Topic: "lol he caaaan't declare an emergency, it'll just get blocked!"
Anonymous A started this discussion 7 years ago #84,249
Not. How. It. Works.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 11 minutes later[^] [v] #968,318
Thanks for your post.
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,321
@OP
> Not. How. It. Works.
It actually is how it works. His invented "national emergency" isn't getting beyond the 9th circuit, and both he and Mitch McConnell know it. Despite Trump's best efforts, America is still not a totalitarian autocracy.
> Not. How. It. Works.
It actually is how it works. His invented "national emergency" isn't getting beyond the 9th circuit, and both he and Mitch McConnell know it. Despite Trump's best efforts, America is still not a totalitarian autocracy.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,323
@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
> America is still not a totalitarian autocracy.
That's where you are wrong. It has been one since 1977!
> America is still not a totalitarian autocracy.
That's where you are wrong. It has been one since 1977!
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 7 years ago, 8 minutes later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,330
@previous (A)
It hasn't, but I know hyperbolic panic-mongering is the stock-in-trade these days so by all means run with it.
At a calmer level though, Trump's "national emergency" is going nowhere fast. This is only a gesture. It's not getting beyond the very same legal apparatus that was set up to prevent retarded demagogues like him from f*cking over the country and turning it into a Stalinist police state.
It hasn't, but I know hyperbolic panic-mongering is the stock-in-trade these days so by all means run with it.
At a calmer level though, Trump's "national emergency" is going nowhere fast. This is only a gesture. It's not getting beyond the very same legal apparatus that was set up to prevent retarded demagogues like him from f*cking over the country and turning it into a Stalinist police state.
(Edited 42 seconds later.)
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,333
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 13 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,334
@968,330 (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
Have you read about the National Emergencies Act, like at all? In practice, the President can use it to do whatever, whenever... as long as they personally believe there is an emergency, and are of sound mind, you can't do shit about it. Thanks.
Have you read about the National Emergencies Act, like at all? In practice, the President can use it to do whatever, whenever... as long as they personally believe there is an emergency, and are of sound mind, you can't do shit about it. Thanks.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,338
@previous (A)
> Have you read about the National Emergencies Act, like at all?
Yes.
> In practice, the President can use it to do whatever, whenever...
Actually it's only "in theory" they can do 'whatever they like'. In a government of divided power (i.e "in practise"), something Trump has never quite figured out how to negotiate, they can't.
> as long as they personally believe there is an emergency, and are of sound mind, you can't do shit about it.
If this is true (and it simply isn't, but I've sensed that toying with you will amuse me for a while) then why didn't Trump do this a month ago instead of shutting down the government and costing the American economy $11 billion, which was almost twice the paltry $5.7 billion dollars he was asking in the first place?
> Thanks.
You are more than welcome.
> Have you read about the National Emergencies Act, like at all?
Yes.
> In practice, the President can use it to do whatever, whenever...
Actually it's only "in theory" they can do 'whatever they like'. In a government of divided power (i.e "in practise"), something Trump has never quite figured out how to negotiate, they can't.
> as long as they personally believe there is an emergency, and are of sound mind, you can't do shit about it.
If this is true (and it simply isn't, but I've sensed that toying with you will amuse me for a while) then why didn't Trump do this a month ago instead of shutting down the government and costing the American economy $11 billion, which was almost twice the paltry $5.7 billion dollars he was asking in the first place?
> Thanks.
You are more than welcome.
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 12 minutes later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #968,348
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,351
Just issue another emergency that blocks all blocks
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,352
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 27 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,365
> he caaaan't declare an emergency, it'll just get blocked!
That's basically what Trump is saying.
"So the order is signed. And I'll sign the final papers as soon as I get into the Oval Office. And we will have a national emergency, and we will then be sued, and they will sue us in the 9th Circuit, even though it shouldn't be there, and we will possibly get a bad ruling, and then we'll get another bad ruling, and then we'll end up in the Supreme Court, and hopefully we'll get a fair shake and we'll win in the Supreme Court."
Right before saying:
"I could do the wall over a longer period of time, I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster."
Yup. Nothing screams massive emergency like admitting it isn't one before heading off to play golf for the weekend.
That's basically what Trump is saying.
