The face of the Democratic Party is in more trouble.

The Dems are more interested in protecting this illegal alien than the people he harms because they refuse to advocate streamlining “due process” for illegals (assuming it is really needed instead of conjure by activist judges).

(05-01-2025 08:54 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This is exactly why due process and even habeus is insane, in our current situation. Biden released 20M illegals into the country to forever change the political and cultural makeup of the US, and ensure one party rule, and essentially turn us into a socialist country, or worse.

That's total BS. In illegally, out illegally. Period. It's like running out German or Japanese WWII invaders. Some mistakes will be made? Sure. Tough sh!t.

You know your two "sources" here are COMPLETELY biased, right?

So is every source you post so I say it evens out, don't you?

(05-01-2025 09:03 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This is exactly why due process and even habeus is insane, in our current situation. Biden released 20M illegals into the country to forever change the political and cultural makeup of the US, and ensure one party rule, and essentially turn us into a socialist country, or worse.

That's total BS. In illegally, out illegally. Period. It's like running out German or Japanese WWII invaders. Some mistakes will be made? Sure. Tough sh!t.

You know your two "sources" here are COMPLETELY biased, right?

Nearly everyone in that room is completely biased. What does that have to do with the question asked in the presser?

(05-01-2025 09:10 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 09:03 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This is exactly why due process and even habeus is insane, in our current situation. Biden released 20M illegals into the country to forever change the political and cultural makeup of the US, and ensure one party rule, and essentially turn us into a socialist country, or worse.

That's total BS. In illegally, out illegally. Period. It's like running out German or Japanese WWII invaders. Some mistakes will be made? Sure. Tough sh!t.

You know your two "sources" here are COMPLETELY biased, right?

Nearly everyone in that room is completely biased. What does that have to do with the question asked in the presser?

Everything! Because...well, reasons! Don't you know, you sick, twisted freak?!? /sarcasm

Sorry. I had to do it.

(05-01-2025 09:27 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This is exactly why due process and even habeus is insane, in our current situation. Biden released 20M illegals into the country to forever change the political and cultural makeup of the US, and ensure one party rule, and essentially turn us into a socialist country, or worse.

That's total BS. In illegally, out illegally. Period. It's like running out German or Japanese WWII invaders. Some mistakes will be made? Sure. Tough sh!t.

You know your two "sources" here are COMPLETELY biased, right?

Says the independent.........

(05-01-2025 09:58 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:54 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 08:09 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This is exactly why due process and even habeus is insane, in our current situation. Biden released 20M illegals into the country to forever change the political and cultural makeup of the US, and ensure one party rule, and essentially turn us into a socialist country, or worse.

That's total BS. In illegally, out illegally. Period. It's like running out German or Japanese WWII invaders. Some mistakes will be made? Sure. Tough sh!t.

You know your two "sources" here are COMPLETELY biased, right?

So is every source you post so I say it evens out, don't you?

For Tom, that might be one of the least self-aware posts he has ever made, and dayum, that's saying a lot.

Btw, the two ACTUAL sources in the videos are Tom Homan and Caroline Leavitt. The Border Czar and the WH Press Secretary. DUH...

i'm glad we get to read the same posts over, and over, and over, and over, and....

(05-01-2025 10:09 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  The face of the Democratic Party is in more trouble.

The Dems are more interested in protecting this illegal alien than the people he harms because they refuse to advocate streamlining “due process” for illegals (assuming it is really needed instead of conjure by activist judges).

Not a "Dem," but I'm all for making the process better. Been saying it for years...that our immigration system needs reformed. Sadly, our congress (both parties) have failed us on this front for the better part of 20 years or more.

(05-01-2025 10:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 10:09 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  The face of the Democratic Party is in more trouble.

The Dems are more interested in protecting this illegal alien than the people he harms because they refuse to advocate streamlining “due process” for illegals (assuming it is really needed instead of conjure by activist judges).

Not a "Dem," but I'm all for making the process better.

lulz.....independent.....

(05-01-2025 10:28 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 10:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 10:09 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  The face of the Democratic Party is in more trouble.

The Dems are more interested in protecting this illegal alien than the people he harms because they refuse to advocate streamlining “due process” for illegals (assuming it is really needed instead of conjure by activist judges).

Not a "Dem," but I'm all for making the process better.

lulz.....independent.....

Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

(05-01-2025 11:32 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

LOL...

You got pretty close... he's more like a one legged transgender hippo.

