|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 28 2025 23:17 Jankisa wrote:
As an European observer I would much, much rather live in Canada then the US, just because US is a heaven for Libertarian blowhards it doesn't mean it's a better place to live, as evidenced by many factors other then "I don't like paying taxes because I don't give a fuck about my fellow citizens".
this is a vast oversimplification. Firstly, it does not have to be an EITHER-OR. You can live in both countries. I spend 100 days a year in Canada. 90% of Canadians live within a 2 hour drive of the border. Like most Canadians I grew up an hour from the border.
I think sticking all of one's eggs in the Canada basket is a lazy move.
|
On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation?
The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal.
If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on their perceived political affiliation is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming. You thinking that the only people that might object to kidnapping and exporting human beings to el salvador are democrats says a lot about more about repubicans than you think that it does.
I legitimately don't think you're being told about how the asylum process works and think that democrats for some reason intentionally let in migrants because they're just comically evil. A Judge saying "hey maybe you should be following due process if you want to make sure you're following the law" shouldn't be in your mind against the law.
|
On April 28 2025 04:23 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2025 17:08 decafchicken wrote:On April 26 2025 19:19 oBlade wrote:On April 26 2025 05:29 decafchicken wrote:
And now trump is arresting judges.
*constitutional crisis intensifies* Unfortunately, two judges seem to have done illegal things, and as we know no one is above the law. They are not even being arrested for belonging to the choir of district judges who have unilaterally taken up the power to override the executive branch since January. Has nothing to do with the interplay between branches which leads to constitutional crises, which is why it wasn't a constitutional crisis for example when Santos was investigated for... doing illegal things. Trump seems to do illegal things all the time. What have these judges done to you that warrants arrests, and why so in comparison to the contempt the executive branch has shown the judiciary? One obstructed federal agents and one hid a criminal in his house. That's why judges approved arrest warrants for them and they were arrested. I find it credible they broke the law which was the probable cause for them being arrested under warrant. They will have their day in court to show otherwise. There is no "in comparison." You are comparing apples to oranges. They were not arrested because they are judges and the law isn't supposed to apply to judges which everyone knows, except Drumpf who is so vengeful he had them arrested for breaking laws even though they're allowed to break laws. They are citizens who (allegedly and credibly enough to merit arrest warrants) broke laws.
No, an administrative warrant does not automatically give access to a courtroom. Administrative warrants, like those issued by agencies like ICE, are not court orders and do not mandate cooperation from judges or law enforcement. They are internal documents and do not carry the same legal weight as a judicial warrant
-Administrative warrants are not judicial: They are issued by agencies within the executive branch, not a court.
-They don't grant access to private spaces: Administrative warrants typically focus on immigration violations and don't authorize entry into private areas without consent or a judicial warrant
-They are distinct from judicial warrants: Judicial warrants, issued by a judge, have the authority to compel action and can be used to enter private spaces
-They are internal documents: Administrative warrants are primarily for internal agency use and don't create a legal obligation for other entities.
https://www.motionlaw.com/the-difference-between-judicial-and-administrative-warrants/
https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/articles/ices-fake-warrant-judge-hannah-dugans-arrest-political-stunt-trumps-autocratic-agenda/
The "contempt" you frame the executive currently showing the judiciary is reciprocal. Parts of the judicial branch are in brazen political mutiny in a departure from their constitutional role, which is a strategy explicitly admitted by Schumer. Many Democrats, to include many district judges, simply do not accept that the office of president exists or has any power when occupied by the orange devil. I'll give you a quick example. During Biden's administration, there was a border crisis, with caravans of 10k-15k people arriving per day from not only Central & South America but the whole world. These are called "inadmissible aliens." This is not a pejorative from me, it's a specific legal class, meaning people who have no reason to be let in, but if they walk across the border and call ollie ollie in free, due to lack of enforcement of the laws by the Biden administration, they would get a court date in 3 years and be let into the US on the basis of an asylum claim which has a 90%+ rate of being called BS and rejected in court if they ever bother to show up. However, after a certain point, that begins to make it look like you're being a bad president, at least on paper, because there's large numbers of hundreds of thousands or millions of people crossing the border illegally and many of them staying. In its infinite wisdom, the corpse of Biden directed Mayorkas to invent a program paroling the people into the US, so they could be brought directly to the US and wouldn't be counted as illegal border crossings and illegal immigrants, they would come under "parole" instead which makes the numbers look good on paper! The source of the authority is 8 USC 1182: + Show Spoiler +(5)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security may, except as provided in subparagraph (B) or in section 1184(f) of this title, in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit any alien applying for admission to the United States, but such parole of such alien shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such parole shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, have been served the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to the United States. So the Biden administration created a convenient app to turbo-let 500,000 inadmissible aliens into the country and dumped them on towns that never asked and weren't consulted. Sound like a case-by-case basis to you? Me neither. But good news, instead of 500,000 illegal border crossings by inadmissible aliens, we helped 500,000 people in a humanitarian stroke! Hooray! Trump ended the program and ended parole for people on it, giving them like a month to leave. A district presidentjudge stayed the order with this rationale: + Show Spoiler +Termination of Parole Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, 90 Fed. Reg. 13611 (Mar. 25, 2025), is hereby STAYED pending further court order insofar as it revokes, without case-by-case review, the previously granted parole and work authorization issued to noncitizens paroled into the United States pursuant to parole programs for noncitizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (the “CHNV parole programs”) prior to the noncitizen’s originally stated parole end date. Emphasis mine. Conclusion: A Republican's evil hand may not undo that which a Democrat president did with the exact same power. Biden can mass import 500,000 people despite that the law specifically says it takes a case-by-case basis to admit them. Trump cannot end the parole because they or a Democrat somewhere might not like that. It's one after another of these. A president trying to run the country doing something that he thinks, and usually is, within his power to do. A progressive judge somewhere throws a wrench in it with the justification it might affect someone in a way they don't like.
Remember when republicans killed the bi-partisan border security bill to make biden look bad? lol
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-block-border-security-bill-campaign-border-chaos-rcna153607
|
On April 28 2025 23:56 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation? The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal. If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on policy is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming.
What policy?