"So the order is signed. And I'll sign the final papers as soon as I get into the Oval Office. And we will have a national emergency, and we will then be sued, and they will sue us in the 9th Circuit, even though it shouldn't be there, and we will possibly get a bad ruling, and then we'll get another bad ruling, and then we'll end up in the Supreme Court, and hopefully we'll get a fair shake and we'll win in the Supreme Court."
Right before saying:
"I could do the wall over a longer period of time, I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster."
Yup. Nothing screams massive emergency like admitting it isn't one before heading off to play golf for the weekend.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,367
@968,321 (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
When all those kids were at the border getting "take away" the left were calling it an emergency
When all those kids were at the border getting "take away" the left were calling it an emergency
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,371
@previous (G)
> When all those kids were at the border getting "take away" the left were calling it an emergency
And 'the left' were just as stupid as Trump. What broader point are you making?
> When all those kids were at the border getting "take away" the left were calling it an emergency
And 'the left' were just as stupid as Trump. What broader point are you making?
Anonymous F replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,372
@968,367 (G)
I think you're missing an important distinction between a sitting president declaring a national emergency and someone writing a headline.
I think you're missing an important distinction between a sitting president declaring a national emergency and someone writing a headline.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,374
@previous (F)
Presidents have declared national emergencies for lesser happenings than the current invasion of the country that is happening at our borders.
Presidents have declared national emergencies for lesser happenings than the current invasion of the country that is happening at our borders.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,376
@previous (A)
How is there an invasion when crossings are at historical lows and the caravans are announced in advance and shrink in size as they travel through central america and Mexico?
How is there an invasion when crossings are at historical lows and the caravans are announced in advance and shrink in size as they travel through central america and Mexico?
(Edited 8 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU double-posted this 7 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,377
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #968,379
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,380
So many delicious liberal tears..
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 7 years ago, 39 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,381
@968,374 (A)
> Presidents have declared national emergencies for lesser happenings than the current invasion of the country that is happening at our borders.
1) Are you saying that America has been "invaded"? Please say if you believe this is true, because Trump keeps avoiding the question (America has so far never been invaded and it would be such a shame if, as he is saying, it has happened on his watch).
2) Do you understand the difference between the nature of the 'national emergency' declaration that, say, Obama made when it came to blocking funds to Gaddafi (which went uncontested in the Senate and House) and what Trump is doing now, which even the Republicans are horrified by?
> Presidents have declared national emergencies for lesser happenings than the current invasion of the country that is happening at our borders.
1) Are you saying that America has been "invaded"? Please say if you believe this is true, because Trump keeps avoiding the question (America has so far never been invaded and it would be such a shame if, as he is saying, it has happened on his watch).
2) Do you understand the difference between the nature of the 'national emergency' declaration that, say, Obama made when it came to blocking funds to Gaddafi (which went uncontested in the Senate and House) and what Trump is doing now, which even the Republicans are horrified by?
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 32 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,382
Ionize tg2merrin
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,383
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 10 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,386
I cant wait for 2020 Trump II ICE ICE Boogaloo..
When he begins rounding them up and shipping them out..
Brown crooks brown crooks...whatcha gonna do..
Whatcha gonna do...when ICE comes for you..
When he begins rounding them up and shipping them out..
Brown crooks brown crooks...whatcha gonna do..
Whatcha gonna do...when ICE comes for you..
(Edited 44 seconds later.)
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,387
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,388
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 46 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,405
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,437
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 44 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,456
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,525
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
read it again. the way they are coming (i.e. illegally) is unwanted.
read it again. the way they are coming (i.e. illegally) is unwanted.
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,527
@previous (A)> read it again. the way they are coming (i.e. illegally) is unwanted.
but then I'd be still live in commie shithole u want more commies son??? I think not
Anonymous F replied with this 7 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,559
@968,379 (A)
This doesn't strengthen your point. If an invasion can describe tourism or the Beatles coming over in the 1960s, that actually makes your claims about an invasion being an emergency sound sillier.
