Anyone trading on the stock market?

[superdave]

Actually, yes, it does. Asylum has to be granted before they are no longer illegal. Until then, they are just like everyone else who crosses the border without permission.

You are putting the cart before the horse. It is not illegal to claim asylum in the US. They would only become illegal after asylum has been denied and they refuse to leave the country. You have to be physically IN the US to claim affirmative or defensive asylum. I repeat...you have to be on US soil.

A person entering a bank is not a criminal. He only becomes one when he pulls out a gun and robs the teller.

Asylum seakers should not be treated as illegals until they are granted asylum.

 

[Glurin]

You are putting the cart before the horse. It is not illegal to claim asylum in the US. They would only become illegal after asylum has been denied and they refuse to leave the country. You have to be physically IN the US to claim affirmative or defensive asylum. I repeat...you have to be on US soil.

And until we decide what to do with you, you are illegal. You can scream sanctuary all you want the moment your big toe touches U.S. soil, but that doesn't make you a citizen. Nor does it mean you get to bypass all the usual processes that anyone crossing the border without permission has to go through.

 

[superdave]

And until we decide what to do with you, you are illegal. You can scream sanctuary all you want the moment your big toe touches U.S. soil, but that doesn't make you a citizen. Nor does it mean you get to bypass all the usual processes that anyone crossing the border without permission has to go through.

You are both legally and morally wrong. They are NOT illegal. I also said nothing about asylum seekers bypassing the usual processes.

 

[Glurin]

You are both legally and morally wrong. They are NOT illegal. I also said nothing about asylum seekers bypassing the usual processes.

Yeah, you quite literally did. (Well, actually what you literally said was we should treat them as illegals after they've been granted asylum, but I know what you meant.)

Asylum seakers should not be treated as illegals until they are granted asylum.

Just try and think about it for a minute. Some guy breaks down your front door and marches into your home. You know absolutely nothing about him and you've already had frequent problems with break ins. He claims asylum. So you say "Welcome brother" and roll out the red carpet? Why? Because he claimed asylum? What exactly is stopping a murderous psychopath from doing that exact same thing? How do you know he's actually seeking refuge and not just using asylum as an excuse because he knows you'll treat him like a king if he says the word "asylum"? Especially when your previous experiences with break ins were with people doing exactly that.

That's not morality. That's stupidity. You don't have to be stupid to be moral.

 

[superdave]

You really don't understand asylum laws. Your shitty analogy proves that.

 

[Glurin]

You know that part of the bank with signs that say "Employees Only" or "No Unauthorized Entry"? Yeah, that's our border and you will be detained if you cross it without permission. Doesn't matter what your motives are. Claiming to be a "vault inspector" so it's okay for you to be there doesn't make it so.

 

[superdave]

You know that part of the bank with signs that say "Employees Only" or "No Unauthorized Entry"? Yeah, that's our border and you will be detained if you cross it without permission. Doesn't matter what your motives are. Claiming to be a "vault inspector" so it's okay for you to be there doesn't make it so.

Again, an assine analogy.

You have conflated illegal and asylum seeker not that it matters anyways. Neither should have their children taken away to be locked in cages.

Still waiting for the link to where Dems are sending Trumpers off to concentration/re-educationa camps. Difficultylevel? No Q or insane Maga websites or links to your crazy uncle's Facebook page.

 

[zemaj]

Only Trump administration would put kids in cages...(CNN link)

 

[superdave]

The article doesn't say what you think it does.

 

[d2lover]

I can only say, in Germany at least no one has to starve.

If you are really hungry you just go to jail or 5 star hotel mental asylum.

 

[jmervyn]

Only Trump administration would put kids in cages...(CNN link)

Actually, I only mentioned the asinine claims of illegal alien concentration camps made by renowned intellectuals such as Sandy Cortez in passing... I figured that the (*Jewish*) head of PBS' legal department calling for Trump voters' children to be seized and put in "re-education camps" would be pooh-poohed by many here (PBS is America's state-run television - internal propaganda vs. the external propaganda from Voice of America).

I probably should have kept my powder dry regarding a primary CNN anchor, Nichole Wallace, calling (again) for drone strikes on conservative politicians who incite violence.

It's kind of amusing that so many Progressives are desperately eager to kill, imprison, or subjugate those disagreeing with them, but those of us who dislike collectivist totalitarian systems are supposed to be the evil ones?

That it's okay for Progressives to reject the authority of the President of the United States as part of their #Resistance plotting, but conservatives *AND LIBERTARIANS* are terrorists if they even contemplate similar views? (Oh, but noes, that was suddenly 'satire' so it's all good now. Quite funny & droll, obviously.)