The guy had an illegal immigrant living on his property who was a gang member, and he destroyed evidence that was part of an investigation into the person he was harboring. And he admitted to it. That's a serious crime. It's transparently evil, and it's corrupt, and it's a disgusting betrayal from a judge. So that is what led to a federal judge signing his arrest warrant.
This is not a lie. There is actually a judge in the US who is that fucking insane. I understand it's inconvenient to admit because it's sounds so far-fetched that it must be something we can dismiss as a Republican conspiracy. Unfortunately, it happened.
So I ask again: What policy? None of the acts he's accused of are the national policy of the US federal government. If you are representing to me now that any one of the things he did is the state policy of New Mexico, where he was a state judge, I would submit to you Trump should mobilize the national guard and declare martial law in New Mexico.
On April 29 2025 00:27 decafchicken wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2025 04:23 oBlade wrote:On April 27 2025 17:08 decafchicken wrote:On April 26 2025 19:19 oBlade wrote:On April 26 2025 05:29 decafchicken wrote:
And now trump is arresting judges.
*constitutional crisis intensifies* Unfortunately, two judges seem to have done illegal things, and as we know no one is above the law. They are not even being arrested for belonging to the choir of district judges who have unilaterally taken up the power to override the executive branch since January. Has nothing to do with the interplay between branches which leads to constitutional crises, which is why it wasn't a constitutional crisis for example when Santos was investigated for... doing illegal things. Trump seems to do illegal things all the time. What have these judges done to you that warrants arrests, and why so in comparison to the contempt the executive branch has shown the judiciary? One obstructed federal agents and one hid a criminal in his house. That's why judges approved arrest warrants for them and they were arrested. I find it credible they broke the law which was the probable cause for them being arrested under warrant. They will have their day in court to show otherwise. There is no "in comparison." You are comparing apples to oranges. They were not arrested because they are judges and the law isn't supposed to apply to judges which everyone knows, except Drumpf who is so vengeful he had them arrested for breaking laws even though they're allowed to break laws. They are citizens who (allegedly and credibly enough to merit arrest warrants) broke laws. The "contempt" you frame the executive currently showing the judiciary is reciprocal. Parts of the judicial branch are in brazen political mutiny in a departure from their constitutional role, which is a strategy explicitly admitted by Schumer. Many Democrats, to include many district judges, simply do not accept that the office of president exists or has any power when occupied by the orange devil. I'll give you a quick example. During Biden's administration, there was a border crisis, with caravans of 10k-15k people arriving per day from not only Central & South America but the whole world. These are called "inadmissible aliens." This is not a pejorative from me, it's a specific legal class, meaning people who have no reason to be let in, but if they walk across the border and call ollie ollie in free, due to lack of enforcement of the laws by the Biden administration, they would get a court date in 3 years and be let into the US on the basis of an asylum claim which has a 90%+ rate of being called BS and rejected in court if they ever bother to show up. However, after a certain point, that begins to make it look like you're being a bad president, at least on paper, because there's large numbers of hundreds of thousands or millions of people crossing the border illegally and many of them staying. In its infinite wisdom, the corpse of Biden directed Mayorkas to invent a program paroling the people into the US, so they could be brought directly to the US and wouldn't be counted as illegal border crossings and illegal immigrants, they would come under "parole" instead which makes the numbers look good on paper! The source of the authority is 8 USC 1182: + Show Spoiler +(5)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security may, except as provided in subparagraph (B) or in section 1184(f) of this title, in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit any alien applying for admission to the United States, but such parole of such alien shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such parole shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, have been served the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to the United States. So the Biden administration created a convenient app to turbo-let 500,000 inadmissible aliens into the country and dumped them on towns that never asked and weren't consulted. Sound like a case-by-case basis to you? Me neither. But good news, instead of 500,000 illegal border crossings by inadmissible aliens, we helped 500,000 people in a humanitarian stroke! Hooray! Trump ended the program and ended parole for people on it, giving them like a month to leave. A district presidentjudge stayed the order with this rationale: + Show Spoiler +Termination of Parole Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, 90 Fed. Reg. 13611 (Mar. 25, 2025), is hereby STAYED pending further court order insofar as it revokes, without case-by-case review, the previously granted parole and work authorization issued to noncitizens paroled into the United States pursuant to parole programs for noncitizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (the “CHNV parole programs”) prior to the noncitizen’s originally stated parole end date. Emphasis mine. Conclusion: A Republican's evil hand may not undo that which a Democrat president did with the exact same power. Biden can mass import 500,000 people despite that the law specifically says it takes a case-by-case basis to admit them. Trump cannot end the parole because they or a Democrat somewhere might not like that. It's one after another of these. A president trying to run the country doing something that he thinks, and usually is, within his power to do. A progressive judge somewhere throws a wrench in it with the justification it might affect someone in a way they don't like. Remember when republicans killed the bi-partisan border security bill to make biden look bad? lol https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-block-border-security-bill-campaign-border-chaos-rcna153607
Thanks for at least pretending to care about border security. But Biden is the one who made himself look pretty bad by not being able to do in 4 years to the border what Trump could do in 1 month without a bill. Assuming what Biden did wasn't intentional. Nice vindication for every eagle-eyed political observer who realized the base problem wasn't the presence or absence of this or that law per se, but the execution of the laws.
Hopefully an upcoming monopartisan border bill will be a lot better. Just like the Secure the Border Act of 2023 was better than the "bipartisan" bill that Republicans didn't vote for. Turns out doing something good is more important than doing something shitty which is bipartisanly shitty.
"Administrative warrants don't count." This is a hilarious one.
The reason you don't need judicial warrants in every immigration case is related to what people were arguing pages ago, 99% sure you included, that illegal immigration isn't against the law because in some cases it's "only" civil, not criminal violations.
That's why you don't need a judge to sign off on a warrant for a civil immigration violation when ICE can issue their own warrant. Okay? Choose which you want. Do you want it to be a crime or not? As long as it's "just" a civil violation, ICE can issue their own warrants. Amazing, isn't it?