This doesn't strengthen your point. If an invasion can describe tourism or the Beatles coming over in the 1960s, that actually makes your claims about an invasion being an emergency sound sillier.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 5 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,603
@968,525 (A)
The word "invasion" is pretty clearly being used in the first definition sense because Trump sent troops to the border. You wouldn't do that for an invasion of canadian tourists or whatever. Also if you read conservative websites they will always talk about how "military age men" are crossing the border. Meaning 17-40 I guess? You know what term actually describes them? Working-age men. Because they are coming here to work and send remittances back home. Just like they have been for the last SEVENTY years. This fake invasion narrative is dumb as hell and arguing that it's both NOT an invasion in the military sense while defending the president who sent the fucking army to greet them feels...inconsistent (feels like arguing in bad faith to me honestly).
The word "invasion" is pretty clearly being used in the first definition sense because Trump sent troops to the border. You wouldn't do that for an invasion of canadian tourists or whatever. Also if you read conservative websites they will always talk about how "military age men" are crossing the border. Meaning 17-40 I guess? You know what term actually describes them? Working-age men. Because they are coming here to work and send remittances back home. Just like they have been for the last SEVENTY years. This fake invasion narrative is dumb as hell and arguing that it's both NOT an invasion in the military sense while defending the president who sent the fucking army to greet them feels...inconsistent (feels like arguing in bad faith to me honestly).
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 45 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,608
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Once again...maybe one day you will get this..
The Mexicans just decide they want to come here and live...well U.S. Law says they have to do it a certain way and the Mexicans say-
Screw their law...all our buddies are up there already...we will just just sneak in there and do what we want...laws ne damned..
They know Pelosi is fine with them breaking U.S. law..
The do not have U.S. Constitutional rights..
U.S. citizens which help and support foreigners to willingly disobey U.S. laws are traitorous pigs..
Once again...maybe one day you will get this..
The Mexicans just decide they want to come here and live...well U.S. Law says they have to do it a certain way and the Mexicans say-
Screw their law...all our buddies are up there already...we will just just sneak in there and do what we want...laws ne damned..
They know Pelosi is fine with them breaking U.S. law..
The do not have U.S. Constitutional rights..
U.S. citizens which help and support foreigners to willingly disobey U.S. laws are traitorous pigs..
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 19 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,609
@previous (E)
Tourists have Constitutional rights. Legal immigrants have Constitutional rights. Illegal immigrants have Constitutional rights. The only people on U.S. soil who do not have Constitutional rights as far as I know are uniformed soldiers of a hostile invading foreign power. Even then they have some rights re: torture, PoW conditions, etc. from treaties we are signatories of.
Also illegal immigrants come here to work because we have illegally invaded and propped up dictatorial regimes in their countries. In Mexico's case, U.S. citizens' drug habits directly fund their cartels. I subscribe to the "you break it, you buy it" theory of foreign policy. If you ruin a country, you're liable for all the consequences that follow. And we ruined a lot of countries.
Tourists have Constitutional rights. Legal immigrants have Constitutional rights. Illegal immigrants have Constitutional rights. The only people on U.S. soil who do not have Constitutional rights as far as I know are uniformed soldiers of a hostile invading foreign power. Even then they have some rights re: torture, PoW conditions, etc. from treaties we are signatories of.
Also illegal immigrants come here to work because we have illegally invaded and propped up dictatorial regimes in their countries. In Mexico's case, U.S. citizens' drug habits directly fund their cartels. I subscribe to the "you break it, you buy it" theory of foreign policy. If you ruin a country, you're liable for all the consequences that follow. And we ruined a lot of countries.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,630
Father Merrin once again shoving his fist of logic up angry FARTs rears
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 34 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,646
@968,609 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> illegal immigrants come here to work because we have illegally invaded and propped up dictatorial regimes in their countries. In Mexico's case, U.S. citizens' drug habits directly fund their cartels. I subscribe to the "you break it, you buy it" theory of foreign policy. If you ruin a country, you're liable for all the consequences that follow. And we ruined a lot of countries.
Ask Becky what presumption and conjecture mean pertaining to testimony..
> illegal immigrants come here to work because we have illegally invaded and propped up dictatorial regimes in their countries. In Mexico's case, U.S. citizens' drug habits directly fund their cartels. I subscribe to the "you break it, you buy it" theory of foreign policy. If you ruin a country, you're liable for all the consequences that follow. And we ruined a lot of countries.
Ask Becky what presumption and conjecture mean pertaining to testimony..
