Have Trump and his ICE agents become a terrifying Fascist state?

[User]

17 hours ago, blackbird said:

What we have are people that post nonsense about arbitrarily depriving other people of their basic human rights.  But if that ever happened to them, they would be the first to cry fowl.   That would be ironic ...and hypocritical.    Isn't it strange how everyone expects their own rights to be respected, but if there is an issue involving blue and red politics, they forget about human rights to try to win an argument.   Respect for individual rights is not a party thing or a left versus right thing.  It is pure respect for other people's lives and rights.

There is nothing arbitrary about it. 

Biden administration, supported by other Democrats with Sanctuary city policies, have allowed and encouraged massive invasion by illegal immigrants including known violent gangs. 

It is not "arbitrary" to identify known and suspected gang members from Venezuela and expel them. 

Folks like you support this madness, you want this madness, you don't want to deport any illegal immigrants and support policies that protect criminals being released from jail just to go out and harm Americans again rather than work with ICE to deport them. 

So you make this due process argument dishonestly. 

 

[blackbird]

23 minutes ago, User said:

Biden administration, supported by other Democrats with Sanctuary city policies, have allowed and encouraged massive invasion by illegal immigrants including known violent gangs. 

That is BS.   Undocumented people who are desperate to protect their families have been coming into the U.S. for many decades from well back in the 20th century.  The naturalization process is not easy.

Nobody knows how many are criminals except some people like you and the MAGA type who seem to be saying they are all criminals.

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, User said:

Biden administration, supported by other Democrats with Sanctuary city policies, have allowed and encouraged massive invasion by illegal immigrants including known violent gangs. 

It is not "arbitrary" to identify known and suspected gang members from Venezuela and expel them. 

 

 

Encouraging massive invasion by illegal immigrants including known violent gangs is a ridiculous comment.  Who, when , where has any Democrat publicly welcomed mass numbers of illegal immigrants and violent gangs to their city or state?  

There is no single legal definition, but sanctuary states generally restrict their agencies from sharing information with federal immigration authorities or holding individuals in local custody based solely on immigration detainers. This often involves preventing state and local law enforcement from assisting in federal immigration enforcement actions like detaining individuals based on immigration status.  That applies to both democrat and republican represented sanctuary states and cities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[taxme]

20 hours ago, Matthew said:

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."  (14th Amendment)

If a person is an American citizen than their life, liberty and property cannot be taken away from them without due process. Illegals have no rights to due process because they are not a citizen of America. What do you not get here? 🤔

[User]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

That is BS.   Undocumented people who are desperate to protect their families have been coming into the U.S. for many decades from well back in the 20th century.  The naturalization process is not easy.

Nobody knows how many are criminals except some people like you and the MAGA type who seem to be saying they are all criminals.

You are a liar. 

Being here illegally at all makes them a criminal and Democrats support Sanctuary city policies that leave people like Laken Riley murdered. 

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

That is BS.   Undocumented people who are desperate to protect their families have been coming into the U.S. for many decades from well back in the 20th century.  The naturalization process is not easy.

Nobody knows how many are criminals except some people like you and the MAGA type who seem to be saying they are all criminals.

If they entered illegally then they are all criminals.

This is so simple. If people believe they should be allowed to be here then pass the laws to make it absolutely legal for them to be here. If the laws say that it's not legal for them to be here or they have no lawful excuse then remove them

A commodore 64 has enough computing power to work this out.

Right now the law says they have no lawful excuse and they're being removed. Which is how it should be. If people disagree with that law then they need to pass new laws that say it is legal and explain how and why.

But if you just start ignoring laws you don't like then you ruin the entire concept of laws in the first place and all you get is people deciding which laws they're going to obey and which ones they're not and that ends in disaster

[herbie]

[User]

2 minutes ago, herbie said:

This is not the meme thread. 

[herbie]

Oh damn. Thern have another

Orange Overlord invites PP to his birthday parade

[User]

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

Oh damn. Thern have another

Orange Overlord invites PP to his birthday parade

LOL, you don't have enough intestinal fortitude to stand up for most of the crap you post on here, but a meme—oh man, look at you, tough guy!

[Legato]

11 minutes ago, herbie said:

Oh damn. Thern have another

Orange Overlord invites PP to his birthday parade

Was that taken outside the NDP head office?

[robosmith]

On 6/13/2025 at 8:53 AM, Nationalist said:

Libbies...this is very simple.

The law surrounding illegal entry to the USA is grounds for immediate deportation. THAT is the law.

It is also true that "asylum seekers" need apply for asylum in the first nation they "escape" to. That would not be the USA...in most cases...