(05-01-2025 12:00 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 11:32 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

LOL...

You got pretty close... he's more like a one legged transgender hippo.

that doesnt understand insurance deductibles....

(05-01-2025 11:32 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

And that differs from 99.9% of the posters here...how exactly?

Please, regale us on all your fresh positions.

(05-01-2025 12:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 11:32 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

And that differs from 99.9% of the posters here...how exactly?

Please, regale us on all your fresh positions.

Absolutely.

1. Two countries. Blue gets the west coast minus San Diego, + Illinois, NY and New England. Red gets the rest.

2. No due process or habeas for any illegal immigrants. Send them all home. All 20M. Illegal in, illegal out.

3. Strong border, finish the wall.

4. Strong trade policies to eliminate unfair trade deficits and encourage American manufacturing, especially bringing back critical products like computer chips and medicine.

5. Make Trump's tax cuts permanent.

6. Make deep spending cuts, as possible, and continue the DOGE effort to reduce the fed payroll and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse..

I could go on, but that's a good start.

Okay, let's have yours. Btw, you misinterpreted the "same sad old stuff." I didn't mean they HAD to be fresh. I just meant they are bad policies, and your positions haven't changed since you have been here.

Many of mine have changed, such as 1, 2, 4 and 6.

(05-01-2025 12:28 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 12:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-01-2025 11:32 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Tom, I don't care if you're Indy, a Dem, or a one legged transgender giraffe, your positions are still the same sad old stuff.

And that differs from 99.9% of the posters here...how exactly?

Please, regale us on all your fresh positions.

Absolutely.

1. Two countries. Blue gets the west coast minus San Diego, + Illinois, NY and New England. Red gets the rest.

2. No due process or habeas for any illegal immigrants. Send them all home. All 20M. Illegal in, illegal out.

3. Strong border, finish the wall.

4. Strong trade policies to eliminate unfair trade deficits and encourage American manufacturing, especially bringing back critical products like computer chips and medicine.

5. Make Trump's tax cuts permanent.

6. Make deep spending cuts, as possible, and continue the DOGE effort to reduce the fed payroll and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse..

I could go on, but that's a good start.

Okay, let's have yours. Btw, you misinterpreted the "same sad old stuff." I didn't mean they HAD to be fresh. I just meant they are bad policies, and your positions haven't changed since you have been here.

Many of mine have changed, such as 1, 2, 4 and 6.

You could have saved a bunch of keystrokes just by typing 'when trump says it, ditto'. Lolz.

Hey Clarence, when did Trump ever say make two separate countries? Details, details...

And you act surprised that I support Trump's policies. But many of them I just came to, which was the topic with Tom.

Do you really EVER pay attention to what anybody else types?

(05-01-2025 01:33 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey Clarence, when did Trump ever say make two separate countries? Details, details...

And you act surprised that I support Trump's policies. But many of them I just came to, which was the topic with Tom.

Do you really EVER pay attention to what anybody else types?

Great, you could have typed "I simply blather 5/6 of what Trump commands" and still saved us the depth of your outlook. The point one is simply the cherry on top of how much you bleat to the tune of whatever you hear.

Youve regaled us with the panoply of Fox News as the only source for your info. so #1 isnt really a stretech into the true depths of ignorance.

The other difference between AAA (and most conservatives on this board) and Tom, is that we don't pretend to be Independent. It's called honesty and transparency. I realize Dems don't understand those concepts, but they still are a thing with some folks.

Hey Clarence, would you prefer if I used MSNBC or CNN as sources, instead of Fox?

I prefer TV news, b/c I'm always doing other things and just have it on and muted until I see something of interest. Gee, what a character flaw that is.

I also use multiple sources on X, but you don't like any of those, either. Dang it, your criticism really keeps me awake at night.

Oh, and you consider any opinion opposed to your own to be the "depths of ignorance." Cool cool

(04-30-2025 09:37 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 07:07 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:54 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-30-2025 06:43 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to due process. David Schoen, a former Trump impeachment attorney, just said on Ingraham that "We are on the verge of turning the Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."

Which is what those of us questioning "due process no matter the circumstances" have been saying.

What other fundamental rights do you wish to **** on?

Fundamental precepts of the Constitution are just that. Not a matter of expediency.

Im enthralled by the constant metronome of 'Levin (on Fox) said' and 'on Ingraham' that appear to form the base of your belief system.

