Immigration Issue

No I wouldn't be, and I am not a Trumper either.  I just can't with the Joe, Bernie, Hilary, OB and Big Mike OB now.  I want to keep this short tonight so let's call him Mr. Orange just to lower the hate in this thread.  Before Mr. Orange took on politics, he had a show where he fired everyone.  The theme of the show.  It's his personality, and there was NEVER this much hate towards him then.  He did just that as POTUS, draining the swamp, right?  I could be wrong here, but I think he first dabbled on the Dems side in his early political stunts when OB was coming to be.  Didn't work out, DNC and all so he went conservative and open arms took him in and love him like Reagan.  Even his haters see he feeds off the crowds like a popstar/movie star, and everyone also knows when he is backed into a corner he fights like no other.  Thats how he relates to the other 50% the Libs don't get.  IMO the Libs hate the other side and that's why they're compared to communists or in the least socialists.  The other side is not EVIL.  

I do have a serious question here, I have noticed over the course of this back and forth that both,

@MrWhatsItToYa 

@wallstreetcappers

 you both when questioned and even more so when going on tilt you retaliate with....your post #123 for example.  Responded to your post #345.... Its a pattern, could there be two posters who have the same political views and post the same way?  Maybe a stretch here but I have to now call out BULLSHIT, not just the only flag either.  I would lay odds of these two are the same poster at -130.  

   for the emoji haters 

@THEMUGG

 the last report I read was they all got on a bus to Cali from a church sponsor of migrants ..... they're on a greyhound to the sunshine state but may get off when it stops in east bumfrick.

If we did this as law abiding citizens, no mercy.  tazed if lucky, maybe shot dead.  24 hours ago, my state Gov Hochul completely side stepped a direct question about her "greatest city in the world" cops as it will be looked into and considered, fast forward a day and her stance is deport.  She needed legal or what?  Nope she needed her BASE to agree.  This is why I have no party.  I see both sides and call out the shit.  But I live in a blue state so on a national level its Lib or it doesn't matter.  Local level voices may heard and lately that includes school boards

No " change" is really needed to fix the illegal immigration problem ( like passing "another" bill in Congress)... you just need to go backwards to what was already working in ths first place,... like Trump's policies.... i.e. give the Border Patrol their authority back, remain in Mexico policy,  etc.. 

The belief we need to " change" and "add more legislation"  also rears its ugly head in many other facets of life, like

on trying to control smash & grab, shoplifting,  whatever you want to call it.  Here around LA , they've come w an ""Organized Retail Theft Task Force.""

You don't need any of this * new shit.  You just need to enforce the laws that are already on the books.    But no one wants to put prosecute the 'hoodrats and put them back in jail, instead give them no- cost bail.  What a great deal for society.     

The reason I didn't respond to you is because " your argument " just got dumb.  " You" changed the argument from an " insurrection," to what constitutes deadly force to kill an "individual."   I'd argue you'd need a helluva lot of flagpoles and fire extinguishers  (and cardboard campaign signs) to carry out your insurrection.

  If the people on Capitol on Jan. 6th truly wanted to overthrow the government,  don't you think they would've planned it better, or maybe use "" some other form(s) of deadly force.""  .... you know what I mean ??? 

Put your thinking cap on buddy.. 

Or just post as BuckFalls and let him take the heat 

Republicans question House attempt to impeach Mayorkas the homeland security secretary.  This includes Buck, Collins, Capito, McClintock and others.  Murkowski criticizes House effort as a detour from congress important work.  Impeachment sham is not based on evidence of impeachable offense but about politics.  Legal experts and former officials say House evidence fails to meet the standard of high crime.  Arguing that republicans are abusing impeachment by falsely accusing Mayorkas of failing standards that have never been met under past administrations.  Republicans are angry that children aren't separated from parents and put in cages.  They have no serious policy solutions to fix border issue except for cruelty.  But policy disagreement is not a valid reason and Biden administration is entitled to wide authority under the law.  Besides, Trump policies have been struck down by the courts.

@spockgato

 Mr. Spockgato, did WallStreet ever answer your question or concern post 225 and 228 - fair and balanced ??

He’s answered it many times . I’m too abrasive and me questioning anything is considered an attack . It’s politics C-Dogg . I’m just glad that some of the great people in our nation’s history that fought for my civil rights persevered passed these types of countermeasures and that progress was made because of them .

@MrWhatsItToYa

I did not see anyone that did say that?  It was in reply to the definition of them and what they purport to do.  

 Sanctuary cities have never agreed to support illegal aliens.All sanctuary cities do is limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities regarding the location and removal of unauthorized immigrants,but nice try.

So it was simply to point out the exact definition of what the sanctuary cities claim to do and actually do.  So, to claim they never agree to support illegals is wrong.

