President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#25,576
#25,576
utvolpj said:
We still need bodies and until that is filled correctly we'll deal with immigration issues. It just must be addressed by something other than "deport them all"

Let's make everyone earn it. I mean, anyone against birthright citizenship has to be in favor of it. Force them all to take something like the Civics exam my 7th grader just took and either pass or give up their entitlements like SS or Medicare. Maybe we can just make it required to post in this forum....

All (kinda) kidding aside, I realize there's no easy answer but it shouldn't take 10-12yrs to certify someone as useful.
Click to expand...
Why would we invite immigrants that need entitlements? (Or my apologies if I missed the joke.)
 
#25,577
#25,577
Ritzwatch said:
Whataboutism is what practical politics is all about.

Idealistic Politics gets to be principled, and gets to decide amongst a range of ideas in the hopes that the decisions that are made are the best decisions that can be made.

Practical Politics is all about X vs Y. Trump vs. Clinton. Biden vs. Trump. Harris vs. Trump.

It is not about whose policies and views we support fully, it is about whose policies and views we support more. And that is an important distinction. One votes not for the candidate they think is best among all possible candidates, but rather for the candidate they think is better between the two choices presented.

The way we determine who is "better" is by comparing the two choices to each other, i.e. "whataboutism."
Click to expand...


There's some element of it, but when Trump defenders must ALWAYS resort to "It's okay that he's a brazen con artist because others were," and not bothering to ever defend the substance of what he's doing, that's at a different level.

No one here, that I saw anyway, ever defended the dinner with the people that bought his meme coin, 80 % of which goes to his interests. Not one peep of why its good or even permissible. Just, yeah, he's a crook, but so are the others.

And this from people who rant and rave about Pelosi or others trading in stocks they regulate.

At this point, what will people say when Trump literally puts pardons on Craigslist? Nothing. They'll just say everybody does it so its okay.
 
#25,579
#25,579
ButchPlz said:
The problem is it is not "difficult" in terms of stuff immigrants need to do. We ought to 100% require strict English classes, history lessons, etc.. beyond the token crap that exists now.

It is difficult in that in the inevitability that one careless moron loses your (digital) submission, or a mailman drops your stuff off in the wrong place, or someone in the government misfiles your paperwork, you're now on the hook for hundreds of dollars at minimum to refile, or thousands of dollars if they start deporting you for their own fault- and half the time they don't even get you the right letter letting you know you're in deportation proceedings.
Click to expand...
We require history classed of native born also. When my wife and I spent a day in Dallas I was able to get in the area of JFK assasination. I asked 4 Dallas couples what building Oswald Shot from, they didn't know. I asked where was Kennedy when he was shot, no one knew who John F Kennedy was. My filipina wife knew the date he was assassinated.
.
 
#25,580
#25,580
lawgator1 said:
There's some element of it, but when Trump defenders must ALWAYS resort to "It's okay that he's a brazen con artist because others were," and not bothering to ever defend the substance of what he's doing, that's at a different level.

No one here, that I saw anyway, ever defended the dinner with the people that bought his meme coin, 80 % of which goes to his interests. Not one peep of why its good or even permissible. Just, yeah, he's a crook, but so are the others.

And this from people who rant and rave about Pelosi or others trading in stocks they regulate.

At this point, what will people say when Trump literally puts pardons on Craigslist? Nothing. They'll just say everybody does it so its okay.
Click to expand...
again that is the case with every president. You were forgiving Biden being a vegetable because of Trump 1.0. Trump 1.0 used Obama, Obama used Bush, so on and so forth.

most people only want to hold politicians to a set standard when their guy isn't in power. you aren't nearly independent enough to do that.
 
#25,581
#25,581
LouderVol said:
again that is the case with every president. You were forgiving Biden being a vegetable because of Trump 1.0. Trump 1.0 used Obama, Obama used Bush, so on and so forth.

most people only want to hold politicians to a set standard when their guy isn't in power. you aren't nearly independent enough to do that.
Click to expand...


I did NOT say that the cover up of Biden's frailty was ok. Even before he pulled out of the race I said he was too old. I join in with those criticizing the people who shielded it from everyone and I join in the criticism of the mainstream media for their accepting the explanations they were getting and not asking touch questions.

But -- AND I REPEAT THIS FOR THE 100TH TIME - that in no way justifies Trump turning the presidency into a cheap whorehouse for a moneygrab for himself, which is what he is doing.
 
#25,584
#25,584
Buddy’s Bandit said:
So are law breaking individuals Who take advantage of our system.
Click to expand...
right, so arrest them. I didn't say not to. throw in a quota and who knows how many Americans, or legal residents, get grabbed up. the "it will get sorted out eventually if they should be here" doesn't really fly with our "innocent until proven guilty" rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#25,585
#25,585
Orange_Crush said:
Why?