So ICE issues warrants for immigration violations. A courthouse is a public place. Not a private place. You cannot be reasonably expected to fuck with federal agents, and whisk someone out the back just because there's no judicial arrest warrant for the guy being chased, and expect no consequences. For the same reason you can't drop buckets of slime and thousands of marbles in front of policemen chasing a guy who just crashed his car after a high speed chase just because the police don't have a judicial arrest warrant signed by a judge at that moment. The police officers have the right to go after the guy, and you do not have the right to interfere, and if you interfere, they are first of all going to win anyway, and you should know better especially if you're a judge yourself. Similarly, the federal agents have the right to execute their duties under the authority they get from federal law passed by Congress. Whether you should have to help them or not is its own question, but you definitely don't get to obstruct them.
|
On April 28 2025 23:34 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2025 23:17 Jankisa wrote:
As an European observer I would much, much rather live in Canada then the US, just because US is a heaven for Libertarian blowhards it doesn't mean it's a better place to live, as evidenced by many factors other then "I don't like paying taxes because I don't give a fuck about my fellow citizens".
this is a vast oversimplification. Firstly, it does not have to be an EITHER-OR. You can live in both countries. I spend 100 days a year in Canada. 90% of Canadians live within a 2 hour drive of the border. Like most Canadians I grew up an hour from the border. I think sticking all of one's eggs in the Canada basket is a lazy move.
And yet you are cheering on an administration who is actively and systematically destroying the alliance and partnership between these countries that allows you to live like that while pretending like the reality of vast majority of Canadians that find that shit appealing doesn't exist.
All the while you are trying to present your stances of Canada being a socialist hellhole who most Canadians can't wait to leave for the glorious USA as something that most Canadians share, it's very shitty, doesn't align with polling and reality and I don't think many people around here except maybe your fellow fascist sympathizers are buying it.
|
On April 29 2025 00:50 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2025 23:56 Sermokala wrote:On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation? The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal. If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on policy is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming. What policy?The guy had an illegal immigrant living on his property who was a gang member, and he destroyed evidence that was part of an investigation into the person he was harboring. And he admitted to it. That's a serious crime. It's transparently evil, and it's corrupt, and it's a disgusting betrayal from a judge. So that is what led to a federal judge signing his arrest warrant. This is not a lie. There is actually a judge in the US who is that fucking insane. I understand it's inconvenient to admit because it's sounds so far-fetched that it must be something we can dismiss as a Republican conspiracy. Unfortunately, it happened. So I ask again: What policy? None of the acts he's accused of are the national policy of the US federal government. If you are representing to me now that any one of the things he did is the state policy of New Mexico, where he was a state judge, I would submit to you Trump should mobilize the national guard and declare martial law in New Mexico.
I said judges before I said policy so I don't know how you feel fixating on one word is in good faith but I'm going to act in good faith and assume you just made a reading mistake.
The person you're referring to is not a sitting judge, hasn't been a judge from march, but I'm going to act in good faith and assume the source you're putting faith in also made a mistake.
I understand the legal system is complex but if you are not compelled to release information to the court, like how Trump was with the documents he was storeing in his bathroom, you are under no obligation to preserve it. If you were under an obligation the government could claim they were investigating everyone at all times and would have to preserve all data and information available to them.
And to be clear nothing that the person has done that the government has claimed is a crime. Labeling people as "illegal immigrant" when they claim asylum isn't true and I'm going to act in good faith that you understand the implication of that label based on your "transparently evil" line there.
No I'm talking about the other judge in Wisconsin that the government arrested because they let someone not be kidnapped by the government with the legitimate expectation that they may be shipped to el salvador without due process. Allowing someone to escape people who you have reasonable suspicion are not following the law and will traffic them over state and national lines is not an evil act. Where you get the idea that its obstruction is 100% policy that the judge was targeted for. ICE agents are not the FBI and you should have a higher standard of respect for the courts than to arrest a sitting judge because they don't agree with your interpretation of the law. There is a place for that and you're not going to believe me but its called a court.
You need to do a lot of reflection on the sources of information that you are consuming and how they are making you feel. They are not rational and they make you irrational.
|
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 00:50 oBlade wrote:On April 28 2025 23:56 Sermokala wrote:On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation? The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal. If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on policy is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming. What policy?The guy had an illegal immigrant living on his property who was a gang member, and he destroyed evidence that was part of an investigation into the person he was harboring. And he admitted to it. That's a serious crime. It's transparently evil, and it's corrupt, and it's a disgusting betrayal from a judge. So that is what led to a federal judge signing his arrest warrant. This is not a lie. There is actually a judge in the US who is that fucking insane. I understand it's inconvenient to admit because it's sounds so far-fetched that it must be something we can dismiss as a Republican conspiracy. Unfortunately, it happened. So I ask again: What policy? None of the acts he's accused of are the national policy of the US federal government. If you are representing to me now that any one of the things he did is the state policy of New Mexico, where he was a state judge, I would submit to you Trump should mobilize the national guard and declare martial law in New Mexico. I said judges before I said policy so I don't know how you feel fixating on one word is in good faith but I'm going to act in good faith and assume you just made a reading mistake.
You're the one who said it was based on policy. That's what based on means. It's the base. What did you mean if not the policy of the judges? Whose policy?
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
The person you're referring to is not a sitting judge, hasn't been a judge from march, but I'm going to act in good faith and assume the source you're putting faith in also made a mistake.
Yes, he's not a judge anymore. He resigned and was arrested. Since he's not a judge anymore, we don't have to bother defending his right to his behavior? You specifically said "judges." Were you referring to only one person? Like what is the point of this self-nitpick? If we were to impeach and fire judges, they're fairer game to arrest because they're not technically judges anymore? Not seeing any point.
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
I understand the legal system is complex but if you are not compelled to release information to the court, like how Trump was with the documents he was storeing in his bathroom, you are under no obligation to preserve it. If you were under an obligation the government could claim they were investigating everyone at all times and would have to preserve all data and information available to them.
Trump quite memorably got in trouble for keeping things and not surrendering them. The government took by force them because they knew where they were at all times and were sick of Trump not giving them to them despite demanding them. If you knowingly destroy evidence, that's a crime. Because the government can't take it anymore despite needing it. And a judge would know that. But he'll have his day to prove otherwise, that he smashed the guy's phone with a hammer out of mere reputational concern. Just like Hillary assumed wiping an email server meant with a cloth. In fact, didn't she smash phones with hammers too? Where do these people come from?
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
And to be clear nothing that the person has done that the government has claimed is a crime. Labeling people as "illegal immigrant" when they claim asylum isn't true and I'm going to act in good faith that you understand the implication of that label based on your "transparently evil" line there.
