tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
но вы мертвы
In ultimate alpha move, trump orders tear gas to be fired at shoeless children
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
And still no picture. Look bitch, I've been to St. Petersburg a few times. There's an all night news-stand. Just get your superior to crack the petty cash open and get a few thousand rubles for today's NYT.
Last edited:
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
It's not "have the opportunity". People fleeing from their country "have the right" by US law to apply for asylum at the border and US border officials must take them in. Not, "wait in line while the people you are fleeing from catch and kill you". Trump is not following the law when orders his border police to turn people away.
Trump should follow the law.
xjking
Well-Known Member
If you would pay attention, they are in the process of interviewing every single one of them. Unfortunately it takes time and they are there in the masses...instead of understanding this, lets just assume they are not being given the opportunity...
squarepush3r
Well-Known Member
wow, misogynist much ?
did you legally or illegally immigrate?
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
Calm down, you're overreacting. Unless you lay your head on the border at night
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You right wingers just make shit up, don't you? As if facts can be ignored. The fact is that the law states the US must take an asylum seeker in once they have applied for asylum. There is no waiting period or sending them back if there are a lot of people. For the asylum seeker's safety, the asylum seeker is allowed to enter this country legally while their petition is processed. Also, their status is decided by a judge, not some ICE lackey but somebody who actually understands the law. Trump's orders to send asylum seekers away before they can apply for asylum are illegal. By his illegal orders, he created the conditions that led to a riot yesterday.
Trump should follow the law.
Last edited:
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
After all these decades he's going to change?
Wait till he pardons everybody named Trump for criminal activity.
I've seen swamps before but this is such obvious corruption in plain view, it just can't possibly end well.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
As long as we are talking about Trump and his extremely bad administration, Trump should listen to scientists and start taking action to reduce carbon emissions in order to avoid the worst outcomes from global warming caused by human industrial activities.
I'd be embarrassed if I felt that I had to defend Trump. But please do. For the entertainment of all.
blu3bird
Well-Known Member
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
One must keep it simple when talking to Trumpkins.
"Trump should follow the law."
Shouldn't be so hard for them to understand but it is. If xjdumbass can't understand that, there is no point in having a nuanced conversation.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
They came here legally
Trump broke the law by not allowing them to seek asylum at a port of entry
Trump is an illegal
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
The rules are that refugees may seek asylum at a port of entry on the border
They did
Trump broke the law. Trump is an illegal, and a rapist
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
My money is easily earned so I'm not all that upset over some of it going to benefit those less fortunate than myself
Buddha2525
Well-Known Member
Bzzz, wrong. You just lost all your money in final jeopardy. Here's your Encyclopedia Britannica as a consolation prize. Enjoy!
"It is the right of a state to grant asylum to an individual, but it is not the right of an individual to be granted asylum by a state. This perspective is reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which, though recognizing (article 14) the right “to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution,” does not explicitly provide a right of asylum."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/asylum
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
That's great except it doesn't pertain to US law
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Thank you for reiterating that these people all have the right to seek asylum and that trump violated their rights by closing the port of entry they arrived at"does not explicitly provide a right of asylum."
Let me simplify this in Buckanese.
A state can grant asylum and another state has no recourse. A state has no obligation to grant or even accept pleas of asylum. The only right an individual has is they can try.
"Plenipotentiaries on the Status of Refugees and Stateless Persons in 1951, did not create a right of asylum for those seeking it, and the impressive array of rights it enumerates pertains only to those refugees “lawfully in” or “lawfully staying in” the sheltering state."
Translation, those who illegally enter another state have no right to asylum. A person who is granted asylum can't be ungranted asylum. Although an individual has a right to seek asylum, a state has no obligation to even hear their plea for assylum.
You're so lucky you graduated before no child left behind, because otherwise you'd still be trying to graduate.
Trump is a huge pussy and so are you
Buddha2525
Well-Known Member
"Most *conservatives, myself included, are OK with granting legal status to DACA recipients and even to illegal aliens broadly speaking, but in return for several key provisions: 1) no amnesty or citizenship to illegal aliens, 2) mandatory e-verify, 3) border enforcement, 4) elimination of visa lotteries and chain migration, 5) skills based legal immigration system similar to the one used by Canada.
When I hear liberals talk about this issue, they're now saying that immigration law does not matter, that we should selectively enforce the law or ignore it altogether, and they are taking the sides of illegal aliens over Americans. They support using taxpayer dollars to provide services and benefits to illegal aliens, support sanctuary cities, and have displayed zero concern for American low-skilled workers who are most hurt by illegal immigration.
Is this the hill that Democrats are willing to die on? Is their message to voters that they are willing to shut down the federal government because they want amnesty and citizenship for millions of illegal aliens?
We are truly living in absurd times."
*I'm not a conservative but I do agree with this issue. Since, "Until the Obama presidency, liberals actually had a fairly moderate view on illegal immigration: they supported border enforcement and the enforcement of immigration laws."
Translation...
https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/the-liberal-love-affair-with-illegal-immigration
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Look at that, just look at that. He is citing Encyclopedia Britannica as US Law.