visionary Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 (edited) Edited April 8, 2019 by visionary 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Hypothetically, is there anything stopping Trump from telling the agents to break the law and then just pardoning them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said: Hypothetically, is there anything stopping Trump from telling the agents to break the law and then just pardoning them? The agents not wanting to be arrested, charged or tried to start with......trusting Trump might be another add there is also being sued in civil court, which a pardon doesn't prevent. But the only limit to Trump himself doing it is the repercussions, not the law. Edited April 9, 2019 by twa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 2 hours ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said: I mean...she's not wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 2 hours ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said: Once had a boss who used to gush about this really great job he used to have. Where he was higher ranking and higher paid than where he was now. I asked him, if this job was so great, then how come he's working a lesser job now? Response: "I had a difference of opinion with my boss. I thought he was an ****hole, and he didn't." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Yep. Looks like dude is going down the Chancellor Palpatine path. (Star Wars reference). I think it's time for Speaker Pelosi to have a meeting with the leadership of both parties..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 9 minutes ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said: Yep. Looks like dude is going down the Chancellor Palpatine path. (Star Wars reference). I think it's time for Speaker Pelosi to have a meeting with the leadership of both parties..... Wait! First, let's see what Lindsey Graham has to say about this.... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 36 minutes ago, visionary said: "Angry at the ongoing immigration surge"? I know that it's tough to get accurate, unchallengable, statistics on the subject. But is there any indication at all that the number of illegals has gone up under Trump? Or is it like his "illegal voting" straw man? I did see statistics that the number of detentions at the border has like doubled over the last couple years. But I would be inclined to assume that that's due to more vigorous enforcement, and probably to them detaining people who used to just get pointed the other direction with a slap on the butt. In short, I certainly would not jump from "more detentions" to assuming that this means there's a sudden flood of illegals. (In fact, I would think that Trump ought to be dislocating one of his chubby shoulders patting himself on the back, taking credit for how much more effective his enforcement is. Since the other alternative - claiming that the increased detentions means a surge in illegals - leads immediately to "So, Mr Trump, since your policies have lead to the number of illegals doubling under your watch, when to you intend to revert to the previous methods, which were working better?") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 The numbers are increasing, most certainly minors and family groups As a alternative view Trump could claim they are coming here for his great economy and fleeing ****holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 We are heading for bloodshed. Once Miller gets his people in there, I fully expect the shoot to kill order to be given. That's where this heading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 (edited) Trump was in one of his rages That only a firing assuages So Nielsen got canned Over Donald's demand That there weren't enough children in cages. Edited April 9, 2019 by LD0506 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 19 hours ago, visionary said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 This seems like we should move the conversation here. @No Excuses Quote They really don’t. Well I got that definition from a pro-sanctuary city website so I'm going to go with that. Quote You are entirely basing your argument on the emotional need for punishing people who came here undocumented are here illegally; also known as against the law. FTFY I guess we could instead just keep locking them up. Would you prefer that? @Larry Quote They protect them? They stand between the illegals and the feds and prevent them getting together? I quoted the website. Quote Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about jurisdictions choosing not to spend local resources enforcing marijuana laws? I thought about bringing up this comparasion but decided against it. But since you brought it up, yes. And for the record I am extremely pro-marijuana. I think the Fed needs to de-criminalyze it. But I don't support not enforcing a law just because you don't like it. Instead, work to change the law. (fixing Citizen United would help this by getting big pharma to not be able to lobby to keep it illegal.) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 23 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said: Well I got that definition from a pro-sanctuary city website so I'm going to go with that. For starters, policy decisions related to which laws receive higher priority of enforcement happens ALL the time at every level of governance. We already have a law enforcement agency that catches and deports undocumented people. No one in "sanctuary cities" is banning ICE from doing its job. They just aren't mandating their local law enforcement to participate in something that would negatively harm everyone including citizens, legal residents and undocumented migrants. What's your solution to the inevitable unintended consequence of driving undocumented people further underground, where even local law enforcement loses access to them? I would be willing to bet that this would make ICE's job harder as well. The people who would benefit the most from mandating local law enforcement to go after undocumented people are the predators who prey on the undocumented, i.e. businesses who undercut wages and gangs who patrol poor neighborhoods. Every sensible city in the country realizes this. This is pretty much along the lines of the "War on Drugs". You might think you are doing the "right thing". In reality, you are making the problem worse, wasting money and solving nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 (edited) @mistertim my intention was not to claim he was altruistic or to give him credit for a policy he didn’t enact. It was to say that 1) It was a good political strategy 2) The results are not cruel (certainly less cruel than family separation. (The conversation went down a rabbit hole here a bit) 3). He had a good polical strategy that helped immigrants (sanctuary cities have infrastructure in place to deal with illegal immigrants) but for some inexplicable reason he decided family separation was a better strategy. My point was the idea was sound on multiple levels. He didn’t enact the policy though. Ive got no issue with sanctuary cities as long as they aren’t requesting more* funding to pay for their infrastructure as a result of choosing to take in illegal immigrants. (In the case where the federal government is sending bus loads to your city, they should get more* funding). *more as in more than a simular non sanctuary city would get its hard to reconcile a push for states rights on some issues @TheGreatBuzz without also arguing that sanctuary cities should be the states business (like pot, for example). Edited April 12, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now