This is too unclear for me to know what "the person" is or what you're talking about. Labeling someone a nugget of gold as soon as they say the magic word "asylum" isn't true.
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
No I'm talking about the other judge in Wisconsin that the government arrested because they let someone not be kidnapped by the government with the legitimate expectation that they may be shipped to el salvador without due process.
Allowing someone to escape people who you have reasonable suspicion are not following the law and will traffic them over state and national lines is not an evil act. Where you get the idea that its obstruction is 100% policy that the judge was targeted for.
Who is to enforce federal immigration law, if not federal agents, on your planet? Do you believe anyone at all has the authority to enforce federal immigration law? Read this.
On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
ICE agents are not the FBI and you should have a higher standard of respect for the courts than to arrest a sitting judge because they don't agree with your interpretation of the law. There is a place for that and you're not going to believe me but its called a court.
Don't know what the first part of this sentence means. Dugan was arrested by the FBI because there was a warrant approved by a federal judge because there was probable cause she had committed a crime. Now, she may have committed the crime because she has policy qualms with the government - but that's her own problem.
County judges don't get to interfere with federal agents in the performance of their legal duties in a public place just because they wear black robes. You should have realized your objection equally applies to she's a judge and if she witnessed a kidnapping she has a huge network and expertise in the legal profession and could file a complaint leading to yet another TRO or injunction assuming the asylee's rights have actually been violated.
|
On April 29 2025 03:34 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:On April 29 2025 00:50 oBlade wrote:On April 28 2025 23:56 Sermokala wrote:On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation? The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal. If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on policy is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming. What policy?The guy had an illegal immigrant living on his property who was a gang member, and he destroyed evidence that was part of an investigation into the person he was harboring. And he admitted to it. That's a serious crime. It's transparently evil, and it's corrupt, and it's a disgusting betrayal from a judge. So that is what led to a federal judge signing his arrest warrant. This is not a lie. There is actually a judge in the US who is that fucking insane. I understand it's inconvenient to admit because it's sounds so far-fetched that it must be something we can dismiss as a Republican conspiracy. Unfortunately, it happened. So I ask again: What policy? None of the acts he's accused of are the national policy of the US federal government. If you are representing to me now that any one of the things he did is the state policy of New Mexico, where he was a state judge, I would submit to you Trump should mobilize the national guard and declare martial law in New Mexico. I said judges before I said policy so I don't know how you feel fixating on one word is in good faith but I'm going to act in good faith and assume you just made a reading mistake. You're the one who said it was based on policy. That's what based on means. It's the base. What did you mean if not the policy of the judges? Whose policy? Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
The person you're referring to is not a sitting judge, hasn't been a judge from march, but I'm going to act in good faith and assume the source you're putting faith in also made a mistake. Yes, he's not a judge anymore. He resigned and was arrested. Since he's not a judge anymore, we don't have to bother defending his right to his behavior? You specifically said "judges." Were you referring to only one person? Like what is the point of this self-nitpick? If we were to impeach and fire judges, they're fairer game to arrest because they're not technically judges anymore? Not seeing any point. Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
I understand the legal system is complex but if you are not compelled to release information to the court, like how Trump was with the documents he was storeing in his bathroom, you are under no obligation to preserve it. If you were under an obligation the government could claim they were investigating everyone at all times and would have to preserve all data and information available to them. Trump quite memorably got in trouble for keeping things and not surrendering them. The government took by force them because they knew where they were at all times and were sick of Trump not giving them to them despite demanding them. If you knowingly destroy evidence, that's a crime. Because the government can't take it anymore despite needing it. And a judge would know that. But he'll have his day to prove otherwise, that he smashed the guy's phone with a hammer out of mere reputational concern. Just like Hillary assumed wiping an email server meant with a cloth. In fact, didn't she smash phones with hammers too? Where do these people come from? Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
And to be clear nothing that the person has done that the government has claimed is a crime. Labeling people as "illegal immigrant" when they claim asylum isn't true and I'm going to act in good faith that you understand the implication of that label based on your "transparently evil" line there. This is too unclear for me to know what "the person" is or what you're talking about. Labeling someone a nugget of gold as soon as they say the magic word "asylum" isn't true. Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
No I'm talking about the other judge in Wisconsin that the government arrested because they let someone not be kidnapped by the government with the legitimate expectation that they may be shipped to el salvador without due process.
Allowing someone to escape people who you have reasonable suspicion are not following the law and will traffic them over state and national lines is not an evil act. Where you get the idea that its obstruction is 100% policy that the judge was targeted for. Who is to enforce federal immigration law, if not federal agents, on your planet? Do you believe anyone at all has the authority to enforce federal immigration law? Read this.Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
ICE agents are not the FBI and you should have a higher standard of respect for the courts than to arrest a sitting judge because they don't agree with your interpretation of the law. There is a place for that and you're not going to believe me but its called a court. Don't know what the first part of this sentence means. Dugan was arrested by the FBI because there was a warrant approved by a federal judge because there was probable cause she had committed a crime. Now, she may have committed the crime because she has policy qualms with the government - but that's her own problem. County judges don't get to interfere with federal agents in the performance of their legal duties in a public place just because they wear black robes. You should have realized your objection equally applies to she's a judge and if she witnessed a kidnapping she has a huge network and expertise in the legal profession and could file a complaint leading to yet another TRO or injunction assuming the asylee's rights have actually been violated.
Oh I as assuming in good faith that you knew we were talking about immigration and the federal government arresting judges. Are you legitimately confused about the topic we're talking about? You go onto talk about it very specifically in the following parts of your post.
I'm glad you now understand and can appreciate how due process is a good thing. Its good to see movement from you in this discussion. If a judge does do something wrong that warents an impeachment they should be impeached, through the due process of impeachment and charging someone.
Yes, Trump got in trouble for keeping things he was ordered to return to the government, after he was ordered by a court to return them. I'm glad you now also have shown you understand the difference between the two situations. I don't know why you feel the need to bring in hillary into this but are you making the argument somehow that not preserving all information at all times implies guilt? Do you want to talk about the video footage that was destroyed at trumps hotel after he was told to preserve information?
Labeling someone an asylum seeker when they seek asylum in your country is accurate. Are you confused about what an asylum seeker is or the concept of asylum?