Rumor is there are many, many millions of illegal immigrants here. When you have a big job to do, milestones can be important.
Click to expand...
because they will just begin to make up reasons to deport people. even people who can/should be here.

just like quotas on the interstate lead to people getting tickets after the cop tailgated them for 3 miles in the dark pushing them over the speed limit.

find them, catch them, deport them. no reason to throw in a quota. that is way too big brother for me.
 
#25,586
#25,586
LouderVol said:
because they will just begin to make up reasons to deport people. even people who can/should be here.

just like quotas on the interstate lead to people getting tickets after the cop tailgated them for 3 miles in the dark pushing them over the speed limit.

find them, catch them, deport them. no reason to throw in a quota. that is way too big brother for me.
Click to expand...
So, you're claiming they will invent reasons to deport legals/citizens?

Or you're saying that there are some illegals that you want to be here no matter what?
 
#25,587
#25,587
Orange_Crush said:
So, you're claiming they will invent reasons to deport legals/citizens?

Or you're saying that there are some illegals that you want to be here no matter what?
Click to expand...
Not just me. Trump has said it. homegrown means citizen

Loading…

www.npr.org

pretty sure others have mentioned it to, trying to defend it as they are "exploring options". that is inventing reasons.

there is a reason he is trying to suspend habeas corpus. hard to prove you are a citizen if there is no trial, you have no representation, and there isn't any other due process.
 
#25,588
#25,588
Orange_Crush said:
So, you're claiming they will invent reasons to deport legals/citizens?

Or you're saying that there are some illegals that you want to be here no matter what?
Click to expand...
Why not neither of these options?

Quotas incentivize sloppiness on the way to hitting the number above all else. This is proven over and over in all kinds of applications. They generally don't work how they're intended.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#25,589
#25,589
Orange_Crush said:
So, you're claiming they will invent reasons to deport legals/citizens?

Or you're saying that there are some illegals that you want to be here no matter what?
Click to expand...
With quotas they won't concentrate on the biggest threats. Also likely to lead to more civil rights issues when someone is cutting it closer at the end of the month. Similar to police sitting at a stop sign, they're not really going after the real issue but rather low hanging fruit to hit a number.
 
#25,590
#25,590
Orange_Crush said:
Why would we invite immigrants that need entitlements? (Or my apologies if I missed the joke.)
Click to expand...
My point was more about the claim they need to assimilate while hiding behind their own birthright citizenship . We have a whole lot (even several on this board) who couldn't pass the tests required to become a citizen yet reap the benefits. They couldn't pass the test my 7th grader needs to move on to 8th. They want to abolish birthright citizenship then let's go full bore. No one gets it
 
#25,591
#25,591
utvolpj said:
My point was more about the claim they need to assimilate while hosting behind their own birthright citizenship . We have a whole lot (even several on this board) who couldn't pass the tests required to become a citizen yet reap the benefits. They couldn't pass the test my 7th grader needs to move on to 8th. They want to abolish birthright citizenship then let's go full bore. No one gets it
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Let's go to the Starship Troopers model for citizenship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and ButchPlz
#25,592
#25,592
LouderVol said:
Not just me. Trump has said it. homegrown means citizen

Loading…

www.npr.org

pretty sure others have mentioned it to, trying to defend it as they are "exploring options". that is inventing reasons.

there is a reason he is trying to suspend habeas corpus. hard to prove you are a citizen if there is no trial, you have no representation, and there isn't any other due process.
Click to expand...
As far as I've been able to tell, that was/is not about "deporting" US citizens. It's about looking into the constitutionality of sending US citizens into foreign prisons, mainly because the TdA gangs grow like wildfire in prisons. I'm not defending the idea, but I am offering nuance for the sake of this conversation. The media hung the phrase "deport" US citizens; not the administration--as it's a contradiction in terms.

1748460770230.png

Why do I make the distinction without defending the idea? Because it makes no sense to play a slippery slope fallacy on a different slope. If there are quotas on deporting illegal immigrants, you're claiming that the administration would include off-shoring prison sentences for US citizens in that completely separate category?
 
#25,593
#25,593
utvolpj said:
With quotas they won't concentrate on the biggest threats. Also likely to lead to more civil rights issues when someone is cutting it closer at the end of the month. Similar to police sitting at a stop sign, they're not really going after the real issue but rather low hanging fruit to hit a number.
Click to expand...
Pulling someone over for running a stop sign is a civil rights issue?

Especially if you know there are likely quotas out there, I recommend stopping at stop signs.

Especially if you know there are quotas for deporting illegals (with the added weight of not being able to then apply for legal entry afterward), I recommend you not sneak into the country--and if you have already, I recommend you self-deport.
 
#25,594
#25,594
utvolpj said:
My point was more about the claim they need to assimilate while hosting behind their own birthright citizenship . We have a whole lot (even several on this board) who couldn't pass the tests required to become a citizen yet reap the benefits. They couldn't pass the test my 7th grader needs to move on to 8th. They want to abolish birthright citizenship then let's go full bore. No one gets it
Click to expand...
Gotcha. To me, right or wrong, I think the assimilation argument is a waste of characters when talking about birthright citizenship. The kid will likely assimilate.
 