When said Progressives have actually discussed how proud they are to have been part of the collusion to "steal" the election?

Of course, only horrible, evil KKKonservatives, who are all white supremacist murdererrrrrs anyway, would question Pedo Joe's victory.

 

[zemaj]

The article doesn't say what you think it does.

I'm sorry, did you just imply you know what I am thinking? That's quite the trick... and I'm actually surprised you don't at least partially agree, but then you have already said you can only agree with that which is *exactly* your own opinion said back to you... personally, I think that is complete BS, but I'm used to RFS, and any three people not being able to get total agreement on what toppings to get on a pizza. Amazing how an entire political affiliation can all totally agree on every issue under those conditions, but I digress.

Let me quote a bit from the article:
"While administration officials have condemned Trump's actions, they're still relying on them as they sort out next steps and urging patience as they work to reverse them."

Do you get that? They 'condemn' something, while using it themselves. But they are trying to change it, even though they have thier choice for executive branch in power, as well as majority of both sides of the legislative branch, and could change it all with a few pen-strokes. (All this from a news outlet that has shown its bias many, many times)

And you thought they really cared, it almost would make me laugh if I wasn't on the verge of tears.

Check it, please. Here is EXACTLY what I think about this whole bit. The Obama administration, when Biden was VP, is when those facilities you hate so bad were BUILT. Its asinine to be pissed off that a facility has been used WHEN YOU SHOULD BE PISSED OFF IT EXISTS.

If that really is what this is all about, anyway.

 

[zemaj]

That it's okay for Progressives to reject the authority of the President of the United States as part of their #Resistance plotting, but conservatives *AND LIBERTARIANS* are terrorists if they even contemplate similar views? (Oh, but noes, that was suddenly 'satire' so it's all good now. Quite funny & droll, obviously.)

When said Progressives have actually discussed how proud they are to have been part of the collusion to "steal" the election?

Of course, only horrible, evil KKKonservatives, who are all white supremacist murdererrrrrs anyway, would question Pedo Joe's victory.

First off, let me just say I love how you usually include citations. Top notch form, sir. May we all learn from example.

I was actually looking at this the other day, to see what the legal process was for questioning the integrity of an election. Turns out there isn't one, at least for a presidential election, within the US Constituion. So that pretty much means that any process is up for grabs. Especially after the 2000 and 2016 elections (for recent years) and the brush-up surrounding them, there has been debate about it, and at least one federal court (US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals) said in 2016 it would consider a total re-vote as appropriate (Michigan Court of Appeals shot that down, though).

One article I read had pretty good summary overall.(from 2016, so slightly dated, but less likely to be as polarized as a more recent, imo) I encourage anyone here to do thier own research and see if they can find anything more official on this, and share it. After a couple hours, I get fatigued, especially since I do all this on my phone these days...

It occurs to me we should have a dedicated, stickied thread (or three...) for political discussion, so we can stop jamming up threads with all this *nudges mods/admins*

 

[jmervyn]

First off, let me just say I love how you usually include citations. Top notch form, sir. May we all learn from example.

Yeah, but kris doesn't approve. Don't mess with the krischan!

(No, I never actually saw the movie. Sandler is apparently very smart and a gifted director, but it's just not to my taste.)

I was actually looking at this the other day, to see what the legal process was for questioning the integrity of an election.

It's possible the Founders didn't imagine the various States being able to coordinate such an extensive fraud in real time. They doubtless did imagine things like ACORN, its affiliates, and György Schwartz, but they were also a lot more willing to execute for treason back in the days of yore.

The process which both the Democrat Party and the GOP have at various times invoked, about recognition of electoral ballots, is a fine line to walk because Progressives of all stripes adore the concept of Presidential election "because", while Constitutionalists & Libertarians recognize the deadly nature of concentrating such power (i.e. in the hands of self-centered sociopaths).

At best ACORN affiliates might be found guilty on RICO charges of collusion with "Wall Street", media, and other entities out of the old Steve Jackson Games Illuminati card deck. If one was paying attention that sort of information was indeed being gathered by the Feebs, including on ties between Antifa and György Schwartz. Even on Snorter Biden.

At that point, one must ask exactly why they launch extensive, expensive investigations yet never actually produce anything... Heck, the Feebs sat on Snorter Biden's laptop for over a year & hilariously claimed they didn't want to influence the election. At the same time, Trump repeatedly ordered that all records about "Russiagate" be declassified & made public, yet it hasn't happened and almost certainly never will.

It occurs to me we should have a dedicated, stickied thread (or three...) for political discussion, so we can stop jamming up threads with all this *nudges mods/admins*

I held a party once & nobody came.