You forgot that as a DROPOUT, you have ZERO credibility and FAILED to post EVIDENCE from someone who has some.

[robosmith]

On 6/13/2025 at 11:18 AM, taxme said:

Garcia is a criminal pos. This is just another prime example of judicial lieberal/democrat communist activism. Trump has every right to do what he is doing to rid the country of all illegals, good and bad. Unfortunately for Canada. many thousands of those illegals are now coming to Canada for asylum. It is our turn to get screwed. Gawd dam liberalism. 👎

Too bad you're NEITHER a JUDGE nor a JURY and therefore your OPINIONS mean NOTHING LEGALLY.

On 6/13/2025 at 12:10 PM, taxme said:

All Illegals have no rights. They are not citizen's, they are illegals and they have committed and violated the American immigration policies which is a crime to do so. No one who enters Canada or America illegally have any rights because they are not citizen's of either countries. They have committed a crime. Why can't you not figure that one out? 

The democrats/lieberals have committed an act of treason by allowing those millions of illegals to have rights and freedoms that they do not deserve or have a right too. By you supporting illegals to enter the country illegally shows that you could careless about our Canadian or American immigration laws. Just let the whole world walk right on in and spend hundreds of billions of our tax dollars on illegals who should not be here in the first bloody place. 

You should be careful of what you are trying to support here and wish for. In Canada our Charter of Rights and freedoms and even our constitution does not really exist anymore. It is liberalism and socialism that have removed any and all rights and freedoms that we use to have. We may just end up with living in a Stalinist like country where you will have no more rights and freedoms. Just more big government, more taxes and less freedom. It's time for American and Canadian people to care more about their country than the rest of the world. Let the rest of the world solve their own problems and stop trying to blow my tax dollars on people who do not belong here. It's time for some tough love, baby. 🤗

Too bad you don't understand what it means when the US Constitution says "all persons." LMAO

[robosmith]

11 hours ago, taxme said:

If a person is an American citizen than their life, liberty and property cannot be taken away from them without due process. Illegals have no rights to due process because they are not a citizen of America. What do you not get here? 🤔

We don't get why you  believe your legal OPINION matters when you have NO CREDENTIALS NOR CREDIBILITY. 

[blackbird]

14 hours ago, taxme said:

Illegals have no rights to due process because they are not a citizen of America.

Clearly you don't know anything about the Constitution, laws, and court rulings.  You just pull your ideas out of thin air and post them.  Non-citizens do have legal rights, even if their rights are not always respected or adhered to.  

quote

What constitutional rights do undocumented immigrants have?

Politics Jun 25, 2018 5:08 PM EDT

On Sunday, President Donald Trump tweeted that undocumented immigrants should be immediately returned “from where they came” with “no Judges or Court Cases.”

This, along with the administration’s “zero-tolerance” immigration policy and the recent spike in family separations at the border — a practice President Donald Trump ended through executive order — has called attention to the legal rights of immigrants under U.S. law.

What rights do undocumented immigrants have to a court hearing, to an attorney or to free speech? What rights do their children have to education?

How those rights play out in practice is more complex.

To answer those questions, we must start with a more basic question–does the U.S. Constitution apply to undocumented immigrants?

“Yes, without question,” said Cristina Rodriguez, a professor at Yale Law School. “Most of the provisions of the Constitution apply on the basis of personhood and jurisdiction in the United States.”

Many parts of the Constitution use the term “people” or “person” rather than “citizen.” Rodriguez said those laws apply to everyone physically on U.S. soil, whether or not they are a citizen.

As a result, many of the basic rights, such as the freedom of religion and speech, the right to due process and equal protection under the law apply to citizens and noncitizens. How those rights play out in practice is more complex.

Right to due process

What the law says: The Fifth Amendment states that “no person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

The issue of due process is at the heart of many immigration cases, including Reno v. Flores, the 1993 Supreme Court case that has returned to the spotlight with the surge in family separations. The case led to an agreement requiring the government to release children to their parents, a relative or a licensed program within 20 days.

In the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.”

How it works in practice: Immigrants have the right to due process. But in reality, says, Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the conservative Center for Immigration Studies, “courts of law run the gamut.”

In some cases, immigrants are not granted a hearing at all. When asked about the president’s tweet, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders pointed to the process of “expedited removal,” which was created by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.

“Just because you don’t see a judge doesn’t mean you aren’t receiving due process,” Sanders said.

Under the expedited removal process, immigrants who have been in the country illegally for less than two years and are apprehended within 100 miles of the border can be deported almost immediately without going through a court hearing.

The exception is asylum seekers, who must be granted a hearing.