You are correct the federal government does have the sole authority to enforce immigration law, and are granted that authority by the laws in place and empowered to do this by the Constitution. We are in agreement here and I'm glad to see you also want them to enforce the immigration laws as they have been written and abide by the constitution. Its brave of you to go against the trump administration's stance on this issue.
ICE and the FBI are two different agencies. I'm glad to clear that up, you may have been told that the people who were, in this interpretation being interfered with, are the FBI but they were ICE. They are not the same and do not carry the same authority.
County judges do not get to interfere with federal agents of their performance of their legal duties legal duties I'm glad we agree on this case. If you think that denying people of due process by taking them off the street, never identifying who they are, transporting them across state lines so they cannot access legal council or any form of support, and then transporting them to a central American prison is a legal act I would like you to confirm that please. Trump has said repeatedly and shown repeatedly that he is not following court orders, meaning that your solution isn't legitimate.
Can you confirm for us that Trump and ICE should abide by the court orders they receive in your opinion?
|
"It was an Administrative warrant"
So it's not illegal to obstruct ICE is they have this kind of warrant? Any source for that?
"She was targeted for her perceived political affiliation"
Many left-leaning judges have opposed Trump, is it a coincidence that it's the one that helped someone escape and flee on foot that got arrested?
"ICE agents are not the FBI"
Ok...? So you think it's legal to obstruct ICE because they are not the FBI... or what's the point here?
Sometimes quality is better than quantity. A kitchen-sink of nonsensical arguments isn't helping the case for the judge that snuck the illegal immigrant out the back exit.
|
If you think about it, we really don't even need the judicial system. As long as the executive branch gives itself permission first, they should be able to do whatever they feel is necessary.
|
‘New Media’ Reporter Straight Up Asks Karoline Leavitt to Tell Her What to Cover: ‘What Direction Do You Advise Me to Go In?’
A member of the “new media” reporting on the White House essentially asked Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt how to cover President Donald Trump’s administration.
Hours after her Monday morning briefing, Leavitt held a second briefing solely for members of the “new media” — a collection of correspondents representing independent outlets not traditionally given access to the White House. The inclusion of these voices in the briefing room has been met with criticism due to the fact that many of them come from pro-Trump outlets whose questions have been more sycophantic than serious.
During the new media briefing, American First Policy Institute ambassador Kambree Nelson first bashed traditional media outlets for their coverage of the president — before asking Leavitt to give her marching orders.
Kambree Nelson: “I’ve noticed — this is kind of like a repeat of 2016 — the legacy media has gone back to not reporting anything on President Trump,” Nelson said. “In the beginning, we had them reporting everything that he was doing. Now, they’re kind of going back, again, to not reporting everything that he is actually doing.
“I’m kind of the nerd when it comes to reporting. I’m not the headline news girl. I’m the nuts-and-bolts, I’m the policy-type nerd; so what direction do you advise me to go into? Like the White House files that y’all send out every single day? Because that’s what people are used to. When they wanna ask me questions, they wanna know the nuts and bolts of everything.”
Leavitt replied: “I wish there were people in the legacy media that were like you. And didn’t focus on the sensationalist headlines but actually cared about the facts. The president is doing so many phenomenal things every day that will never be mentioned on cable news at night … signing executive orders…we are do our absolute best to message that. Which is, again, why we’re welcoming independent voices like yours with followings on social media. Because that’s the best way to get those truths and those facts out there.”
they throw out legacy media guys who actually do their jobs, albeit not great at times sure... and this is who they replace it with? guys and gals "seeking direction" of what to report and how. lol.
if you want blondies job why don't you slide into orange man's DMs and constantly tell him how great he is? or just get hired officially for another lickspittle position and drop the charade. I am sure the "have you said thank you yet administration" can always use more sycophants.
as reality comes crashing in from all sides they will need all the PR damage control they can get their hands on.
what a joke again from the clown brigade administration and their toadies.
|
On April 29 2025 04:39 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 03:34 oBlade wrote:On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:On April 29 2025 00:50 oBlade wrote:On April 28 2025 23:56 Sermokala wrote:On April 28 2025 22:12 oBlade wrote:
What news are you reading that the judges were arrested for obstructing illegal deportation? The news that you aren't reading and wouldn't take as a credible source. We know this because you are taking your information from a source I wouldn't find credible because its saying somehow that what they did was illegal. If you can't find it in yourself to see that arresting judges based on policy is a bad look you need to do a lot more introspection on what information you are consuming. What policy?The guy had an illegal immigrant living on his property who was a gang member, and he destroyed evidence that was part of an investigation into the person he was harboring. And he admitted to it. That's a serious crime. It's transparently evil, and it's corrupt, and it's a disgusting betrayal from a judge. So that is what led to a federal judge signing his arrest warrant. This is not a lie. There is actually a judge in the US who is that fucking insane. I understand it's inconvenient to admit because it's sounds so far-fetched that it must be something we can dismiss as a Republican conspiracy. Unfortunately, it happened. So I ask again: What policy? None of the acts he's accused of are the national policy of the US federal government. If you are representing to me now that any one of the things he did is the state policy of New Mexico, where he was a state judge, I would submit to you Trump should mobilize the national guard and declare martial law in New Mexico. I said judges before I said policy so I don't know how you feel fixating on one word is in good faith but I'm going to act in good faith and assume you just made a reading mistake. You're the one who said it was based on policy. That's what based on means. It's the base. What did you mean if not the policy of the judges? Whose policy? On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
The person you're referring to is not a sitting judge, hasn't been a judge from march, but I'm going to act in good faith and assume the source you're putting faith in also made a mistake. Yes, he's not a judge anymore. He resigned and was arrested. Since he's not a judge anymore, we don't have to bother defending his right to his behavior? You specifically said "judges." Were you referring to only one person? Like what is the point of this self-nitpick? If we were to impeach and fire judges, they're fairer game to arrest because they're not technically judges anymore? Not seeing any point. On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
I understand the legal system is complex but if you are not compelled to release information to the court, like how Trump was with the documents he was storeing in his bathroom, you are under no obligation to preserve it. If you were under an obligation the government could claim they were investigating everyone at all times and would have to preserve all data and information available to them. Trump quite memorably got in trouble for keeping things and not surrendering them. The government took by force them because they knew where they were at all times and were sick of Trump not giving them to them despite demanding them. If you knowingly destroy evidence, that's a crime. Because the government can't take it anymore despite needing it. And a judge would know that. But he'll have his day to prove otherwise, that he smashed the guy's phone with a hammer out of mere reputational concern. Just like Hillary assumed wiping an email server meant with a cloth. In fact, didn't she smash phones with hammers too? Where do these people come from? On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
And to be clear nothing that the person has done that the government has claimed is a crime. Labeling people as "illegal immigrant" when they claim asylum isn't true and I'm going to act in good faith that you understand the implication of that label based on your "transparently evil" line there. This is too unclear for me to know what "the person" is or what you're talking about. Labeling someone a nugget of gold as soon as they say the magic word "asylum" isn't true. On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
No I'm talking about the other judge in Wisconsin that the government arrested because they let someone not be kidnapped by the government with the legitimate expectation that they may be shipped to el salvador without due process.
