgeable about what is going on.

- using taxpayer funds actually allocated to such endeavors

- sending them to actual sanctuary cities where there are resources for them. MV is not a sanctuary city and doesn’t have resources for 50 unannounced people, but there are plenty of sanctuary cities in the US they could have sent sent them.

 

Posted
37 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:


If the outline you speak of is following the law then yes. I’m all for moving people to where resource allocations can support them.

 

Border towns aren’t having issues and sanctuary cities want to help, great. Let’s get a Federal effort to help these people.

 

Things that shouldn’t be done:

- Abbott not telling other governors when and where the people will arrive. That’s 100 percent political and isn’t in the best interest of the people

- lying to get people to go. Anyone who would want to be part of such program need to provide full consent being knowledgeable about what is going on.

- using taxpayer funds actually allocated to such endeavors

- sending them to actual sanctuary cities where there are resources for them. MV is not a sanctuary city and doesn’t have resources for 50 unannounced people, but there are plenty of sanctuary cities in the US they could have sent sent them.

 

Excellent….as I said LET’s ROLL! 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

The unserious immigration-fraud lawsuit against DeSantis

JONATHAN TURLEY

 

The undocumented migrants who were transferred to Martha’s Vineyard have quickly adopted one common American practice: litigation. A firm, Lawyers for Civil Rights, in conjunction with the migrant-led nonprofit Alianza Americas, filed the action on behalf of Yanet Doe, Pablo Doe and Jesus Doe who are using pseudonyms for the action “on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated.” The filing is a Jackson Pollock of legal claims with twelve claims thrown against Florida from false imprisonment to intentional infliction of emotional distress to misuse of the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund. The splattering of a claims face considerable legal barriers based on the consent of the migrants, as shown in a waiver released by Florida.

 

The filing of a lawsuit upon entry to the United States is not unprecedented, of course. Indeed, I teach in torts where an immigrant to the United States filed a tort action for an involuntary inoculation upon entry in O’Brien v. Cunard. Yet, this is a case involving undocumented migrants who allegedly signed a waiver and agreed to the trip.

 

The filing does not include the widespread claims of kidnapping and human trafficking made by Democratic politicians and some legal experts. Cables programs are still claiming that criminal kidnapping charges should be brought after the flight.

 

The lawyers are alleging that the migrants were mislead or defrauded in going to Martha’s Vineyard. The flight is portrayed as “designed and executed a premeditated, fraudulent, and illegal scheme centered on exploiting this vulnerability for the sole purpose of advancing their own personal, financial and political interests.”

 

Gov. DeSantis responded by calling the lawsuit “political theater,” which is ironic given that the flight was clearly designed as precisely that type of political theater.

However, most of these claims are highly dubious and will require substantially more factual support to survive a threshold challenge. The first challenge will be to show that the waiver was secured by trick or fraud.  The consent form – available in English and Spanish – states:

 

“I agree to hold the benefactor or its designed representatives harmless of all liability arising out of or in any way relating to any injuries and damages that may occur during the agreed transport to locations outside of Texas until the final destination in Massachusetts.”

 

Most of the claims are barely defined, let alone supported. 

 

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/09/21/three-martha-vineyard-migrants-file-lawsuit-against-desantis/

  • Agree 1
Posted
4 hours ago, B-Man said:

Gov. DeSantis responded by calling the lawsuit “political theater,” which is ironic given that the flight was clearly designed as precisely that type of political theater.

 

Well there is an election in 6 weeks so all this makes perfect sense.

Posted

 

 

 

Florida's DeSantis traverses the U.S. as 2024 White House talk advances (msn.com)

 

He ostensibly made the trip to stump for a fellow Republican. But introduced as "America's governor," DeSantis' one-hour speech sounded like a presidential-style campaign address heavy on his Florida track record.

The audience of hundreds roared with approval, especially when he referenced the Martha's Vineyard flights of migrants he choreographed last week to protest the immigration policies of President Joe Biden's administration.

“He’s not backing down, and that’s one of the things I appreciate about him,” said Bill Burns, 60, of Olathe.

 

DeSantis' stop in America's heartland was part of a series of events that have taken him to such states as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as he builds a national profile and donor base. His actions have led to speculation that should he win a second term as governor in November, he will quickly pivot to a 2024 bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

 

DeSantis, 44, became the national face of resistance to COVID-19 mask and vaccine mandates. He has taken the lead on hot-button cultural issues such as the teaching of race relations and gender identity in public schools.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/florida-s-desantis-traverses-the-u-s-as-2024-white-house-talk-advances/ar-AA12798R?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=fbedc40385a046e192d7fc957e6b2d0b

 

 

 

Posted
13 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

LOL.

 

 

 Media Revives ‘DeSantis is Worse Than Trump’ Narrative After Martha’s Vineyard Hysteria.

 

https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/09/media-revives-desantis-is-worse-than-trump-narrative-after-marthas-vineyard-hysteria/

 

 

.

 

While Trump has lived in the Liberals heads 24-7-365 I think they are now realizing that DeSantis will be the Republican nominee for 2024. Watch after the midterms they shift their focus to DeSanits especially if the Republicans do well this Nov.  DeSantis has shined a big spotlight on Liberal hypocrisy with their sanctuary state BS. Martha's Vineyard proved that they don't want them here either. Liberals hate him for doing that. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Greg S said:

While Trump has lived in the Liberals heads 24-7-365 I think they are now realizing that DeSantis will be the Republican nominee for 2024. Watch after the midterms they shift their focus to DeSanits especially if the Republicans do well this Nov.  DeSantis has shined a big spotlight on Liberal hypocrisy with their sanctuary state BS. Martha's Vineyard proved that they don't want them here either. Liberals hate him for doing that. 

 

They've been going after him for years now, knowing he's the future of the party. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...