Those who are not processed through expedited removal have the right to due process in an immigration court, where the main goal is to decide whether a person has a legal claim to remain in the U.S.

“In immigration court, you have very few rights,” said John Gihon, an immigration attorney who spent six years as a prosecutor for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement before moving into private practice.

Gihon says the bar for what constitutes evidence is lax in immigration court. Documents do not have to be authenticated, and hearsay, a statement made by someone outside of the court, as opposed to on the witness stand, counts as admissible evidence. Hearsay is not allowed in most U.S. courts.

“In the majority of cases, it’s a lock solid 100 percent guaranteed conviction because there is little defense, and most would confess they crossed the border illegally,” Gihon said.

The right to legal counsel

What the law says: The Sixth Amendment states that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall…have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

The Supreme Court ruled in the 1963 case Gideon v Wainwright that if a person is too poor to hire an attorney, the government must appoint one.

How it works in practice: Because most deportation proceedings are civil rather than criminal cases, the right to legal counsel often doesn’t apply.

The Trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy now requires most illegal border crossings to be tried as criminal cases, the exception being parents who cross the border illegally with children. After public outcry about separating families, the head of Customs and Border Protection said Monday the agency has stopped referring parents for prosecution. Other immigrants will still be charged with a crime.

Under the law, anyone facing a criminal charge has the right to counsel. However, the government is only required to provide counsel if the person is accused of a felony. Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor.

In recent weeks, people have donated millions of dollars to nonprofit groups to pay for immigrants’ legal fees.

The Trump administration’s decision to criminally charge immigrants has overwhelmed the courts, as demonstrated last month by a leaked photo of a trial in Pecos, Texas.

The image shows dozens of men in orange jumpsuits being tried en masse. In such proceedings, reports the Intercept, which originally published the photo, trials can last only minutes per defendant.

The right to be with your family

What the law says: Critics of family separation have pointed to the legal right to “family integrity.” This right is not spelled out in the Constitution but was established through court rulings in the early 20th century, Rodriguez said.

“People have a right to be with and commune with their family. It’s a very basic principle,” she said.

The government can split up families in extraordinary circumstances, such as in the case of child abuse, but it cannot do so without going through a legal process.

How it works in practice: Before Trump signed the executive order Wednesday, the administration had divided families as a matter of course, without considering the individual cases. The ACLU sued, arguing the policy was unconstitutional.

The court has not issued a final ruling, and the president’s executive order could change the case. But a judge did rule earlier this month that the case could proceed, saying immigrants have a right to “familial association” under the Constitution.

Right to vote or hold office

What the law says: The Constitution does not prohibit anyone from voting. Instead, it spells out who cannot be denied the right to vote. The 14th Amendment says men who are U.S. citizens and over the age of 21 must be allowed to vote, unless they have committed a crime. The 15th Amendment prohibits anyone from denying the right to vote based on skin color and the 19th Amendment prohibits denying the right to vote based on sex (aka being a woman).

It wasn’t until 1926 that all states passed laws barring noncitizens from voting. Congress passed a law 70 years later prohibiting illegal immigrants from voting “for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner.”

How it works in practice: If you are not a U.S. citizen, voting in a federal election could land you in prison for up to three years or lead to deportation. States can impose their own, sometimes harsher, penalties for breaking the law.

However, because elections are largely a local affair, some states allow local governments to decide whether noncitizens can vote in local elections.

In fact, noncitizens in Chicago have been allowed to vote for school board since 1989. New Yorkers who were not citizens were given the same right from 1969 until 2003, when local school boards were abolished there. Now San Francisco and Maryland are also giving noncitizens the right to vote in some local elections.

The right to education

What the law says: There is no “right to education” in the Constitution but two other sections do come into play when considering whether undocumented migrant children should have access to education.

First, in the case Plyler v. Doe, the Supreme Court ruled that if children who are citizens have access to a free, public education, so should undocumented immigrant children. That is because the 14th Amendment says the government cannot “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

What it means in practice: The court case means undocumented children cannot be prohibited from enrolling in a public school.

But what if a child is being detained and, therefore, does not have access to a public school. That is where, once again, the Flores settlement comes into play.

The settlement requires that facilities where children are kept must meet minimum requirements for providing health care, education, recreation and other child care services.

Right against unreasonable search and seizure

What the law says: The Fourth Amendment establishes the right “against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

What it means in practice: While this law would generally apply to both citizens and noncitizens, there is a key caveat known as the “border search exception.”

This exception dates back to the very first Congress, which passed a law allowing searchers at the border as a means to collecting duties.