Allowing someone to escape people who you have reasonable suspicion are not following the law and will traffic them over state and national lines is not an evil act. Where you get the idea that its obstruction is 100% policy that the judge was targeted for. Who is to enforce federal immigration law, if not federal agents, on your planet? Do you believe anyone at all has the authority to enforce federal immigration law? Read this.On April 29 2025 02:26 Sermokala wrote:
ICE agents are not the FBI and you should have a higher standard of respect for the courts than to arrest a sitting judge because they don't agree with your interpretation of the law. There is a place for that and you're not going to believe me but its called a court. Don't know what the first part of this sentence means. Dugan was arrested by the FBI because there was a warrant approved by a federal judge because there was probable cause she had committed a crime. Now, she may have committed the crime because she has policy qualms with the government - but that's her own problem. County judges don't get to interfere with federal agents in the performance of their legal duties in a public place just because they wear black robes. You should have realized your objection equally applies to she's a judge and if she witnessed a kidnapping she has a huge network and expertise in the legal profession and could file a complaint leading to yet another TRO or injunction assuming the asylee's rights have actually been violated. I'm glad you now understand and can appreciate how due process is a good thing. Its good to see movement from you in this discussion. If a judge does do something wrong that warents an impeachment they should be impeached, through the due process of impeachment and charging someone.
Impeachment = Political process of the legislature trying an appointed/elected person for removal (+disqualification from holding office)
Charging = Criminal process of getting probable cause, with a warrant depending on the situation, arresting someone for violating the law, and getting charged and arraigned and having a jury or bench trial. That's the due process that Dugan is going through.
These are independent processes. Neither requires nor precludes the other.
On April 29 2025 04:39 Sermokala wrote:
You are correct the federal government does have the sole authority to enforce immigration law, and are granted that authority by the laws in place and empowered to do this by the Constitution. We are in agreement here and I'm glad to see you also want them to enforce the immigration laws as they have been written and abide by the constitution. Its brave of you to go against the trump administration's stance on this issue.
ICE and the FBI are two different agencies. I'm glad to clear that up, you may have been told that the people who were, in this interpretation being interfered with, are the FBI but they were ICE. They are not the same and do not carry the same authority.
Nobody said that.
Why did you bring up the FBI? The FBI arrested Dugan. That's the only connection. If you didn't have something to say about that, then bringing up the FBI to tell us ICE aren't the FBI is about as meaningful as clarifying that ICE isn't Santa Claus.
On April 29 2025 04:39 Sermokala wrote:
County judges do not get to interfere with federal agents of their performance of their legal duties legal duties I'm glad we agree on this case. If you think that denying people of due process by taking them off the street, never identifying who they are, transporting them across state lines so they cannot access legal council or any form of support, and then transporting them to a central American prison is a legal act I would like you to confirm that please. Trump has said repeatedly and shown repeatedly that he is not following court orders, meaning that your solution isn't legitimate.
Trump has deported millions of people.
Of those, courts this year have ruled 2 should be returned.
There are certain cases where anyone, even the government on a good day, can recognize a law is broken for a greater good. Speeding/reckless driving to get your loved one to the hospital. Do you have any specific evidence Dugan was acting in her official capacity, with specific knowledge that federal agents were conspiring to do something illegal, when she obstructed them? Because the fact she saw #FreeMarylandGarcia on CNN like you is, to put it lightly, scant reason for her to obstruct federal agents' operation in Wisconsin.
Here's the authority for ICE to issue detainers, which sanctuary jurisdictions can ignore, included for clarity.
+ Show Spoiler +(a) Detainers in general. Detainers are issued pursuant to sections 236 and 287 of the Act and this chapter 1. Any authorized immigration officer may at any time issue a Form I-247, Immigration Detainer-Notice of Action, to any other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency. A detainer serves to advise another law enforcement agency that the Department seeks custody of an alien presently in the custody of that agency, for the purpose of arresting and removing the alien. The detainer is a request that such agency advise the Department, prior to release of the alien, in order for the Department to arrange to assume custody, in situations when gaining immediate physical custody is either impracticable or impossible.
(b) Authority to issue detainers. The following officers are authorized to issue detainers:
(1) Border patrol agents, including aircraft pilots;
(2) Special agents;
(3) Deportation officers;
(4) Immigration inspectors;
(5) Adjudications officers;
(6) Immigration enforcement agents;
(7) Supervisory and managerial personnel who are responsible for supervising the activities of those officers listed in this paragraph; and
(8) Immigration officers who need the authority to issue detainers under section 287(d)(3) of the Act in order to effectively accomplish their individual missions and who are designated individually or as a class, by the Commissioner of CBP, the Assistant Secretary for ICE, or the Director of the USCIS.
(c) Availability of records. In order for the Department to accurately determine the propriety of issuing a detainer, serving a notice to appear, or taking custody of an alien in accordance with this section, the criminal justice agency requesting such action or informing the Department of a conviction or act that renders an alien inadmissible or removable under any provision of law shall provide the Department with all documentary records and information available from the agency that reasonably relates to the alien's status in the United States, or that may have an impact on conditions of release.
(d) Temporary detention at Department request. Upon a determination by the Department to issue a detainer for an alien not otherwise detained by a criminal justice agency, such agency shall maintain custody of the alien for a period not to exceed 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays in order to permit assumption of custody by the Department.