 

[superdave]

At the same time, Trump repeatedly ordered that all records about "Russiagate" be declassified & made public, yet it hasn't happened and almost certainly never will.

Trump's own Justice Dept lawyers said that a twitter proclamation is NOT an order from the President. they need to see a letter from the White House before they could declassify anything. Trump knew this, Trumps advisers knew this. There was a reason nobody at the White House made this a formal order. They didn't want it declassified because those documents make Trump and his cohorts look like the criminals they are. Trumps Justice Dept called his Tweets "ambiguous Twitter statements."

"After the President issued his statements on Twitter, I and other Department officials consulted with the White House Counsel's Office about the matters discussed in those statements, including potential declassification of documents related to the Russia Investigation and Hillary Clinton's emails.

The White House Counsel's Office informed the Department that there is no order requiring wholesale declassification or disclosure of documents at issue in this matter. The Department was further information that the President's statements on Twitter were not self-executing declassification orders and do not require the declassification of any particular documents." TRUMP'S Justice Dept

I'm sure that after the new admin unfucks the fuckups, they will have time to release the details. Thanks to Graham, Garland will be lucky if he can be appointed AG before March.

 

[zemaj]

Trump's own Justice Dept lawyers said that a twitter proclamation is NOT an order from the President. they need to see a letter from the White House before they could declassify anything. Trump knew this, Trumps advisers knew this. There was a reason nobody at the White House made this a formal order. They didn't want it declassified because those documents make Trump and his cohorts look like the criminals they are. Trumps Justice Dept called his Tweets "ambiguous Twitter statements."

"After the President issued his statements on Twitter, I and other Department officials consulted with the White House Counsel's Office about the matters discussed in those statements, including potential declassification of documents related to the Russia Investigation and Hillary Clinton's emails.

The White House Counsel's Office informed the Department that there is no order requiring wholesale declassification or disclosure of documents at issue in this matter. The Department was further information that the President's statements on Twitter were not self-executing declassification orders and do not require the declassification of any particular documents." TRUMP'S Justice Dept

I'm sure that after the new admin unfucks the fuckups, they will have time to release the details. Thanks to Graham, Garland will be lucky if he can be appointed AG before March.

Do you really think they will declassify them?

I'm all for that, regardless of what they say. Truth can never damage a legitimate concern, only point out the flaws in logic after all.

I do worry about them ever unfucking anything though... I mean, look at the job they have done thus far (maybe not totally fair, but how much of what anyone says is fair at this point? Biden's 'first 100' are ticking away, though...).

To whit: don't forget he said "Trump doesn't have a plan to get this virus under control - I do." and totally hasn't backtracked on that at all, right? *checks notes*

Oh... well then...

 

[jmervyn]

Do you really think they will declassify them?

Not doing so is refusing a Presidential order, and they're part of the Executive Branch. Will they refuse? Hard to say, given they've already proved that they consider themselves above the law.

To whit: don't forget he said "Trump doesn't have a plan to get this virus under control - I do." and totally hasn't backtracked on that at all, right? *checks notes*

Oh... well then...

Yeah, for those who haven't checked their brains at the door, the number of outright betrayals by PedoJoe is in the double digits already, if I was counting. Minimum wage at $16 an hour? ROFLMAO!

What do you expect from someone whose first days in office are punctuated by statements such as, "I don't know what I'm signing." or, when passing a pair of guards, "Salute the Marines!"

Of course, the devout fascists don't particularly care, confident that for all their desperately suckling at the Presidential root, they'll be last to face a firing squad. 'Tis always thus.

 

[Glurin]

Oh I think there's still a good chance they'll declassify them. After a thorough round of "correcting misinformation" of course.

 

[superdave]

Barr already took care of that.

 

[zemaj]

Words fail me... I had a tab opened to the actual Time Article, and kept putting off reading it until today... I had to read through it 3 separate times just to absorb all this. I encourage everyone to go check this out, yes, it's long, but damn, this is important.


This is collusion, plain and simple. Forget the claims of foreign collusion... this is pretty much the assembly of american elites deciding for themselves what is best for everyone. I had really thought I had seen everything that could happen, this is something straight out of some dystopian-future-novel. I'm just dumbfounded. Just the verbiage they use throughout underpins thier self-proclaimation of being the sole guardians of democracy. I'm not sure what they are even thinking, releasing this... it's pretty much them bragging about how they tricked and manipulated an entire nation... like, what? They even talk about how the tricked GOP members into signing off on this so they could say 'bipartisan'. What the actual blazing **** is going on here?


Just incase anyone missed that link, here is the straight URL.
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/