gatomontes99

Up until now, Democrats had no problem with kidnapping. That is why they loved not separating kidnapped children from adults at the border. And those were actual, verifiable kidnapping cases rather than these hypothetical cases they are so so so worried about.

Rikers has many of the same conditions and it is run by radical liberals. https://abc7ny.com/post/inside-rikers-island-nyc-7-side-investigates-gets-exclusive-look-flooding-sewage-complaints-jail/16566953/

The irony is well tempered.

Lmao...you really think you have something? User posted an article. I don't need to rehash that. Further, their association is being reported all over the news. If you don't know they are leftists/ANTIFA, then that is willful ignorance.

No, but they can violate it with impunity? If that is the case, they might as well be able to change it. While the Constitution wasn't amended, neither was it upheld. That, in practicality, is a change. What Trump is doing is enforcing the amendment as he interprets it. That is what he is supposed to do per his oath of office. If the congress disagrees, they can write laws to over ride him or impeach him. If the SCOTUS disagrees, they can issue an order. Until then, his interpretation of the Constitution is the law of the land. I, for one, welcome the SCOTUS ruling. I want to see how they view the term jurisdiction. That will put this issue to bed and set goals for both sides. The clearer we can mae our understanding of the amendment, the better.

How many states did that in 2020? The first was absolutely suspended for draconian mandates that churches close.

No born children aren't citizens. For this class action to be valid it has to be for people that will not get citizenship. Those people are unborn. Therefore, this is class action suit only includes unborn children.

So unborn children now have the right to citizenship but not the right to life? Fine, if this injunction is legal than all unborn children have the right to live and abortions are hereby banned.

Dude. You've been destroyed on this issue. Why do you continue to embarrass yourself?

What about Obama who started the separation standards? Do you know why they did it?

Wellllll....most didn't procreate. Given their genes and proclivity for stupid decisions, it's probably a win?

I bet they didn't. With Trump, they used DNC paid propaganda, leaked the propaganda to the press, used the press release to convince a judge there was a there there and then leaked that the judge signed off on it all to create the impression of impropriety. Did they do any of that with the Clinton's who made millions upon millions from a foundation that collapsed after 2016.

I see your $45K and raise you $455K. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5009373/FBI-surprised-Bill-Clinton-took-500-000-Russia.html When former President Bill Clinton received a $500,000 check from a Kremlin-linked bank in 2010 to give a speech in Moscow it served, to the FBI, as further evidence the Russians had unleashed an influence campaign designed to get access to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

They are ANTIFA...also known as Fascists Sympathizers

Well, discretionary application of the law is a thing and it is possible on some parts of the law. However, on asylum it mandates detention and hearing and the Biden admin didnt do it. In this case, deportation is discretionary. However drug trafficker is a pretty clear cut case. Further, nothing in the law limits the time for making the decision.

You keep lying despite the fact that I've definitively proven you wrong on at least 5 posts. Why?

Read the statement on the closure: The bold items are unique to Cali and LA. Crime os skyrocketing because your governor refuses to enforce the law. Labor is skyrocketing because of price floors enacted by your state. Goods are rising in costs due to Cali's trucking laws. Real estate costs in Cali are insanely high due to an influx of illegal aliens (demand) and all the other reasons given for rising costs in this statement. Bureaucracy in Cali? Say it ain't so! Tell me how your state didn't drive this restaurant out of business.

Yeah, I didnt read why they got denied. Its democrats, so I assumed it was a stunt. Oh look, it was a stunt. They wanted to get rejected so they intentionally violated the rules to make it look like they were being denied.

Or they could buy a noaa radio and be warned: https://a.co/d/hQ9Ai5s

Meeeh...no they cant. They got denied a few days ago.

Here is a great American and someone that should be a national hero along with every single Coast Guard member that was there.

What is your point? They broke the law. Yes it does. It absolutely warrants that.

Has anyone proven that or is it the testimony of people that violated our laws and are looking for an out?

Because they were either violent criminals or they were near violent criminals that got picked up. Tom has been very clear. They will not let an opportunity go by to deport illegal aliens. They are targeting the worst. But if someone is near the bad guy and isn't here legally, they won't waste that opportunity. This is America. We provide the necessary care for our prisoners. Your assumption to the contrary is nothing more than your hope that you can find some reason to be mad at Trump. Why should I concern myself with these rights? There is zero evidence they have been violated. Every supposed point you've made in this thread has been thoroughly debunked. You are just inventing scenarios and asking they are true. Incidents like this are always investigated. If there were mistakes, people will be held accountable. If there are systematic problems, policies will change. If there was a crime, criminals will be prosecuted. Until such time as we know the whole story, the KISS principle applies. Occam's Razor applies. That that requires the fewest assumptions is the most likely. Fat drug dealer dies from bad heart is pretty simple.

Short term pain comes with long term gain in this case. Its not about Biden. Its about making the timeliness the most important thing. So what if a time line passed? The bigger, more important issue is getting the right deal. I'm glad liberals finally get that taxes are paid by the end user. However, am I? Ultimately, yes, the end user pays allnthe costs associatednwith a good or service. Still, prices haven't gone up. In fact, inflation is hovering right at the 2% the fed says is ideal. You should also know that the price to consumers is based on supply and demand, not taxes. Adding tariffs does not, necessarily increasing the price to consumers. It may decrease profits. This argument that tarrifs automatically raise costs is completely wrong. Without studying the competitors costs and ability to meet demand, the ability of consumers to spend more and values of currencies over the same period of time, it is impossible to guess what the outcome will be. You've chosen the outcome you want to be true rather than letting facts and data dictate your response.