Here's the authority for ICE to issue warrants, which citizens do not have a right to obstruct with impunity, regardless of the color of their robes or being a county or state judge:
+ Show Spoiler +(2) Issuance of arrest warrants for immigration violations. A warrant of arrest may be issued by any of the following immigration officials who have been authorized or delegated such authority:
(i) District directors (except foreign);
(ii) Deputy district directors (except foreign);
(iii) Assistant district directors for investigations;
(iv) Deputy assistant district directors for investigations;
(v) Assistant district directors for deportation;
(vi) Deputy assistant district directors for deportation;
(vii) Assistant district directors for examinations;
(viii) Deputy assistant district directors for examinations;
(ix) Officers in charge (except foreign);
(x) Assistant officers in charge (except foreign);
(xi) Chief patrol agents;
(xii) Deputy chief patrol agents;
(xiii) Division chiefs;
(xiv) Assistant chief patrol agents;
(xv) Patrol agents in charge;
(xvi) Deputy patrol agents in charge;
(xvii) Border Patrol watch commanders;
(xviii) Special operations supervisors;
(xix) Supervisory border patrol agents;
(xx) Directors of air operations;
(xxi) Directors of marine operations;
(xxii) Supervisory air and marine interdiction agents;
(xxiii) Executive Associate Director of Homeland Security Investigations;
(xxiv) Institutional Hearing Program directors;
(xxv) Director, Field Operations;
(xxvi) Assistant Director, Field Operations;
(xxvii) Port directors;
(xxviii) Assistant port directors;
(xxix) Field operations watch commanders;
(xxx) Field operations chiefs;
(xxxi) Supervisory deportation officers;
(xxxii) Supervisory detention and deportation officers;
(xxxiii) Group Supervisors;
(xxxiv) Director, Office of Detention and Removal Operations;
(xxxv) Special Agents in Charge;
(xxxvi) Deputy Special Agents in Charge;
(xxxvii) Associate Special Agents in Charge;
(xxxviii) Assistant Special Agents in Charge;
(xxxix) Field Office Directors;
(xl) Deputy Field Office Directors;
(xli) District Field Officers;
(xlii) Supervisory immigration services officers;
(xliii) Supervisory immigration officers;
(xliv) Supervisory asylum officers;
(xlv) Supervisory special agents;
(xlvi) Director of investigations;
(xlvii) Directors or officers in charge of detention facilities;
(xlviii) Directors of field operations;
(xlix) Deputy or assistant directors of field operations;
(l) Unit Chief, Law Enforcement Support Center;
(li) Section Chief, Law Enforcement Support Center;
(lii) Immigration Enforcement Agents; or
(liii) Other duly authorized officers or employees of the Department of Homeland Security or the United States who are delegated the authority as provided in 8 CFR 2.1 to issue warrants of arrest, and who have successfully completed any required immigration law enforcement training.
Here's the authority for agents to execute that power:
+ Show Spoiler +Under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, an officer or employee of the Service may carry a firearm and may execute and serve any order, warrant, subpoena, summons, or other process issued under the authority of the United States. The authority to make arrests under paragraph (5)(B) shall only be effective on and after the date on which the Attorney General publishes final regulations which (i) prescribe the categories of officers and employees of the Service who may use force (including deadly force) and the circumstances under which such force may be used, (ii) establish standards with respect to enforcement activities of the Service, (iii) require that any officer or employee of the Service is not authorized to make arrests under paragraph (5)(B) unless the officer or employee has received certification as having completed a training program which covers such arrests and standards described in clause (ii), and (iv) establish an expedited, internal review process for violations of such standards, which process is consistent with standard agency procedure regarding confidentiality of matters related to internal investigations.
|
Trump has deported millions of people.
might want to hold your breath on that one.
A pledge to deport millions of undocumented immigrants helped propel President Donald Trump back to the White House.
"It's going to be called a Trump mass deportation," Trump said during a campaign rally on Aug. 12, 2024. "We will begin the largest deportation operation in American history."
He appointed a border czar, Tom Homan, to increase expulsions.
"I will run the biggest deportation operation the country has ever seen," said Homan, a week after Trump won the election.
The Trump administration has embraced a shock and awe approach to immigration enforcement designed for maximum publicity. The homeland security secretary has attended and posted video of early morning arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Trump has deployed more armed forces to the border and used military planes to ferry away immigrants. He has also sent alleged Venezuelan gang members to a terrorism prison in El Salvador before they could have a day in court.
But federal data shows there has not been a significant jump in immigrants deported since Trump took office. Mass deportations have not occurred. The numbers show removals are lagging behind levels during the Biden administration.
"Frankly I was shocked," said Sue Long, co-founder of the nonpartisan Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse that tracks immigration statistics at Syracuse University.
...
Early on the Trump administration touted the number of daily immigration arrests but has never shared detailed deportation figures.
Long was able to calculate recent deportation figures using a cumulative number deep inside a spreadsheet ICE is required by law to keep updated for Congress.
"They're lower," Long said. "Their daily average is simply 10 percent lower."
The White House told Scripps News that because border crossings are down, so are deportations. It is an argument Homan also makes.
"We're down border crossings 96 percent, so we don't have millions of people coming across the border," Homan told reporters at the White House. "Just to compare our removal numbers to (Biden's) is just ridiculous."
Homan also told the New York Times, "We need to increase the arrests ... They're not high enough."
There are still an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country.
Homan says more funding from Congress would boost immigration enforcement efforts. Costs are high to arrange and transport individuals out of the U.S. to their home countries. Logistics are another challenge, as countries must agree to receive deported immigrants.
enlightening really. my bet is on bluster and publicity stunts, instead of hard work and achievements. whatever that would mean in this context...
successfully robbing people of due process and human rights for asylum seekers?
|
Nothing like a fascist supporter who likes to pretend that he uses facts putting out a completely made up figure and getting slapped down showing that these fuckers are worse then previous administrations despite being very indiscriminate, as the Ukrainians say about Russians, "thank god they are dumb".
Speaking of fascism, I'm sure that oBlade is already masturbating while reading this EO:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/strengthening-and-unleashing-americas-law-enforcement-to-pursue-criminals-and-protect-innocent-citizens/
"Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Attorney General, shall determine how military and national security assets, training, non-lethal capabilities, and personnel can most effectively be utilized to prevent crime."
Not even a year in, we are already at the "using military on home soil under pretense of stopping crime" part of speed running fascism.
|
I let my breath out in 2021 after Biden was inaugurated after Trump deported millions of people during his term making my statement pretty easy to digest.
