I am hearing rumors about amnesty plans

AnyNameYouWish said:
You're OK with what? Why do you guys just respond with talking points, rather than the actual comments? It's like you're a (poorly coded) program, not a human.
Click to expand...
Of course I am. That dude was not a citizen. He is hear because the govt said it is OK to be here. He has no right to be here. As such, he can be deported back to his home country. That is actually immigration law. Look it up.
 
Sherriff Coffee said:
Of course I am. That dude was not a citizen. He is hear because the govt said it is OK to be here. He has no right to be here. As such, he can be deported back to his home country. That is actually immigration law. Look it up.
Click to expand...

I'm going to ask nicely ... are you well? Should we send someone out to check on you? You don't seem to ever respond to what's actually said, or asked. I asked what you're OK with, and you say "of course I am." WTF? I'm getting Biden vibes from you at this point.

Regardless, we're discussing the literal MS13 tattoos on his knuckles. Or, are you going to respond that you're OK with literal MS13 tattoos on his knuckles because you don't know what is being said?
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
Can't wait for you to present "try reading the Amendment" as an argument in front of The Supremes.
Click to expand...
Amendment XIV, Section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF, are citizens of the United States..."
If subject to another jurisdiction, then it doesn't apply. Even a child given birth at Miami airport by a UK citizen while enroute to Buenos Aires from London is not a US citizen.
Occam's Razor, common sense stuff.
 
Frank Lee said:
Amendment XIV, Section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF, are citizens of the United States..."
If subject to another jurisdiction, then it doesn't apply. Even a child given birth at Miami airport by a UK citizen while enroute to Buenos Aires from London is not a US citizen.
Occam's Razor, common sense stuff.
Click to expand...

It's OK that you don't understand what the Constitution says, and how it's been interpreted. I don't expect you to ... you only understand what Trump tells you to think.

Right now, a child given birth at Miami airport by a UK citizen IS a US citizen (assuming that child isn't the child of a diplomat). And it's been that way for quite some time, per the Constitution. There's a wannabe dictator trying to change that, despite being violative of the Constitution, but, as yet, he hasn't been entirely successful in destroying our representative democracy.

I may even agree with you that this *shouldn't* be the case - i.e. I wish the law was different ... but I also believe in rule of law, and the Constitution provides for birthright citizenship in that instance. Change the Constitution if you want to change this. It's very straightforward. It's not OK to short-circuit our Constitution to get our way.

I remember when you guys used to pay lip service to the Constitution as a way to try to rationalize your views and behaviors. That was your primary argument in most instances ... "but I believe in the Constitution, not like you ..." is something we all heard over and over again when there was a difference in interpretation. We knew you didn't really mean it - that it was just an argument of convenience ... but now that you've found someone to lead you who really doesn't give a crap about the Constitution, you threw that fake argument to the side, and now proudly flaunt your disdain for the supreme law of the land ... replacing it with a wannabe dictator's whims.
 
Last edited:
NittanyLion99 said:
I don't have a problem with that stance, but my point is that I don't think it matters. Just remove the "anchor" policy.

Mom crosses illegally.
Baby is born in US and is a citizen. (This doesn't mean they have to live in the US)
Illegal alien mom is deported and must take her dependent (US citizen) baby with her.
Mom is no longer eligible to emigrate legally in the future.
Child is a US citizen and can return to the country of their birth once they are of age.

My point is that getting rid of the anchor policy will greatly reduce the practice, and problem.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but that will never happen.

You have a baby who has citizen rights. Then it is whether we as a country want to pay for the welfare of that child or allow the parents in to take care of him.

The first is ridiculous. Why would we tie up our foster system with this child?

But anyway, the issue is that if you are here illegally you aren't allowrd to have a baby and it become a citizen.

The amendment to the constitution specifically states 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'

Clearly an illegal, and citizen of another country, can be excluded from birthright.

It is purely interpretation that they are not.
 
Pnnylion said:
Still white knighting for that gang dude?
Click to expand...

I didn't opine on "that gang dude" at all.

This is what you guys do ... just about all of you. You can't have an honest conversation. You can't acknowledge wrongfulness, or mistakes, by someone on "your side" ... especially not your leader. You always have to ignore those things and just continue to push the propaganda.

I pointed out that Trump thought the superimposed "MS 13" graphic was an actual tattoo, and evidence that he was a deportable MS 13 member ... even after it was explained to him this wasn't the case.

The responses? Variations of "he should have been deported" and "you support him and his gang."

These responses are evidence that the cult requires you to avoid reality and only promote the cult.

Or, in JohnJumbamethspeak ... eee-ee-e-ee-eeee-e.
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
I didn't opine on "that gang dude" at all.