#25,595
#25,595
Orange_Crush said:
As far as I've been able to tell, that was/is not about "deporting" US citizens. It's about looking into the constitutionality of sending US citizens into foreign prisons, mainly because the TdA gangs grow like wildfire in prisons. I'm not defending the idea, but I am offering nuance for the sake of this conversation. The media hung the phrase "deport" US citizens; not the administration--as it's a contradiction in terms.

View attachment 744822

Why do I make the distinction without defending the idea? Because it makes no sense to play a slippery slope fallacy on a different slope. If there are quotas on deporting illegal immigrants, you're claiming that the administration would include off-shoring prison sentences for US citizens in that completely separate category?
Click to expand...
I don't see a difference in deporting a US citizen, and imprisoning them in another nation. and that is with the great big ole assumption that there is still some sort of trial to establish guilt to imprison them anywhere. its already been shown the US has no jurisdictions over those prisons so what happens when that citizen wins an appeal, or time is served, and the El Salvadorans don't release them? what happens if the US citizen while in El Salvadoran prison breaks some dumb El Salvadoran law, does that get added to their time? do they have to complete their US time, and then stick around for whatever BS El Salvador wants to claim to keep them there? a crime they would never have been guilty of if they had stayed in the US. We have no power to bring them back. and are we going to have a C130 sitting there everytime a citizen completes their time?

I am saying that Trump has already publicly mentioned "getting rid of" citizens, so its not as much of a leap on that slope to say full blown deportations are next.
 
#25,596
#25,596
Orange_Crush said:
Pulling someone over for running a stop sign is a civil rights issue?

Especially if you know there are likely quotas out there, I recommend stopping at stop signs.

Especially if you know there are quotas for deporting illegals (with the added weight of not being able to then apply for legal entry afterward), I recommend you not sneak into the country--and if you have already, I recommend you self-deport.
Click to expand...
Not always but the process of hitting quotas will always lead to questionable procedures. Much easier to violate rights when trying to determine citizenship. Heck I posted a video this week of Ice chasing down a US citizen and putting him in custody. Give a bunch of idiots quotas and watch the courts fill up
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#25,597
#25,597
LouderVol said:
I don't see a difference in deporting a US citizen, and imprisoning them in another nation. and that is with the great big ole assumption that there is still some sort of trial to establish guilt to imprison them anywhere. its already been shown the US has no jurisdictions over those prisons so what happens when that citizen wins an appeal, or time is served, and the El Salvadorans don't release them? what happens if the US citizen while in El Salvadoran prison breaks some dumb El Salvadoran law, does that get added to their time? do they have to complete their US time, and then stick around for whatever BS El Salvador wants to claim to keep them there? a crime they would never have been guilty of if they had stayed in the US. We have no power to bring them back. and are we going to have a C130 sitting there everytime a citizen completes their time?

I am saying that Trump has already publicly mentioned "getting rid of" citizens, so its not as much of a leap on that slope to say full blown deportations are next.
Click to expand...
It's about as bad of a slipperty slope fallacy as I've seen in a long time. Like I said, you're making a category fallacy and assuring us that the administration will as well. You're making the objective claim that "quotas are bad", and defending the idea by mixing fallacies.
 
#25,598
#25,598
Orange_Crush said:
It's about as bad of a slipperty slope fallacy as I've seen in a long time. Like I said, you're making a category fallacy and assuring us that the administration will as well. You're making the objective claim that "quotas are bad", and defending the idea by mixing fallacies.
Click to expand...
so what is the practical difference between deporting a citizen, and imprisoning a citizen in another country? because I really don't see it as two different categories. I think there are more similarities than differences.

its involuntary removal, and involuntary residence in another country, both subject to the laws of the host nation without protection under the US Constitution, and out of the jurisdictional control of the US.
 
#25,599
#25,599
LouderVol said:
so what is the practical difference between deporting a citizen, and imprisoning a citizen in another country? because I really don't see it as two different categories. I think there are more similarities than differences.

its involuntary removal, and involuntary residence in another country, both subject to the laws of the host nation without protection under the US Constitution, and out of the jurisdictional control of the US.
Click to expand...
Is the quota on # of illegals deported, or gross number of people forced out of the country?

Is the quota placed on ICE (that has a very specific jurisdiction), or the DoJ?

1748464912000.png

It would appear that the quota is directed at a very specific jurisdiction, which has nothing to do with imprisoning US citizens, and you ask for the "practical" difference? That pretty damn practical of a difference.


And you are sure the US will have no jurisdiction agreement with another country that offers prison-as-a-service, specifically per our own citizens?

There seems to be a lot of assumptions on your part.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top