(04-18-2025 04:51 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Hilarious! But AI is getting scary.

Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

Gotta say, DSt does have a rather unique talent.
He can write an entire paragraph of semi connected thoughts on a matter and manage to get them ALL entirely wrong.

Noticed this about 3 days ago, it’s astonishing, really.

No low level local District judge is locking up the POTUS or AG.

The poster boy for the left has MS13 freaking tattooed on his left hand.

The loons frontrunner for DNC party chairman had 2 separate restraining orders taken out by his wife to protect herself. Easily findable on the interwebs.

Amazing

(04-18-2025 05:52 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

Glad to know you have become a constitutionalist. So from now on the 2nd amendment will be just as feverishly defended. All babies will have the right to life. And free speach will be defended. What a wonderful world if all of you prog filth would defend the constitution so strongly.

(04-18-2025 05:52 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

3A is on the right track. There *already* is very relaxed due process in the initial determination of being illegal aliens. *And* in the insto-presto deportation orders that can be availed.

ThreeIfByLightning already illuminated this in the Expedited Removal Hearing process. But, the laxity of that is being expanded from near the border to literally all over the nation.

The funny thing is the call here that 'illegal aliens shouldnt have any rights, so no due process'. The interesting thing is that the authors of the statements dont seem to grasp that the due process should be inherent in the *determination* of the status.

In short, let me retranslate these authors' claims to something more identifiable. "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process". This 'illegal aliens shuoldnt enjoy due process' crapola I have heard literally 5 times in 2 hours on Fox today. its simply stupid as fk. Again, if you understand how fking stupid "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process" is, then perhaps apply that to the idiot level phrase that is being bandied about re: illegal aliens and due process.

I guess somehow if a citizen is picked up and jailed by ICE (which just happened), they should enjoy the right to prove otherwise. If an illegal alien is picked up, nope. The war phrase is just fking retarded.

Just liberal garbage.

You guys lost the election. Biatch and moan all you want. Nobody takes you seriously or cares.

(04-18-2025 07:08 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Court #3: You have a hold on deportation.

Trump Administration: who gives a **** about a court order.

Love what you missed there, pardner.

(04-18-2025 07:08 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Bullet in the brain

Processesls

(04-18-2025 06:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 05:52 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

3A is on the right track. There *already* is very relaxed due process in the initial determination of being illegal aliens. *And* in the insto-presto deportation orders that can be availed.

ThreeIfByLightning already illuminated this in the Expedited Removal Hearing process. But, the laxity of that is being expanded from near the border to literally all over the nation.

The funny thing is the call here that 'illegal aliens shouldnt have any rights, so no due process'. The interesting thing is that the authors of the statements dont seem to grasp that the due process should be inherent in the *determination* of the status.

In short, let me retranslate these authors' claims to something more identifiable. "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process". This 'illegal aliens shuoldnt enjoy due process' crapola I have heard literally 5 times in 2 hours on Fox today. its simply stupid as fk. Again, if you understand how fking stupid "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process" is, then perhaps apply that to the idiot level phrase that is being bandied about re: illegal aliens and due process.

I guess somehow if a citizen is picked up and jailed by ICE (which just happened), they should enjoy the right to prove otherwise. If an illegal alien is picked up, nope. The war phrase is just fking retarded.

Let a layman explain it to Clarence Darrow. A person crosses our border illegally purposely to avoid the authorities and later is arrested for criminal behavior. That person is then deported by immigration officials. That person has gotten all the due process deserved under the law. And that is exactly what we have here.

Face it. You will not make any graft off of this. No one is going to call you to represent 10,000,000 illegals at $5,000 a whack paid for by the tax payers of this US of A.

They broke the law. They knew they were breaking the law. They should suffer the consequences of a bad decision. Not the tax payers who will foot the bill to give ilegals their due process before being deported.

Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

(04-18-2025 08:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

When on US soil they do, sparkles. Boudemienne v Bush, UsSupCt (2008)

Oopsie.

Want to try again with dumb*** and false rhetoric?

(04-18-2025 08:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

And to mention courts as some here like to do, the SCOTUS agreed. This scums rights, along with all of his compadres, have been addressed.

(04-18-2025 08:15 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 06:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 05:52 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

3A is on the right track. There *already* is very relaxed due process in the initial determination of being illegal aliens. *And* in the insto-presto deportation orders that can be availed.

ThreeIfByLightning already illuminated this in the Expedited Removal Hearing process. But, the laxity of that is being expanded from near the border to literally all over the nation.

The funny thing is the call here that 'illegal aliens shouldnt have any rights, so no due process'. The interesting thing is that the authors of the statements dont seem to grasp that the due process should be inherent in the *determination* of the status.

In short, let me retranslate these authors' claims to something more identifiable. "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process". This 'illegal aliens shuoldnt enjoy due process' crapola I have heard literally 5 times in 2 hours on Fox today. its simply stupid as fk. Again, if you understand how fking stupid "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process" is, then perhaps apply that to the idiot level phrase that is being bandied about re: illegal aliens and due process.

I guess somehow if a citizen is picked up and jailed by ICE (which just happened), they should enjoy the right to prove otherwise. If an illegal alien is picked up, nope. The war phrase is just fking retarded.

Let a layman explain it to Clarence Darrow. A person crosses our border illegally purposely to avoid the authorities and later is arrested for criminal behavior. That person is then deported by immigration officials. That person has gotten all the due process deserved under the law. And that is exactly what we have here.