On April 29 2025 20:13 Doublemint wrote:
enlightening really. my bet is on bluster and publicity stunts, instead of hard work and achievements. whatever that would mean in this context...
successfully robbing people of due process and human rights for asylum seekers?
Are you in favor of deporting illegal immigrants with due process, or do you think due process is a procedural shield that exists to stop people from ever being deported?
|
On April 29 2025 20:33 Jankisa wrote:Nothing like a fascist supporter who likes to pretend that he uses facts putting out a completely made up figure and getting slapped down showing that these fuckers are worse then previous administrations despite being very indiscriminate, as the Ukrainians say about Russians, "thank god they are dumb". Speaking of fascism, I'm sure that oBlade is already masturbating while reading this EO: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/strengthening-and-unleashing-americas-law-enforcement-to-pursue-criminals-and-protect-innocent-citizens/"Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Attorney General, shall determine how military and national security assets, training, non-lethal capabilities, and personnel can most effectively be utilized to prevent crime." Not even a year in, we are already at the "using military on home soil under pretense of stopping crime" part of speed running fascism.
That particular aspect of speedrunning fascism has been happening under Democrats in New York.
It brings the number of National Guard members stationed at subway entrances to 1,000. A show of force intended to deter crime and to reassure riders.
The Governor and MTA chairman insist they are making progress in driving down crime in the transit system. Overall crime is down since the pandemic but not in every category.
"This is not a response to a specific crime. We're not seeing a trend that's alarming, but it's about continuing a strategy that has proven its success and expanding it to protect even more people," Hochul said.
abc7ny.com
EDIT: It would be a propaganda fail for Trump not to literally say that he is "continuing a strategy that has proven its success and expanding it to protect even more people"
|
Jesus christ you are brain rotted, Trump puts out that EO and all you have to say is "but democrats". Eric Adams is a piece of shit cop that has had investigations pulled by Trump regime basically as soon as they came in to power but it's "the democrats".
You, honestly, are worse then oBlade, at least that guy is an unapologetic fascist supporter, you are just the worse kind of smug troll, I honestly feel bad for you, being this jaded and slimy must be exhausting and it reflects a spectacular lack of inner life.
|
On April 29 2025 22:55 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2025 22:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 29 2025 20:33 Jankisa wrote:Nothing like a fascist supporter who likes to pretend that he uses facts putting out a completely made up figure and getting slapped down showing that these fuckers are worse then previous administrations despite being very indiscriminate, as the Ukrainians say about Russians, "thank god they are dumb". Speaking of fascism, I'm sure that oBlade is already masturbating while reading this EO: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/strengthening-and-unleashing-americas-law-enforcement-to-pursue-criminals-and-protect-innocent-citizens/"Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Attorney General, shall determine how military and national security assets, training, non-lethal capabilities, and personnel can most effectively be utilized to prevent crime." Not even a year in, we are already at the "using military on home soil under pretense of stopping crime" part of speed running fascism. That particular aspect of speedrunning fascism has been happening under Democrats in New York. It brings the number of National Guard members stationed at subway entrances to 1,000. A show of force intended to deter crime and to reassure riders.
The Governor and MTA chairman insist they are making progress in driving down crime in the transit system. Overall crime is down since the pandemic but not in every category.
"This is not a response to a specific crime. We're not seeing a trend that's alarming, but it's about continuing a strategy that has proven its success and expanding it to protect even more people," Hochul said. abc7ny.comEDIT: It would be a propaganda fail for Trump not to literally say that he is "continuing a strategy that has proven its success and expanding it to protect even more people" Jesus christ you are brain rotted, Trump puts out that EO and all you have to say is "but democrats". Eric Adams is a piece of shit cop that has had investigations pulled by Trump regime basically as soon as they came in to power but it's "the democrats". You, honestly, are worse then oBlade, at least that guy is an unapologetic fascist supporter, you are just the worse kind of smug troll, I honestly feel bad for you, being this jaded and slimy must be exhausting and it reflects a spectacular lack of inner life.
It's part of a point I've made about Democrats laying the foundations of fascism before Trump took the reins of those foundations.
fascists can point to it being a critique and product/policy that came from Democrats, that "the libs" accepted it when Biden/Democrats did it, and any opposition now is just them being bitter partisans. If Democrats push it, they'll be labeled as sympathizers or terrorists themselves, so they won't, and will call that "pragmatism".
Same for the Cop City in ATL, domestic spying, the (still in use) 2001 AUMF, policing the public in NYC using the military, cracking down on "illegals", and the list goes on and on.
After Democrats lay down all these foundations for fascism and eventually lose control of them (since they won't win every election in perpetuity) they'll pick up their batons in a vain attempt to avoid being the targets of those policies, institutions, etc. by finding "bipartisan compromises" on where to direct that fascism among the US public and oppressed people around the globe.
Eric Adams (this is Hochul's (D-NY) policy though) was a Democrat until Trump bribed him with a quid pro quo to escape corruption charges (that were almost certain to lead to a conviction). He's on pace to be replaced with a Democrat serial sexual offender with their own history of corruption and misdeeds.
Trump was a Democrat for most of his life. He didn't turn into a bad person only after becoming a Republican.
This cultish partisanship (for both parties) veneered with lesser evilism and ignorance is what is rotting people's brains and capacity to think critically.
|
United States42682 Posts
GH genuinely believes that nobody else knows about the issues with two party systems and that he has been given the responsibility to educate everyone else.
|
I think he is genuinely just a contrarian who has a desperate need to feel and be special, that's just my opinion based on the last 30ish pages of this and other threads since I started paying attention and participating, you have been exposed to his slop for far longer.
I just find it supremely ironic that this is the person who is trying to present himself as "solutions guy" when the only way that American system recovers from Trump before a full on civilizational collapse is by Democrats wrestling power away from him and his Republican cult, and this guy spends all of his time bloviating about and attacking the only people who have any chance to reverse these fascistic tendencies.
So, he's either extremely stupid or an useful idiot for people who want to see America destroy himself, based on his replies in the Russia / Ukraine thread I'm beginning to lean towards the latter.
Of course, the third option is that he is isolated enough and doesn't care about any of this and is just trolling and intellectually masturbating because he's obviously incredibly bored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