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,650
@previous (E)
Elliot fucking Abrams is still in the government. There is no conjecture. No one denies it, we just ignore it or worse, brag about it. Pick 5 central or south american countries and I guarantee you will find horrible shit we endorsed or directly sponsored in 4 of them.
Elliot fucking Abrams is still in the government. There is no conjecture. No one denies it, we just ignore it or worse, brag about it. Pick 5 central or south american countries and I guarantee you will find horrible shit we endorsed or directly sponsored in 4 of them.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 6 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,655
@968,525 (A)> . the way they are coming
OP They is code word for Brown people. Trump is a racist. bert is a racist. We expect people from the south to be racist.
Manufactured National Emergency and even Trump says there is no rush was no rush to do something. He gave himself a blow job, just to make it easy for the courts to laugh.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,657
@968,650 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
And yet we have literally been the main player in saving the entire world from chaos in two World Wars and given hundreds of Billion in aid at the drop of a hat...to multiple countries for decades...having zero obligation to do so..
You need to take your smartaleced self to another country if you're so unhappy with this one..
And yet we have literally been the main player in saving the entire world from chaos in two World Wars and given hundreds of Billion in aid at the drop of a hat...to multiple countries for decades...having zero obligation to do so..
You need to take your smartaleced self to another country if you're so unhappy with this one..
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,660
@previous (E)
Unless you're a native American? If not your family immigrated to US. Just because your family rounded up all native Americans and stole their land, is no reason for you to stop other inmigrantes who want to pick your fruit and clean pots in restaurants. Maybe it's because they are brown people and that grinds your gears.
Unless you're a native American? If not your family immigrated to US. Just because your family rounded up all native Americans and stole their land, is no reason for you to stop other inmigrantes who want to pick your fruit and clean pots in restaurants. Maybe it's because they are brown people and that grinds your gears.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 7 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,663
@previous (M)
How does any of that pertain to the Mexicans breaking U.S. Law via illegal immigration in present time..
Is that the argument you'd present to the judge in court if you were arguing agains their immediate deportation..
How does any of that pertain to the Mexicans breaking U.S. Law via illegal immigration in present time..
Is that the argument you'd present to the judge in court if you were arguing agains their immediate deportation..
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,667
@previous (E)
People who migarted here did so in about the same fashion as Mexican migrants. Only difference is America was land of free back then, and we didn't try to deny anybody that freedom.
People who migarted here did so in about the same fashion as Mexican migrants. Only difference is America was land of free back then, and we didn't try to deny anybody that freedom.
Anonymous M replied with this 7 years ago, 22 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,672
@968,663 (E)This is how it pertains. They those inmigrantes you worry about are actually better people than your next door neighbors or perhaps even You.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 13 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,676
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 15 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,683
@968,672 (M)
You mean the majority of the people commit the majority of crimes? Say what?
Also that homicide stat doesn't look good, dude.
You mean the majority of the people commit the majority of crimes? Say what?
Also that homicide stat doesn't look good, dude.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,685
How come people think that Trump is some kind of monarch or theocratic leader?
How come people think Obama had the same amount of power?
Do Americans not know how their own government functions?
How come people think Obama had the same amount of power?
Do Americans not know how their own government functions?
Anonymous M replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,686
@968,683 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/two-charts-demolish-the-notion-that-immigrants-here-illegally-commit-more-crime/?utm_term=.6d4e3567a2a3
"States with larger shares of undocumented immigrants tended to have lower crime rates than states with smaller shares in the years 1990 through 2014. "Increases in the undocumented immigrant population within states are associated with significant decreases in the prevalence of violence," authors Michael T. Light and Ty Miller found."
More charts more text. Bottom line. If your next door neighbor is an illegal immig. That is a better neighbor to have.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/two-charts-demolish-the-notion-that-immigrants-here-illegally-commit-more-crime/?utm_term=.6d4e3567a2a3
"States with larger shares of undocumented immigrants tended to have lower crime rates than states with smaller shares in the years 1990 through 2014. "Increases in the undocumented immigrant population within states are associated with significant decreases in the prevalence of violence," authors Michael T. Light and Ty Miller found."