And..... I looked at the Levin bit. Since you buy into that segment lock, stock, and two smoking shotguns as the height of educated knowledge, I guess you also agree with Levin that SCOTUS is a 'Politburo'. Not once, but at least 4 times.

Im glad that network is now the champion of suspending parts of the Constitution simply because, an that you buy into the expediency of simply suspending it (as you openly now support a position that advocates that backing due process is a suicide pact'.)

Given that -- what other fundamental rights do you think we should simply ignore simply because? Should be a simple question for you to answer given your soapbox above. I look forward to a semblance of an answer.

Can you answer the questions in Post #1223 in this Thread?

My arent you the insistent one tonite.

Sure thing.

Slaves -- SCOTUS ruled that slaves were property. Can no more afford due process to a slave than afford due process to a '83 Trans Am in their view.

Most find that all of: repugnant, misguided, and racist.

I hope that angle isnt the saving grace for a rationale for 'others' not being "persons" under the 5th and 14th in your view.

American Indians -- same story, slightly different tune. Consistent rulings that touched upon 'their own nation' were a cover for rulings denying due process. Even though due process was afforded Italians, Irish, Brits, French, various Germanic nationalities, Russsians blah blah blah blah.

Apparently non-naturalized Irish were afforded due process even though being of 'another nation', and American Indians were not while being of another nation.

Kind of obvious in the discrepancies that the rulings were permeated with rank discrimination based on 'red skin' or not.

Again, if you want to use either as a great counter-example for denying 'others' due process, that might be treading on some thin ice.

I see you havent explicitly made that argument. Just insistently asked for an answer twice in rapid succession tonite, which indicates some wish to use those as a grand counter example.

The argument that blacks, Indians, and whole host of others today arent 'persons' can be quite the balancing act to pull off without going full blown racist garbage. Id tread pretty lightly around that issue -- especially so given the explicit history of the groups and the rulings about them in a much, much, much earlier time.

Thanks for the reply.

As you stated "Slaves -- SCOTUS ruled that slaves were property."

In the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, the Supreme Court ruled that enslaved people were not citizens of the United States and therefore could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. The Court held that enslaved individuals were not citizens and did not have standing in federal courts, even after they were freed. This decision effectively treated slaves as property rather than as individuals entitled to due process or citizenship rights.

To me the key word here is citizen of the USA.

The Dred Scott v. Sandford decision was effectively overturned by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.
The 13th Amendment, ratified in 1865, abolished slavery throughout the United States, while the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, including former slaves.

The key word here is citizenship.

As far as the Native Americans in the USA. They had none of these Rights until 1924 when they were granted citizenship.

The Fifth Amendment rights for Native Americans are not directly tied to a specific date but rather to their status as U.S. citizens. Native Americans were granted full U.S. citizenship in 1924 with the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act.
This act declared Indigenous persons born within the United States to be U.S. citizens, which included the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including the Fifth Amendment.

Illegals do not have all these Rights that you and Elvis speak of from what I can see. All I see is the court system pissing on the Constitution.

(05-01-2025 01:43 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey Clarence, would you prefer if I used MSNBC or CNN as sources, instead of Fox?

You do you, champ.

Whatever it is, I would hope you do a bit of independent filtering. And maybe the ability to separate obvious demagoguery (e.g. 'SCOTUS is a politburo') from.factual assertion. You haven't really demonstrated that to any extent.

Quote:I prefer TV news, b/c I'm always doing other things and just have it on and muted until I see something of interest. Gee, what a character flaw that is.

Nice strawman, but inaccurate. See the above paragraph.

Quote:I also use multiple sources on X, but you don't like any of those, either. Dang it, your criticism really keeps me awake at night.

If you want to base facts and political issues on X, you go right ahead. Free country, there's one born every minute, and all that jazz.

I personally have not a lot of faith in issues generally reported in general X feeds, much for the same reason I don't rely on my brother in law for reports about the internal power struggles in the central committee in Beijing.

Yeah, in my book there isn't hardly any inherently trustworthy comment from X --- and that literally goes to typically any viewpoint or reporting. No matter the slant.

You be you. I'll call out an issue from X as inherently unreliable without regard to the viewpoint it tries to further.

Quote:Oh, and you consider any opinion opposed to your own to be the "depths of ignorance." Cool cool

Nope. But nice baseless assertion.

You have the right to cry harder.

Kilmore Abragone is still in his country.

Too many lines, Clarence. Try harder.