aristocrat Posted Tuesday at 11:48 PM Posted Tuesday at 11:48 PM 49 minutes ago, Homelander said: Why stop there? Why didn't Trump 1.0 take action to prevent the tragedies on his watch? For the first two years, Trump had control of all three branches of government, yet the only major legislation he prioritized was a tax cut that primarily benefited the top 1%. Where was the outrage during his time in office for him not prioritizing our border? So because he didn’t do it his first term he shouldn’t do it now? 1
boyst Posted Tuesday at 11:48 PM Posted Tuesday at 11:48 PM 2 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: That seems to be your max brain capacity. I am not going walk into two arguments making the same point to two individuals both interested in different topics. Round is about as intelligent as a 9 yr old with a pocket knife high on soda pop. However, he's not very honest so I have to handle him with special care. An argument on multiple fronts is difficult to defend a position when a special needs student is hurling spitballs at the chalkboard and someone else tries to discuss this on a more rational level Regardless, the guy has shown to be a judicial risk, a flight risk, evidence shows he is a gang member as well. Since 2012 he's been in the system. He should have long been removed. There is no reason to wait any longer. The bells and whistles about who he may be or what affiliations he has aren't that important. He may have knocked up some dumb broad and may have a poor child in this world who will never know their father. That's not anyone else's fault but his father's and mother's. The world ain't nice, it sucks, but this dude should have been thrown out in 2012 when it was found he broke the law.
Roundybout Posted yesterday at 12:05 AM Posted yesterday at 12:05 AM (edited) 27 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: You lose "The evidence" Is that the SWORN testimony of ICE? What evidence is there? 19 minutes ago, boyst said: I am not going walk into two arguments making the same point to two individuals both interested in different topics. Round is about as intelligent as a 9 yr old with a pocket knife high on soda pop. However, he's not very honest so I have to handle him with special care. That's cute but you haven't actually proven anything except that you prefer a dictatorship unchecked by the judiciary. Edited yesterday at 12:07 AM by Roundybout
boyst Posted yesterday at 12:20 AM Posted yesterday at 12:20 AM 14 minutes ago, Roundybout said: "The evidence" Is that the SWORN testimony of ICE? What evidence is there? That's cute but you haven't actually proven anything except that you prefer a dictatorship unchecked by the judiciary. I asked a question. Does a judge have the ability to change the laws of the United States?
The Frankish Reich Posted yesterday at 12:48 AM Posted yesterday at 12:48 AM It was an illegal deportation. The Trumpistas are generally correctly citing the background. But here's the key: a judge found that he is properly deportable, but also found that it was more likely than not that he would be subject to extreme abuse (persecution) if returned to his native El Salvador. And this happened under Trump 1.0, so if his Homeland Security officials disagreed they had the right to appeal that decision to try to get it overturned. Apparently they didn't. So it became final. That meant that the U.S. could deport him to any country other than El Salvador. Get Venezuela to take him? Fine, off he goes. Get Mexico or Honduras or Vanuatu to take him, same thing. There's literally one place you can't send him: El Salvador. And they sent him to El Salvador. Yes, we should request his return, not to freedom in the USA, but to immigration detention in the USA. And then we should look for an alternative country that will let him in, and deport him to that country. Or if the DHS thinks they can show he'd no longer be subject to persecution in El Salvador, they can ask the judge to reopen the case to update the evidence and basically start again. That's how it works, that's what obeying court orders means. In America we fix our errors when we can, and try to get it right the second time around. At least we have for a couple centuries now. 3