Nope. And nope. But please try some more of your magic fact changing machine schtick.

Quote:They broke the law. They knew they were breaking the law. They should suffer the consequences of a bad decision. Not the tax payers who will foot the bill to give ilegals their due process before being deported.

Again, you forget, with respect to Abrego- Garcia:

A court ordered a do not deport.

That trumps the low fact, low 'make **** up on the fly' rhetoric that populates the paragraph you post above. More than makes up for the drivel above. Bummer.

(04-18-2025 08:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

When on US soil they do, sparkles. Boudemienne v Bush, UsSupCt (2008)

Oopsie.

Want to try again with dumb*** and false rhetoric?

Then we should change the stupid law, especially when we have a president who cuts holes in the border wall and allows in maybe 20M+ illegals, unvetted.

If you ran the country, it would be turned into a third world sh!thole while you screamed "Due process!"

(04-18-2025 08:24 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

And to mention courts as some here like to do, the SCOTUS agreed. This scums rights, along with all of his compadres, have been addressed.

Nope. You got that simple fact ace reversed there, champ.

(04-18-2025 08:26 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Garcia is a member of MS-13. Adjudicated on that point twice in court.

MS-13 is a terrorist organization. Terrorists don't get due process rights.

As I said many pages ago, ask the 9/11 mastermind who has been sitting in Gitmo for 20+ years.

When on US soil they do, sparkles. Boudemienne v Bush, UsSupCt (2008)

Oopsie.

Want to try again with dumb*** and false rhetoric?

Then we should change the stupid law, especially when we have a president who cuts holes in the border wall and allows in maybe 20M+ illegals.

If you ran the country, it would be turned into a third world sh!thole while you screamed "Due process!"

Then change it.

And I guess follow it with the biggest fktard 'whadabout' you can think of right afterwards. That always helps.

Due process is kind of an important thing, champ. I guess you dont realize it. You be you.

(04-18-2025 08:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:15 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 06:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 05:52 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Unfortunately, like most threads here, this one largely consists of cultish children happily splashing in their fetid orange cesspool and cheering each others antics on. Fortunately, a few posters occasionally suggest interesting potential solutions from the other side of the aisle. For instance -

(04-18-2025 08:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I wasn't arguing the court order, simply stating the fact that the other gang no longer exists, per media reports.

I do think that since they all entered illegally, due process should be limited or eliminated, as can be interpreted as argued above by Three.

If someone enters my house to steal something or harm my family, they forfeit their rights.

(04-18-2025 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The rules that we have for these situations do not really work for asymmetric conflict with rogue states or terror groups. They were written for an era when soldiers on both sides were well defined and basically honorable. We need a rethink and a rewrite of the rules.

I don't really disagree with you on these, I would definitely be open to both a limited due process for illegal aliens and revised rules for modern conflicts with bad actors who are not nation-states. But unless and until these changes are made by act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court, the law is the law. And it must be followed.

3A is on the right track. There *already* is very relaxed due process in the initial determination of being illegal aliens. *And* in the insto-presto deportation orders that can be availed.

ThreeIfByLightning already illuminated this in the Expedited Removal Hearing process. But, the laxity of that is being expanded from near the border to literally all over the nation.

The funny thing is the call here that 'illegal aliens shouldnt have any rights, so no due process'. The interesting thing is that the authors of the statements dont seem to grasp that the due process should be inherent in the *determination* of the status.

In short, let me retranslate these authors' claims to something more identifiable. "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process". This 'illegal aliens shuoldnt enjoy due process' crapola I have heard literally 5 times in 2 hours on Fox today. its simply stupid as fk. Again, if you understand how fking stupid "Guilty murderers shouldnt be afforded due process" is, then perhaps apply that to the idiot level phrase that is being bandied about re: illegal aliens and due process.

I guess somehow if a citizen is picked up and jailed by ICE (which just happened), they should enjoy the right to prove otherwise. If an illegal alien is picked up, nope. The war phrase is just fking retarded.

Let a layman explain it to Clarence Darrow. A person crosses our border illegally purposely to avoid the authorities and later is arrested for criminal behavior. That person is then deported by immigration officials. That person has gotten all the due process deserved under the law. And that is exactly what we have here.

Nope. And nope. But please try some more of your magic fact changing machine schtick.

Quote:They broke the law. They knew they were breaking the law. They should suffer the consequences of a bad decision. Not the tax payers who will foot the bill to give ilegals their due process before being deported.

Again, you forget, with respect to Abrego- Garcia:

A court ordered a do not deport.

That trumps the low fact, low 'make **** up on the fly' rhetoric that populates the paragraph you post above. More than makes up for the drivel above. Bummer.

You do seem to hitch your wagon to some real winners. This bullchit is just the latest. Another in the long line of Clarence misfortunate blunders tripped into at full gallop. Jack Smith. Latisha James. Fat Fanni. SMH.

You and this judge, tilting at windmills.

I'm older than you, Clarence, and I obviously understand due process in the general sense. I never said due process wasn't important. But I did change my view about it in this particular case in the middle of debating it.

1. Illegal aliens have limited due process rights, per various sources linked here, not full due process as American citizens do.

2. When a president does what Biden did at the border, it's not unrealistic to question due process in this particular case, especially since it is limited to start with, and has not been tested under these particular circumstances.