Posted by strikeout26 on 6/25/2018 10:14:00 PM (view original):
Latching on to Trump's nutsack is a great way to make a quick buck. Worked for Stormy.

Not that great for Stormy, at least not compared to what Shera Bechard got from Trump.

True dat.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 10:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 10:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 8:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 8:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/25/2018 6:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 6:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 5:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 4:31:00 PM (view original):
Immigrants being arrested is not rare. Not sure what you’re talking about.

No your specific example is. Don’t play coy. You do that again and we are done conversing.

Is there an emoji for the jerk-off motion?

Any *specific* example is going to be relatively rare.

The likelihood the the border patrol would witness a US citizen crossing the border in a remote area without ID is obviously small. The point wasn’t that it would happen often, the point was that it could happen, period.

Without due process, that person is screwed. Due process protects us all.

Thank you for admitting your example sucked. So how would you fix it? Due Process is not working. People are not deterred. You don't want a wall. What do you want? Open borders?

I am saying for people who cross illegally we send them back. Period. Or we build the wall. Or we find a 3rd lever because what is happening currently is not working.

The flaw in your premise is that due process *does* work. What makes you think it doesn’t?

It is not a deterrent. People still insist on trying to sneak in illegally. Premise being the US is soft and will take them in.

Due process is a protection, not a deterrent. That’s the point.

This is 100% correct and bad_luck wins the unblock award. Border patrol, walls, etc. are deterrents. Sending someone back to their home country AFTER due process is a deterrent. Due process itself is neither a deterrent nor an incentive.

Then we need to redifne due process because they are wasting taxpayer $$$.

What I am hearing is you all want the same old same old. Bad Luck thinks everything is working just fine. Ignorant he is.

What do you mean, “redefine due process?”

You don’t seem to really understand what due process is.

Again with your one way thinking. Let me explain it to you. Due process would not apply to people illegally crossing into the US from Mexico but would apply in every other instance.

You still have not provided a solution. Useless you are.

A) again, due process is the only method available to determine if someone is here illegally

B) Do you actually think due process is the problem or are you just latching onto Trump’s nutsack?

Regardless of what Trump says the current border solutions is not working IMO. I think there needs to be a radical change. Just yesterday for example a Coyote smuggled in two families. The border patrol agents spotted him but he ran off and they could not pursue him. They know who he is and they know the people smuggled in are illegals.

Give them food and water and medical assistance and politely send them back. No need to bring in a judge, etc.

Wylie smuggling people in again?

That’s how he rolls.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 8:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 10:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 10:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 8:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 8:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/25/2018 6:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 6:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 6:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/25/2018 5:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/25/2018 4:31:00 PM (view original):
Immigrants being arrested is not rare. Not sure what you’re talking about.

No your specific example is. Don’t play coy. You do that again and we are done conversing.

Is there an emoji for the jerk-off motion?

Any *specific* example is going to be relatively rare.

The likelihood the the border patrol would witness a US citizen crossing the border in a remote area without ID is obviously small. The point wasn’t that it would happen often, the point was that it could happen, period.

Without due process, that person is screwed. Due process protects us all.

Thank you for admitting your example sucked. So how would you fix it? Due Process is not working. People are not deterred. You don't want a wall. What do you want? Open borders?

I am saying for people who cross illegally we send them back. Period. Or we build the wall. Or we find a 3rd lever because what is happening currently is not working.

The flaw in your premise is that due process *does* work. What makes you think it doesn’t?

It is not a deterrent. People still insist on trying to sneak in illegally. Premise being the US is soft and will take them in.

Due process is a protection, not a deterrent. That’s the point.

This is 100% correct and bad_luck wins the unblock award. Border patrol, walls, etc. are deterrents. Sending someone back to their home country AFTER due process is a deterrent. Due process itself is neither a deterrent nor an incentive.

Then we need to redifne due process because they are wasting taxpayer $$$.

What I am hearing is you all want the same old same old. Bad Luck thinks everything is working just fine. Ignorant he is.