More charts more text. Bottom line. If your next door neighbor is an illegal immig. That is a better neighbor to have.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,687
@previous (M)
So you admit that you picked a bad graph to use? 'd like to know which states so that I can see the race demographics
So you admit that you picked a bad graph to use? 'd like to know which states so that I can see the race demographics
Anonymous M replied with this 7 years ago, 22 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,701
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
"While any death is tragic, a February 2018 study by the Cato Institute using 2015 crime statistics from Texas found immigrants in the country illegally were 25 percent less likely to be convicted of homicide than native-born Americans.
(Legal immigrants were 87 percent less likely.)
"According to the study, immigrants in the country illegally were also 11.5 percent less likely than native-born Americans to be convicted of sexual assault and 79 percent less likely to be convicted of larceny.
The study found higher conviction rates among illegal immigrants for gambling, kidnapping, smuggling and vagrancy, but those offenses were rare and made up a tiny fraction of overall crime in Texas in 2015."
Again they make better neighbors and co-workers - So many Stats so little time to post them.
"While any death is tragic, a February 2018 study by the Cato Institute using 2015 crime statistics from Texas found immigrants in the country illegally were 25 percent less likely to be convicted of homicide than native-born Americans.
(Legal immigrants were 87 percent less likely.)
"According to the study, immigrants in the country illegally were also 11.5 percent less likely than native-born Americans to be convicted of sexual assault and 79 percent less likely to be convicted of larceny.
The study found higher conviction rates among illegal immigrants for gambling, kidnapping, smuggling and vagrancy, but those offenses were rare and made up a tiny fraction of overall crime in Texas in 2015."
Again they make better neighbors and co-workers - So many Stats so little time to post them.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,703
@968,672 (M)
@968,676 (E)
@968,683 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Based on the chart, you should want immigrants to come in and be here LEGALLY so they won't commit as much homicide.
Based on the chart, undocumented immigrants are responsible for MORE THAN TWICE as many crimes as documented (legal) immigrants, and commit HUGELY DISPROPORTIONATE amounts of homicide!
@968,676 (E)
@968,683 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Based on the chart, you should want immigrants to come in and be here LEGALLY so they won't commit as much homicide.
Based on the chart, undocumented immigrants are responsible for MORE THAN TWICE as many crimes as documented (legal) immigrants, and commit HUGELY DISPROPORTIONATE amounts of homicide!
Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 19 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,710
@previous (A)
Trump will not let them come in LEGALLY. He despises Brown people. Of course because he can hire the illegals for his golf courses at slave wages (until caught days ago) he continues to operate as a hypocrite.
Trump will not let them come in LEGALLY. He despises Brown people. Of course because he can hire the illegals for his golf courses at slave wages (until caught days ago) he continues to operate as a hypocrite.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,715
@968,703 (A)
What happens to them after they become documented to make them less likely to commit murder?
What happens to them after they become documented to make them less likely to commit murder?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 7 years ago, 58 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,719
@968,701 (M)
That's good. They should account for race a then see how it turns out. I would be interested.
That's good. They should account for race a then see how it turns out. I would be interested.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 7 years ago, 16 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,737
@968,715 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I think it might be that the people who come here legally have an inherent respect for the law that the undox dont?
I think it might be that the people who come here legally have an inherent respect for the law that the undox dont?
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Syntax replied with this 7 years ago, 28 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,739
@968,719 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I am pressed for time this AM soon to be PM but Kook you might take some time to read this about Florida and see if you can provide a review for us about your state and how immigration has helped or not
Is a LOT to read.
https://cis.org/Report/Shaping-Florida-Effects-Immigration-19702020
Might even be worth a topic of it's own - Lots of graphs as well
I am pressed for time this AM soon to be PM but Kook you might take some time to read this about Florida and see if you can provide a review for us about your state and how immigration has helped or not
Is a LOT to read.
https://cis.org/Report/Shaping-Florida-Effects-Immigration-19702020
Might even be worth a topic of it's own - Lots of graphs as well
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 7 years ago, 3 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,749
Syntax replied with this 7 years ago, 28 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,794
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Yes I No you're not against Hispanics or immigration - Might just be worthwhile to see how the Cubans and others have improved your state with some facts.