As a result, courts have long upheld that searches at the border are not considered “unreasonable” for the very fact that they occur at the border.

The question courts have grappled with since is what constitutes the border. Searches at airports and other ports of entry for example are often considered legal. The Justice Department has also established a 100-mile wide “extended border” where Border Patrol agents can conduct searches if they meet certain criteria.

unquote

What constitutional rights do undocumented immigrants have? | PBS News

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

You forgot that as a DROPOUT, you have ZERO credibility and FAILED to post EVIDENCE from someone who has some.

It must really bother you that someone like me can make you look stupid and childish regularly. 

[blackbird]

On 6/13/2025 at 12:10 PM, taxme said:

All Illegals have no rights. They are not citizen's, they are illegals and they have committed and violated the American immigration policies which is a crime to do so.

Children of illegal migrants who are born in the U.S. are, according to the Constitution, automatically U.S. citizens.

So if an illegal migrant has a spouse who is an American citizen and/or has children born in the U.S., that changes the whole picture and such illegal migrants should not be deported.  It is not the children's fault that they have a parent who is an illegal migrant.  So on humanitarian grounds, such migrants should not be deported.

Even if a migrant committed a criminal offence, if they have a spouse or children who are U.S. citizens, they should not be deported, but they should be punished in the U.S. in the area in which their family lives for any crime.  Children should not be punished for the faults of a parent.  

Deporting a parent of an American child is both inhumane and may be breaking up a family.  The family structure is a kind of sacred structure that must be protected and respected.  

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

It must really bother you that someone like me can make you look stupid and childish regularly. 

There's no way to upvote this enough to do it justice   

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Children of illegal migrants who are born in the U.S. are, according to the Constitution, automatically U.S. citizens.

So if an illegal migrant has a spouse who is an American citizen and/or has children born in the U.S., that changes the whole picture and such illegal migrants should not be deported.  It is not the children's fault that they have a parent who is an illegal migrant.  So on humanitarian grounds, such migrants should not be deported.

Even if a migrant committed a criminal offence, if they have a spouse or children who are U.S. citizens, they should not be deported, but they should be punished in the U.S. in the area in which their family lives for any crime.  Children should not be punished for the faults of a parent.  

Deporting a parent of an American child is both inhumane and may be breaking up a family.  The family structure is a kind of sacred structure that must be protected and respected.  

It changes nothing. 

Either the person is lawfully in the country (which maybe they are after marriage? Don't know american law that well) or they are not. 

If they are not they get deported.  From their origin country they can apply for immigration same as anyone 

If they've committed a crime then i believe they're locked up and THEN deported after they've served their time.  So don't commit crimes. 

That is not cruel OR inhumane. 

 

The state is not the one punishing the child. The parents and their bad choices are.  You have utterly failed to address this despite it having been raised a dozen times and until you can your argument is little more than whining. 

If a person commits a crime they go to jail. If they're in the country illegally they get deported.  So don't commit crimes and don't enter illegally.  If you do then others around you will likely suffer for your bad choices along side you 

[blackbird]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The state is not the one punishing the child. The parents and their bad choices are.

You missed the point entirely.

If one of the parents is deported and the spouse is not deported because he or she is a U.S. citizen and/or the children are also U.S. citizens, then definitely deportation is attacking the family structure and destroying it.  

That causes great harm to the children and spouse.  

I know you have said you are not a Christian and don't accept the King James Bible as God's word.  That would explain your inability to understand the sanctity of the family.  

You need to rethink all of that.  You cannot understand the importance of this unless you become a Christian and read and study the KJV Bible.

You are opposing God and are in fact alienated from Him.  Everyone is born with a fallen, corrupt nature.  The only way to reconcile that divide between you and God is through being born again by accepting Jesus Christ, God's Son, as your Savior and Lord.  Read the gospel of John.

"

The Bible emphasizes the importance of family in countless ways. From the very beginning in Genesis to the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, family plays a crucial role in shaping our spiritual and social lives. Whether you’re exploring the Old Testament or diving into the Gospels, you’ll find that family is a recurring theme, underscoring its significance in God’s plan for humanity.

Family as God’s Design

God’s design for family is evident right from the creation story. In Genesis 1:27-28, it’s clear that family is fundamental to God’s vision for humanity:

“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.'”

This passage highlights a few key points:

Creation of Man and Woman: Both were created in God’s image, establishing the foundation for equality and partnership in family life.

Be Fruitful and Multiply: This command underscores the importance of procreation and the continuation of human life through families.

Stewardship: Families are tasked with stewardship of the earth, indicating that family units are integral to societal and environmental responsibility."