This is what you guys do ... just about all of you. You can't have an honest conversation. You can't acknowledge wrongfulness, or mistakes, by someone on "your side" ... especially not your leader. You always have to ignore those things and just continue to push the propaganda.

I pointed out that Trump thought the superimposed "MS 13" graphic was an actual tattoo, and evidence that he was a deportable MS 13 member ... even after it was explained to him this wasn't the case.

The responses? Variations of "he should have been deported" and "you support him and his gang."

These responses are evidence that the cult requires you to avoid reality and only promote the cult.

Or, in JohnJumbamethspeak ... eee-ee-e-ee-eeee-e.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
I'm going to ask nicely ... are you well? Should we send someone out to check on you? You don't seem to ever respond to what's actually said, or asked. I asked what you're OK with, and you say "of course I am." WTF? I'm getting Biden vibes from you at this point.

Regardless, we're discussing the literal MS13 tattoos on his knuckles. Or, are you going to respond that you're OK with literal MS13 tattoos on his knuckles because you don't know what is being said?
Click to expand...
Just because he didn’t have MS13 tattoos, and many say the symbols are MS 13 signs, doesn’t mean he’s a nice guy and deserves to stay. I followed the law. Immigration law says a person can be deported at any time who is not a citizen and the due process for an immigrant or illegal immigrant is different than for a crime or arrest of a citizen
 
Sherriff Coffee said:
Just because he didn’t have MS13 tattoos, and many say the symbols are MS 13 signs, doesn’t mean he’s a nice guy and deserves to stay. I followed the law. Immigration law says a person can be deported at any time who is not a citizen and the due process for an immigrant or illegal immigrant is different than for a crime or arrest of a citizen
Click to expand...

So you finally admit Trump either intentionally lied to promote his stance, even though it was such an obvious falsehood that even he had to know that everyone would call him on his lie (imagine someone with that much power, knowing he can say or do anything and his followers will just go along with it, no matter how untethered to reality it is) ... or he was completely bamboozled by something which could fool no sane individual.
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
So you finally admit Trump either intentionally lied to promote his stance, even though it was such an obvious falsehood that even he had to know that everyone would call him on his lie (imagine someone with that much power, knowing he can say or do anything and his followers will just go along with it, no matter how untethered to reality it is) ... or he was completely bamboozled by something which could fool no sane individual.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
So you finally admit Trump either intentionally lied to promote his stance, even though it was such an obvious falsehood that even he had to know that everyone would call him on his lie (imagine someone with that much power, knowing he can say or do anything and his followers will just go along with it, no matter how untethered to reality it is) ... or he was completely bamboozled by something which could fool no sane individual.
Click to expand...

This thread is about discussing the literal MS13 tattoos on his knuckles.

Please stay on topic PeePee the multiple bans disbarred Whale shark of the small mind no one cares about
 
AnyNameYouWish said:
It's OK that you don't understand what the Constitution says, and how it's been interpreted. I don't expect you to ... you only understand what Trump tells you to think.

Right now, a child given birth at Miami airport by a UK citizen IS a US citizen (assuming that child isn't the child of a diplomat). And it's been that way for quite some time, per the Constitution. There's a wannabe dictator trying to change that, despite being violative of the Constitution, but, as yet, he hasn't been entirely successful in destroying our representative democracy.

I may even agree with you that this *shouldn't* be the case - i.e. I wish the law was different ... but I also believe in rule of law, and the Constitution provides for birthright citizenship in that instance. Change the Constitution if you want to change this. It's very straightforward. It's not OK to short-circuit our Constitution to get our way.

I remember when you guys used to pay lip service to the Constitution as a way to try to rationalize your views and behaviors. That was your primary argument in most instances ... "but I believe in the Constitution, not like you ..." is something we all heard over and over again when there was a difference in interpretation. We knew you didn't really mean it - that it was just an argument of convenience ... but now that you've found someone to lead you who really doesn't give a crap about the Constitution, you threw that fake argument to the side, and now proudly flaunt your disdain for the supreme law of the land ... replacing it with a wannabe dictator's whims.
Click to expand...
I actually agree with you here. And this is not going to change as part of a constitutional amendment - not a chance. It's antiquated and probably should change, but it won't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Iran aftermath
2
Replies
26
Views
269
91Joe95
9
J
Some people still having problems registering
Replies
8
Views
101
91Joe95
9
A
About this board
Replies
2
Views
95
The Spin Meister
The Spin Meister
A
  • Article Article
Board cleanup
Replies
6
Views
171
AnyNameYouWish
A
Back
Top