Illegal Immigration

150,310 Views | 1903 Replies | Last: 15 hrs ago by movielover
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HawaiiBear33 • 11:22a, 5/14/25
HawaiiBear33 said:
concordtom said:
1. You could research the 1970's lawsuit against he and his father for not renting to blacks.

https://apnews.com/events-united-states-presidential-election-6349efef6986435b95411dc2e8f8f2c4

2. You could research his full page opinion add about how he wanted to give the death penalty to the Central Park Five, young (not old) black teens who were wrongfully accused, later proven innocent.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6131533-trumpdeathpenaltyad05011989/

3. You could look into his statements about a judge who he claimed would not rule fairly for him because his last name was Latino.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/02/27/politics/judge-curiel-trump-border-wall

4. You could listen to his endless language on the campaign trail that is just racially ugly. And if you haven't heard him speak racially ugly then I assume you are a racist as well, because sensitive people understand it immediately when we hear it.
Go to YouTube and search for it. You can find it.

But, whatever… you're going to see things as you see them.
And I know you are a decent fellow. So, I wish you a nice night!!!

That was 4. There a dozens more. But you asked for one, I gave you four.



CT is so blinded by hate that he actually believes these are examples of racism.


It's not his fault. His big mistake is dutifully watching the propaganda (news) for so long and believing what they say.


Everybody go watch "news" and objectively evaluate how much emotion is mixed into everything they are selling you….


The first one is racism but it is for events more than 50 years old.
Reply Quote
1
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:44p, 5/14/25

Probably all talk, no action.
Reply Quote
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:00a, 5/15/25
SCOTUS is hearing arguments on the Exec Order re Birthright Citizenship today. It would be great to see actual details. What is the case / controversy / issue that SCOTUS is deciding? The EO? Birthright Citizenship proper? A lower court injunction?
Reply Quote
1
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 11:27a, 5/15/25
SCOTUS will give Trump this one.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Reply Quote
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 12:15p, 5/15/25
It's a good case study for my belief that we are not a nation of laws. The law is what any given Supreme Court says it is at that time.
Reply Quote
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 12:37p, 5/15/25
bearister said:
SCOTUS will give Trump this one.
From Breitbart. This about sums it up for me

========
During an appearance on Thursday's broadcast of "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Chuck Rosenberg *** said, "1898 when the Supreme Court decided a case [United States v.] Wong Kim Ark, and in Wong Kim Ark, this gentleman was the child of a permanent resident, people of Chinese descent. And the Supreme Court said based on the reading of the 14th Amendment passed just 30 years earlier, 1868, he was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States by being born in this country to those parents. So, the 14th Amendment goes back to 1868. Supreme Court precedent goes back to 1898. And that's been our understanding ever since."

"Could it change? It could change," the MSNBC guest added. "Might President Trump be proved right? He might be proved right. But it is absolutely distinctly the minority view."
Reply Quote
1
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:14p, 5/15/25
Reading reports of oral arguments it appears the Admin is not looking to get resolution on BC but instead is using the issue to attack national injunctions.
Reply Quote
1
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 7:32p, 5/15/25
tequila4kapp said:
bearister said:
SCOTUS will give Trump this one.
From Breitbart. This about sums it up for me

========
During an appearance on Thursday's broadcast of "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Chuck Rosenberg *** said, "1898 when the Supreme Court decided a case [United States v.] Wong Kim Ark, and in Wong Kim Ark, this gentleman was the child of a permanent resident, people of Chinese descent. And the Supreme Court said based on the reading of the 14th Amendment passed just 30 years earlier, 1868, he was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States by being born in this country to those parents. So, the 14th Amendment goes back to 1868. Supreme Court precedent goes back to 1898. And that's been our understanding ever since."

"Could it change? It could change," the MSNBC guest added. "Might President Trump be proved right? He might be proved right. But it is absolutely distinctly the minority view."


Is an illegal alien a "Permanent resident"?
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 7:51p, 5/15/25
"Might President Trump be proved right?"

Does getting a favorable ruling from a corrupt court pass for being "proven right" these days?

*As corrupt as the court is, it only has two Justices that are 100% corrupt. Except for said two justices, I believe there is a line SCOTUS won't cross on Trump's behalf….but they will give him the national injunction ruling he wants.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention

“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 8:01p, 5/15/25
bearister said:
" Might President Trump be proved right?"

Does getting a favorable ruling from a corrupt court pass for being "proven right" these days?
If you can't be intellectually honest enough to acknowledge the difference between illegal alien and permanent resident, and how that could play into the key operative phrase - "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" - then I don't know what to tell you.
Reply Quote
1
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:49a, 5/16/25
Gad Saad calls it suicidal empathy.

Reply Quote
2
MinotStateBeav
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to movielover • 10:53p, 5/16/25
The French government just raided the camp GB news reported on a few days ago.
Reply Quote
3
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 12:42p, 5/17/25
MinotStateBeav said:
The French government just raided the camp GB news reported on a few days ago.


What's the end result? A flashy news clip, arrests, deportations?

The whole EU has a demographic problem created by low birth rates, secularism and the sexual revolution, but letting in millions of uneducated, unvetted immigrants is a disastrous non solution.

Now with Shari Law and Muslims, the social hit is massive with polygamy. Say one unemployed man, three wives, 11 children, the State paying for two or three abodes. Children don't speak formal English, Swedish, or French, 73% of Muslim women don't work.

Britain's prisons reportedly overflowing, so convicted felons only serve one third of their sentence.
Reply Quote
3
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:04p, 5/17/25
The new normal. What will it look like in ten years?

Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.