nedboy7 Posted yesterday at 12:50 AM Posted yesterday at 12:50 AM 1 hour ago, boyst said: I am not going walk into two arguments making the same point to two individuals both interested in different topics. Round is about as intelligent as a 9 yr old with a pocket knife high on soda pop. However, he's not very honest so I have to handle him with special care. An argument on multiple fronts is difficult to defend a position when a special needs student is hurling spitballs at the chalkboard and someone else tries to discuss this on a more rational level Regardless, the guy has shown to be a judicial risk, a flight risk, evidence shows he is a gang member as well. Since 2012 he's been in the system. He should have long been removed. There is no reason to wait any longer. The bells and whistles about who he may be or what affiliations he has aren't that important. He may have knocked up some dumb broad and may have a poor child in this world who will never know their father. That's not anyone else's fault but his father's and mother's. The world ain't nice, it sucks, but this dude should have been thrown out in 2012 when it was found he broke the law. Weird insults from you. But not shocking. I am done discussing this with you as you can't respond to certain facts. So I dont give a ***** about your narrative anymore. 1
Roundybout Posted yesterday at 01:13 AM Posted yesterday at 01:13 AM 52 minutes ago, boyst said: I asked a question. Does a judge have the ability to change the laws of the United States? Of course not. They interpret laws passed by legislative branches. 1
nedboy7 Posted yesterday at 01:19 AM Posted yesterday at 01:19 AM Mr. Bier, who once worked on Capitol Hill for one of the founding members of the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus, said influential figures on the right were raising concerns about a lack of due process because a core principle is at stake. “We’re talking about doing something extraordinary here for the government to sentence people to what’s essentially slave labor, torture, prison in El Salvador based on nothing, based on having a flower tattoo,” he said. “Once we get in the neighborhood of getting rid of due process, that’s the thing that protects all of our citizenship rights.”
Homelander Posted yesterday at 01:49 AM Posted yesterday at 01:49 AM 26 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: That's bullshitz 1
Roundybout Posted yesterday at 01:51 AM Posted yesterday at 01:51 AM 28 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: “People I don’t like should be immediately disappeared to a gulag in El Salvador” is a very American attitude to have 1
aristocrat Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 8 hours ago, Roundybout said: “People I don’t like should be immediately disappeared to a gulag in El Salvador” is a very American attitude to have big fan of central and south american gangs are ya?
Roundybout Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 14 minutes ago, aristocrat said: big fan of central and south american gangs are ya? Not particularly, hence why I believe we should be focusing our efforts on actual gang members and not innocent people.
Wacka Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago (edited) So you support MS-13 and child trafficing? Edited 17 hours ago by Wacka Fat fingers
boyst Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago (edited) 10 hours ago, nedboy7 said: Weird insults from you. But not shocking. I am done discussing this with you as you can't respond to certain facts. So I dont give a ***** about your narrative anymore. There isn't a narrative and it's not about insults. It's about taking the time to get to your discussion when I'm done with round. And for the record, it will confuse roundy but I am not in favor of all of the ways the immigration law is used. Who's to say that my great great grandpa didn't illegally enter the country in 1806 and thus i am illegal and should be deported to Hungary? Or that my grandma may have been in the Crypts so I am of criminal origin and can be deported? 10 hours ago, Roundybout said: Of course not. They interpret laws passed by legislative branches. So the interpretation of the law set him to be incarcerated for a crime for being here illegally to which the punishment or justice is to be removed from the territorial property of the US? Edited 17 hours ago by boyst
Roundybout Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 17 minutes ago, boyst said: So the interpretation of the law set him to be incarcerated for a crime for being here illegally to which the punishment or justice is to be removed from the territorial property of the US? The interpretation of the law gave him a stay of removal that the Trump administration admitted it violated. This is a point you have been consistently ignoring.
boyst Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago 4 minutes ago, Roundybout said: The interpretation of the law gave him a stay of removal that the Trump administration admitted it violated. This is a point you have been consistently ignoring. The original interpretation deemed him to be in violation of the law of immigration thus he was subject to removal by the law. The judge later determined that his interpretation of the law let him decide to circumvent the written law. If you believe this is permissible than you are deciding that any judge is capable of overriding both the executive and legislative branch, correct?
Recommended Posts