Both Trump and Bert do not like brown people. I think that bert fears that when he runs out of money and hits the gutters again with a tent then several years later wants a job to get off the streets he will have to compete with a brown immigrant who is far more useful at work then bert will ever be.
Yes I No you're not against Hispanics or immigration - Might just be worthwhile to see how the Cubans and others have improved your state with some facts.
Both Trump and Bert do not like brown people. I think that bert fears that when he runs out of money and hits the gutters again with a tent then several years later wants a job to get off the streets he will have to compete with a brown immigrant who is far more useful at work then bert will ever be.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 7 years ago, 42 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,821
@968,657 (E)
We didn't just give money because we are so benevolent and wonderful. We did it to buy influence and project our power. The same as the soviets did post-ww2, the Chinese are doing now, etc. We deserve credit and blame for the good and bad things we do, but you seem to want to dramatically oversell the good, and totally ignore the bad. You can't really do that. It's a package deal.
We didn't just give money because we are so benevolent and wonderful. We did it to buy influence and project our power. The same as the soviets did post-ww2, the Chinese are doing now, etc. We deserve credit and blame for the good and bad things we do, but you seem to want to dramatically oversell the good, and totally ignore the bad. You can't really do that. It's a package deal.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 38 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,832
@968,794 (Syntax)
There are millions and millions of 'brown people' in this country ILLEGALLY..
and THAT is the reason that YES the border should be sealed up tighter than Dick's hatband and NO more let in until the issue of the millions of illegals is resolved..
Guess what...if we deported every single illegal here now...I'd be perfectly happy to see the government begin allowing them back in under the proper protocol..
Illegal is illegal and any arguement about immigration which doesnt address that...is flawed and utterly absurd..
There are millions and millions of 'brown people' in this country ILLEGALLY..
and THAT is the reason that YES the border should be sealed up tighter than Dick's hatband and NO more let in until the issue of the millions of illegals is resolved..
Guess what...if we deported every single illegal here now...I'd be perfectly happy to see the government begin allowing them back in under the proper protocol..
Illegal is illegal and any arguement about immigration which doesnt address that...is flawed and utterly absurd..
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 13 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,839
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 2 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,842
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,852
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,861
@previous (B)
Why is deliberately breaking a law for financial gain 'bad'..
You must have been raised by liberals..
Why is deliberately breaking a law for financial gain 'bad'..
You must have been raised by liberals..
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 4 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #968,864
@previous (E)
> Why is deliberately breaking a law for financial gain 'bad'..
How is working for money breaking the law?
> Why is deliberately breaking a law for financial gain 'bad'..
How is working for money breaking the law?
Syntax replied with this 7 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,873
@968,861 (E)
Yo bert I am about to depart for the day n will not be back on net till 2morrow.
Many of those who want to come to USA are Women with Children - Perhaps because you only watch Fox News you have missed those Women who are the victims of Rape. USA has laws that allow those seeking Asylum to come to USA and ask for protection. Even if they cross over Illegally they are still allowed under our laws to Ask and get Asylum. With your long record of making Rape threats perhaps that has been lost on you over the years? Took me 4ever to get you to stop making Rape threats because you felt you had that right with 1st Adem and other arguments you used in mail with me.
But frankly you just give lip service when backing Trump because currently you are not willing to offer UP one thin dime in IRS revenue to back your own president - I have to as I have no choice with my deductions -
That said - Trump has to follow the Laws under our Constitution and his Lazy declaration to build a massive amount of Walls did not fly with the Senate or Congress and courts will slap him silly with his so called National Emergency - Hell I bet even though he is a Moron, he understands a court fight is probably a No win -
Ya all have a nice day but frankly You do not like them Brown People nor do the White Nationals in your Hood and so Odd that His Wife a foreigner not only Got in she even got her relatives in with Chain Migration and they all got green cards - And only because they were White - But hey who is counting
Yo bert I am about to depart for the day n will not be back on net till 2morrow.
Many of those who want to come to USA are Women with Children - Perhaps because you only watch Fox News you have missed those Women who are the victims of Rape. USA has laws that allow those seeking Asylum to come to USA and ask for protection. Even if they cross over Illegally they are still allowed under our laws to Ask and get Asylum. With your long record of making Rape threats perhaps that has been lost on you over the years? Took me 4ever to get you to stop making Rape threats because you felt you had that right with 1st Adem and other arguments you used in mail with me.