Now you can start another question on whether they agreed to support any/all illegals no matter where they are from if you like.  For sure, I can answer that as well.

For example, how many illegals in a harder to reach city (SF, NYC, etc.) did not come into another state first?  Whether they went to the sanctuary city -- after arriving in a border state first -- on their own or not is not the point.  But if you want to make it the point you can do that.

But to say they did not agree to support them is wrong -- it is pretty much the exact definition of what a sanctuary city is.

@MrWhatsItToYa

Okay, I guess.  It just did not seem good comparison to me.  It seemed to be a complete change of subject or deflection.  I am not telling you what to do.  I am just saying comparing an illegal immigration problem for a whole nation to one person's legal problems is a big leap.  I did not even see anyone saying he should have absolute immunity -- I may have missed that argument.

There are many other issues that you could have chosen to counter with as a comparison, yet, you chose Trump once again.  No matter what the issue is you guys always bring your guy into the argument.  

Double speak , double usernames , double the trouble , doublemint gum is delicious and the flavor lasts a really long time , can I have a second username also ? And if you protest that I gotta ask , in all honesty , why the criticism ? What’s it to ya anyway ?

um , it’s not like I’m having to go through the trouble of digging up Gobekli Tepe or anything brother . Just a small amount of digging reveals all that I need to know . In less than 5 minutes I can tell very easily that is you . The jig is up my friend . Own up to it . 

@spockgato

The "daughter" in this story sure does have a lot of anti-Trumper comments that sound the same as another "Mr." around these parts....  

Bro I saw the thread where you caught him . You let him get off easy . I don’t want to have to “ bump and thump “ all of these threads , and I won’t , but something needs to be done about this or this forum will have lost any little shred of integrity that it even had left . 

This is like some Milli Vanilli Shit 

@soup-can

 "He fights like no other".You mean he whines and cries like no other?

Now the big "Covers Deep State' brigade comes out.I tell you what I'll even make it more enticing for you.I'll give you +200 odds,on as much money as you'd like to put on it.

Just now lost integrity or was that lost some time ago...

When one is quick to point out other peoples flaws but they themselves are not able to accept their own flaws even when they are pointed out is a problem…so it makes you wonder why should everyone accept what they tell some of us when they themselves do not follow the same…seems rather one sided and therein lies the problem…

Nothing will be done about this poster because he has a family member with he same IP...just email COVERS and let them know you have a few family members and they will be signing up using the same IP address and then you are clear....that's what the poster is saying...it cannot be proven and it is not against the rules so have some babies or adopt one and then create a username and let the powers that be know...this is how one can circumvent the system in place...whether it is true or not it allows for aliases to be created without violating the rules...there is no way around a legitimate IP address and multiple users except for this way (notice I said legitimate because you could block your IP address)....this just gave everyone an out to properly create aliases or have others in your household join COVERS and tally-ho....

@Rush51

 No the reason you didn't respond was because you know you can't admit that those objects could cause deadly harm,and then still stick to your sarcastic comment about "So how bout those deadly flagpoles and dangerous campaign signs".

Hold on a second,let me put my thinking cap on.

I didn't change the argument from an "insurrection to what constitutes deadly force to kill an individual.And that you would need a helluva lot of flagpoles and fire extinguishers and campaign signs to carry out your insurrection".The only time I even mentioned the word insurrection was in post #143 asking you how many insurrections you had seen.You are the only one between the 2 of us that has brought up an "insurrection" or that they were there to "overthrow the government".In my post #157 I completely explain to you why I thought they were there and what I thought they were looking to accomplish that day.And not 1 time do I even mention that it was an insurrection and that they were looking to overthrow the government,not once,only you have brought those 2 things up.And you were the 1 bringing up that if it was a group looking to overthrow the government "then they just might use deadly force".That's when i pointed out and asked you if you thought those objects could be used with deadly force.And since then,you have still ducked the question. 

Stick with making up nursery rhymes.

Well, I guess one could argue that if she hadn't used the account or made posts in a year, what was she doing logged in yesterday then, when looking at posts or threads does not require a login...that is what the people might say if there were people in these said forums...

@Raiders22

 Show me in the definition you quoted where it says sanctuary cities agreed to support illegal aliens,since it's pretty much the exact definition of what a sanctuary city is.Limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities,is not "Agreeing to support" them.Most times nobody from the cities even meets the illegal immigrants,they just won't cooperate or give authorities the location of aliens or help with their removal.

Mrwhatsittoya is right.  Sanctuary cities are no more supportive of illegal immigrants as non-sanctuary cities that provide aid to the homeless.  In sanctuary cities, police still help ICE.  If immigrants commit serious crimes, police can still detain them for federal agents to deport.  However illegal for police to arrest someone who hasn't been suspected of committing a crime.  Simply being an illegal immigrant is an civil violation and not a crime.  Sanctuary cities are legal under US constitution.