The DeSantis containment thread -- all things DeSantis go here

Grand Vol

Official VN Armorer
Lab Rat
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
72,284
Likes
88,942
That’s not relevant to the discussion about whether they’re here legally.

Asylum statutes and the code of federal regulations lay out a process for resolving the question of whether a person is a refugee. While the process is pending, the claimants are legally allowed to remain in the United Stares. If they default or their claim of refugee status is denied, they are removed or remain here illegally. If they are found to be refugees, they are allowed to legally remain.

The legality of their presence is never ambiguous or vague.

These people have people have pending claims of asylum. They are legally within the United States. And to the extent that this stunt moved them away from the location of their scheduled adjudication, it contributes to the problem of “illegal immigration.”
It's very relevant and at the heart of the discussion.

And you ignore the question I specifically asked (as you normally do) in regards to how asylum is interpreted in our legal system and how subjective and vague that criteria for asylum seekers is.

You can't bring yourself to admit the interpretation varies widely depending on which party is in power. Because the whole concept of "asylum" comes to a screeching halt when one can literally apply it to any emerging crisis. You've had some Democrats trying to say these illegals from Central America need asylum from climate change.

Yes, asylum rationale is super subjective. So, feel free to counter...
 

RockyTop85

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
11,473
Likes
5,601
It's very relevant and at the heart of the discussion.

And you ignore the question I specifically asked (as you normally do) in regards to how asylum is interpreted in our legal system and how subjective and vague that criteria for asylum seekers is.

You can't bring yourself to admit the interpretation varies widely depending on which party is in power. Because the whole concept of "asylum" comes to a screeching halt when one can literally apply it to any emerging crisis. You've had some Democrats trying to say these illegals from Central America need asylum from climate change.

Yes, asylum rationale is super subjective. So, feel free to counter...
No it’s not at all relevant to the conversation I was having about whether these 50 people are legally in the United States. Feel free to go back and review the discussion and see that for yourself, I’m not particularly keen on trying to find a way to dumb it down anymore than I did in my last post.
 
Last edited:

hog88

Your ray of sunshine
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Messages
94,868
Likes
114,066
It's very relevant and at the heart of the discussion.

And you ignore the question I specifically asked (as you normally do) in regards to how asylum is interpreted in our legal system and how subjective and vague that criteria for asylum seekers is.

You can't bring yourself to admit the interpretation varies widely depending on which party is in power. Because the whole concept of "asylum" comes to a screeching halt when one can literally apply it to any emerging crisis. You've had some Democrats trying to say these illegals from Central America need asylum from climate change.

Yes, asylum rationale is super subjective. So, feel free to counter...
Why waste your time?
 

RockyTop85

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
11,473
Likes
5,601
He still ignored it lol
The legal definition of refugee can be as vague and subjective as you want it to be. You can be completely right. Or you could be wrong because it’s even MORE subjective than you say.

Still wouldn’t affect whether these people, whose asylum claims haven’t been adjudicated, are legally allowed to remain here.
 

825VOL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
988
Likes
2,975
The legal definition of refugee can be as vague and subjective as you want it to be. You can be completely right. Or you could be wrong because it’s even MORE subjective than you say.

Still wouldn’t affect whether these people, whose asylum claims haven’t been adjudicated, are legally allowed to remain here.
You know a lot more than I do on this subject, so I will ask you a few questions.

1. To seek asylum don't you have to request asylum from the first country you reach that is not at war, or whatever you say you are running from?

2. If you fail to do #1 wouldn't that negate any request for asylum somewhere else?

3. Wouldn't a easy way to fix this be to enforce #1 if that is in fact the correct procedure?

Thanks,
 

Orangeburst

Attention all Planets of the Solar Federation
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
27,133
Likes
50,992
Remember how hard the left fought to keep the "citizenship" question off the Census. You know the census that appropriates Representation.
Now this would seem to indicate that these illegals have "citizenship" representation. While the semantics of being legal and illegal can be discussed..this is a much bigger issue.
Of course these illegals stay at $400/night hotels while our own military is told to look for Section 8 Housing and food stamps, our government is broke and in a crisis of recession and inflation.
 