But frankly you just give lip service when backing Trump because currently you are not willing to offer UP one thin dime in IRS revenue to back your own president - I have to as I have no choice with my deductions -
That said - Trump has to follow the Laws under our Constitution and his Lazy declaration to build a massive amount of Walls did not fly with the Senate or Congress and courts will slap him silly with his so called National Emergency - Hell I bet even though he is a Moron, he understands a court fight is probably a No win -
Ya all have a nice day but frankly You do not like them Brown People nor do the White Nationals in your Hood and so Odd that His Wife a foreigner not only Got in she even got her relatives in with Chain Migration and they all got green cards - And only because they were White - But hey who is counting
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,877
@968,864 (B)
They're not all working for money...lots of them are sucking up welfare...and if you say they cant you are incredibly naive and ignorant...plus the go to the Emergency Rooms for every little thing from an infected ingrown pubic hair to gall bladder surgery...and they do not pay..
We have to hire extra school faculty...not to teach them English...but to translate from English to Spanish for them or hire spanish speaking teachers..
The ILLEGALs cost our government almost Two Billion a year when they dont even have a right to be here...and that's sure s low estimate because it doesnt account for all the ways extra money has to be spent..
Illegal..
And liberal loony government in California let's ILLEGAL vote in scoop board elections as well..
It's time for FEMA CAMPS for the liberals to be reeducated about how America should be run..
They're not all working for money...lots of them are sucking up welfare...and if you say they cant you are incredibly naive and ignorant...plus the go to the Emergency Rooms for every little thing from an infected ingrown pubic hair to gall bladder surgery...and they do not pay..
We have to hire extra school faculty...not to teach them English...but to translate from English to Spanish for them or hire spanish speaking teachers..
The ILLEGALs cost our government almost Two Billion a year when they dont even have a right to be here...and that's sure s low estimate because it doesnt account for all the ways extra money has to be spent..
Illegal..
And liberal loony government in California let's ILLEGAL vote in scoop board elections as well..
It's time for FEMA CAMPS for the liberals to be reeducated about how America should be run..
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Anonymous E double-posted this 7 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,878
@968,873 (Syntax)
What about American women who are raped by illegals...what about that Mr Liberal..
What about American women who are raped by illegals...what about that Mr Liberal..
Syntax replied with this 7 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,880
@968,877 (E)
> when they dont even have a right to be here
Damn you are equally as ignorant about Laws as Trump is
Out of here and will leave you with the LAWS regarding Asylum seekers - Guess you failed to learn about Laws in USA in School
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_the_United_States
> when they dont even have a right to be here
Damn you are equally as ignorant about Laws as Trump is
Out of here and will leave you with the LAWS regarding Asylum seekers - Guess you failed to learn about Laws in USA in School
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_the_United_States
Anonymous F replied with this 7 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,886
@968,877 (E)
> And liberal loony government in California let's ILLEGAL vote in scoop board elections as well..
Not the scoop board elections!
> It's time for FEMA CAMPS for the liberals to be reeducated about how America should be run..
This sounds like a person who cherishes freedom and encourages free speech in the marketplace of ideas. Not at all insane.
> And liberal loony government in California let's ILLEGAL vote in scoop board elections as well..
Not the scoop board elections!
> It's time for FEMA CAMPS for the liberals to be reeducated about how America should be run..
This sounds like a person who cherishes freedom and encourages free speech in the marketplace of ideas. Not at all insane.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 39 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,903
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,915
@968,832 (E)
You know what else is illegal? The drugs you love, yet you seem to have no problem with those.
You know what else is illegal? The drugs you love, yet you seem to have no problem with those.
Anonymous E replied with this 7 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #968,926
@previous (chill dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Exsqueeze me...what in the fuck...are you talking about..
Exsqueeze me...what in the fuck...are you talking about..
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous B replied with this 7 years ago, 6 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #969,073
@previous (E)
> Exsqueeze me...what in the fuck...are you talking about..
she's saying you're a burnt out old tard and a hypocrite, ya burnt out old tard
> Exsqueeze me...what in the fuck...are you talking about..
she's saying you're a burnt out old tard and a hypocrite, ya burnt out old tard