What do you mean, “redefine due process?”

You don’t seem to really understand what due process is.

Again with your one way thinking. Let me explain it to you. Due process would not apply to people illegally crossing into the US from Mexico but would apply in every other instance.

You still have not provided a solution. Useless you are.

A) again, due process is the only method available to determine if someone is here illegally

B) Do you actually think due process is the problem or are you just latching onto Trump’s nutsack?

Regardless of what Trump says the current border solutions is not working IMO. I think there needs to be a radical change. Just yesterday for example a Coyote smuggled in two families. The border patrol agents spotted him but he ran off and they could not pursue him. They know who he is and they know the people smuggled in are illegals.

Give them food and water and medical assistance and politely send them back. No need to bring in a judge, etc.

Whether or not the BP pursues the coyote has nothing to do with due process, you know that right?

Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

I totally understand why you hate opening my posts. I continually make you look like the moron you obviously are. This "Whether or not the BP pursues the coyote has nothing to do with due process . . . " is what you posted. It is 100% idiotic and untrue. Arguing it once again proves just how pathetically dumb you are. NEXT!

By choosing not to arrest someone, you aren’t violating their due process rights. Idiot.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

bad luck, wait. What exactly is your operational definition of "due process" please?

I like this one: "Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement".

Thanks

I don't believe juries have any part in normal "immigration" due process cases. Just Federal Judges.

There IS one answer to this problem but (hardly) no one is willing to go there............

Shut OFF ALL immigration (except for National security purposes).
NOBODY gets in anymore.
We don't need more citizens.............nor stupid humans residing here.
Got plenty.
We filled our borders sufficiently ----------- from sea to shining sea.
WAY too many people in Arizona and we's a rather small state--population wise.

NO MORE NEED for immigration at ALL!
Shut it down............ only visitors get across the border-----------legally------------ spend $$$$$------------- then go HOME!
Then concentrate on the LAWBREAKERS who sneak in. They can't LIVE here (in that case) so why are they sneaking in?
Obviously for nefarious reasons!
STOP THEM! Use all means possible. Border Patrol agents then know they can arrest ANY "illegal crosser" or use FORCE to stop the entry!
Shoot to kill, if necessary.

A few well publicized "bodies" returned to their own homeland would (likely) be a sufficient deterrent.
Still think I'm an evil lib? LOL

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

bad luck, wait. What exactly is your operational definition of "due process" please?

I like this one: "Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement".

Thanks

Due process is a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:02:00 AM (view original):
By choosing not to arrest someone, you aren’t violating their due process rights. Idiot.

It was not a choice, he jumped into a river and for some reason the agents are not allowed to pursue. Maybe the river is a point of contention IDK.

Again, bad luck. What is YOUR solution? You want to treat illegals the same way that citizens are treated? Same due process?

Is that correct?

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 10:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 9:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
Seriously, how are you so freakin' stupid about so many things? "Due process", by whatever definition you want to use, involves someone or some group determining if some other person or group has done something illegal. Pursuing and catching that person or group is most certainly a vital step in that. You want to have Judges and juries sit in a courtroom with no defendant. Never mind, you're dumb enough to say yes.

I almost never open your posts because 99% of the time they are unintelligible rants of an idiot and, while this one is also the rant of an idiot, it’s hilarious. So, here we go.

CCCP is arguing that due process isn’t working so it needs to be eliminated when dealing with illegal immigrants.

He also cited the BP not pursuing the coyote as a failure of due process.

So...um...which is it? Should we give the coyote due process and bring him to trial? Or should we let him go without pursuit?

bad luck, wait. What exactly is your operational definition of "due process" please?

I like this one: "Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement".

Thanks

Due process is a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.

Does that apply to citizens or to anyone who steps on US soil?

How is sending an illegal back denying them life, liberty or property?

1. They don't own property in the US
2. We aren't taking their life
3. Liberty is earned not given just by stepping on US soil. They are free to go back to their country and reapply to enter the US legally.

So by your own operational definition we are not denying these persons their due process.