The Importance of Family in the Bible - PowerfulJesus.com

[User]

58 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You missed the point entirely.

If one of the parents is deported and the spouse is not deported because he or she is a U.S. citizen and/or the children are also U.S. citizens, then definitely deportation is attacking the family structure and destroying it.  

That causes great harm to the children and spouse.  

No, you missed the point entirely. 

It is not a get out of jail free card to come here illegally and then marry someone and have kids. You are still a criminal who is here illegally and the resulting consequence for being here illegally is deportation. 

Also, no one is "deporting" children who are American citizens; they go with their parents because their parents choose to take them. 

This is no different than any other crime. If you rob a bank and have kids, you don't get to avoid prison time because you have kids. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

You missed the point entirely.

If one of the parents is deported and the spouse is not deported because he or she is a U.S. citizen and/or the children are also U.S. citizens, then definitely deportation is attacking the family structure and destroying it.  

That just simply isn't true. 

If a man murders someone, and is locked up in jail for life away from his wife and child, is the STATE 'destroying' that family? Nope. 

And if he is deported then they can choose to go with him.  Again - this is all about their choices. You haven't demonstrated how this is NOT the result of their choice, 

Quote

 

That causes great harm to the children and spouse.  

I know you have said you are not a Christian and don't accept the King James Bible as God's word.  That would explain your inability to understand the sanctity of the family.  

 

Yes, because only Christians believe in family.  🙄🙄🙄🙄 You're a completely retarded twat  sometimes.

Quote

 

You need to rethink all of that.  You cannot understand the importance of this unless you become a Christian and read and study the KJV Bible.

You are opposing God and are in fact alienated from Him.  Everyone is born with a fallen, corrupt nature.  The only way to reconcile that divide between you and God is through being born again by accepting Jesus Christ, God's Son, as your Savior and Lord.  Read the gospel of John.

"

The Bible emphasizes the importance of family in countless ways. From the very beginning in Genesis to the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, family plays a crucial role in shaping our spiritual and social lives. Whether you’re exploring the Old Testament or diving into the Gospels, you’ll find that family is a recurring theme, underscoring its significance in God’s plan for humanity.

Family as God’s Design

God’s design for family is evident right from the creation story. In Genesis 1:27-28, it’s clear that family is fundamental to God’s vision for humanity:

“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.'”

This passage highlights a few key points:

Creation of Man and Woman: Both were created in God’s image, establishing the foundation for equality and partnership in family life.

Be Fruitful and Multiply: This command underscores the importance of procreation and the continuation of human life through families.

Stewardship: Families are tasked with stewardship of the earth, indicating that family units are integral to societal and environmental responsibility."

The Importance of Family in the Bible - PowerfulJesus.com

 

Again tho. It is not the state that's the problem. 

The family was destroyed by the choices the family made.  Just a the state is not at fault if a murderer is locked up for life. 

Again, you have utterly failed to demonstrate how this is NOT the fault of the criminals in question.

As to your bible shit, lets leave your imaginary friends out of it for now and stick to facts and law. And the fact is the law is clear and they chose to break it, and there must be a consequence for that.  Just like the murderer. 

[blackbird]

54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

If a man murders someone, and is locked up in jail for life away from his wife and child, is the STATE 'destroying' that family? Nope. 

It is not as simple as you try to make it sound.  

Most crimes probably don't involve murder for one thing.   And there is no simple solution that is perfect.  But it is the government's job to do the least harm with its decisions.  Deporting the father in many cases would cause more harm to the family.  The place he would potentially be deported to might be a poor place where there is a lot of crime.  So sending him and his family there would cause a lot of harm to the family.  If the government just sends the man and lets the family stay in the U.S., that would be breaking up the family and be very harmful too.  So the state should do the least harm.

Perhaps the criminal offence might result in only a few years in prison or perhaps a suspended sentence which is often the case in Canada.  So he could remain with his family and it would be intact.

The point is the government must do the least harm to the family and act in a humanitarian way.

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

As to your bible shit, lets leave your imaginary friends out of it for now and stick to facts and law.

Don't get your shirt in a not.  I know the truth sometimes pricks a bit, but it must be told.  Everyone will be held accountable by God for their decisions.  There will be no escaping that judgment.

 

 

[robosmith]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

It must really bother you that someone like me can make you look stupid and childish regularly. 

YOUR ^FANTASIES mean NOTHING to me. Clearly your complete ^lack of credibility means nothing to YOU.

[Legato]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

YOUR ^FANTASIES mean NOTHING to me.

Of course not, your fanatsies are your own, whatever they may be. oh dear........

...........backs quietly away so as not to get involved.........