Grand Vol

Official VN Armorer
Lab Rat
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
72,284
Likes
88,942
The legal definition of refugee can be as vague and subjective as you want it to be. You can be completely right. Or you could be wrong because it’s even MORE subjective than you say.

Still wouldn’t affect whether these people, whose asylum claims haven’t been adjudicated, are legally allowed to remain here.
Thank you. And you are correct they can (should) stay here while their claim is being processed...

Doesn't mean they should have free reign to meander wherever they want while they are waiting.
 

hog88

Your ray of sunshine
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Messages
94,868
Likes
114,066
The legal definition of refugee can be as vague and subjective as you want it to be. You can be completely right. Or you could be wrong because it’s even MORE subjective than you say.

Still wouldn’t affect whether these people, whose asylum claims haven’t been adjudicated, are legally allowed to remain here.
@Grand Vol See, it’s a waste of time.
 

Carl Pickens

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
40,380
Likes
50,638
That’s not relevant to the discussion about whether they’re here legally.

Asylum statutes and the code of federal regulations lay out a process for resolving the question of whether a person is a refugee. While the process is pending, the claimants are legally allowed to remain in the United Stares. If they default or their claim of refugee status is denied, they are removed or remain here illegally. If they are found to be refugees, they are allowed to legally remain.

The legality of their presence is never ambiguous or vague.

These people have people have pending claims of asylum. They are legally within the United States. And to the extent that this stunt moved them away from the location of their scheduled adjudication, it contributes to the problem of “illegal immigration.”
It’s a bunch of BS…
Florida deputy killed by illegal immigrant in hit-and-run before fleeing scene, sheriff says
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2006
Messages
19,934
Likes
34,368
Did it ever occur to anybody that maybe part of what makes places like Texas and Arizona awesome is that they are border states with lots of immigrants (legal and illegal)? Last I checked, Phoenix, Dallas, and Austin are 3 of the lowest crime (per capita) cities in America with tons of economic opportunity. How is this possible if these places are overrun, like everybody tries to pretend?
Whoever said Texas and Arizona are awesome?
 
Likes: hog88

JOEY’S ALL VOL !!!

Calling it like I see it
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Messages
732
Likes
3,464
MV gave them sanctuary. They took them in, gave them shelter, fed them, cleaned them, then raised several hundred thousand dollars in a matter of hours that was given to them. They then put them in contact with the proper authorities and gave them immigration lawyers. They then relocated them to a safe shelter under the control of the proper government officials.

This is what texas and florida is supposed to be doing with our federal money. Maybe we should give it to mv?
You typed all that when you could have and should have said “they fed them, bathed them and then punted their ass on down the road for someone else to deal with” which is exactly what happened. You keep beating that drum though, the clearly partisan and psychotic look suits you.
 

JOEY’S ALL VOL !!!

Calling it like I see it
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Messages
732
Likes
3,464
It’s funny to watch the liberals hang out in the Desantis thread or any thread with Trump in it while avoiding threads talking about apple sauce Joe and his “ I wake up in a whole new world everyday “ adventure. I mean I understand why , it’s just funny to watch .
It’s quite entertaining in moderation, at times though I am concerned that some of that dumbass disease will rub off on me if I intake too much.
 

StarRaider

Travelin' Light
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
9,201
Likes
18,348
MV gave them sanctuary. They took them in, gave them shelter, fed them, cleaned them, then raised several hundred thousand dollars in a matter of hours that was given to them. They then put them in contact with the proper authorities and gave them immigration lawyers. They then relocated them to a safe shelter under the control of the proper government officials.

This is what texas and florida is supposed to be doing with our federal money. Maybe we should give it to mv?

they kept the fundraiser for themselves and shipped the migrants off to the cape
 
Likes: InVOLuntary

VN Store




Top